In 2005, a group of MIT graduate students decided to goof off in a very MIT graduate student way: They created a program called SCIgen that randomly generated fake scientific papers. Thanks to SCIgen, for the last several years, computer-written gobbledygook has been routinely published in scientific journals and conference…
Compare this with the Sokal hoax and you get an idea of how scientists have no right to criticize the humanities for anything.
The one quibble I would have with this is that it still buys into the notion that science is something that is outside of politics, but it captures why debates like this are always going to be self-defeating.
Also Related: A recent and exhaustive meta-analysis of scientific data shows that top psychology studies tend to make conclusions about human nature based on samples taken solely from Western undergraduate students. [Scientific American]
The one about using the centrifuge at 1500 RPM is so true.
Lightnings, flat earth, geocentric model, reproductive model, big bang - here goes your societal bullshit. RELIGION WAS FIRST AND MAINLY CREATED TO EXPLAIN THE WORLD AROUND PRIMITIVE CAVEMEN. Tha baggage it gathered later was solely due to the environment it was acting in (societies). So cut the crap. There would be absolutely NO NEED of religion had it not been for the requirement of some means to explain the world. The fact that religion never did the trick and science did - is a FACT. The fact that religion wouldn’t be around (or would be insignificantly small) had we had the science from beginning - is a FACT.
All those traits you speak about are nicely worded but empty. For instance:
>science emerges from the concatenation of and crystallization of certain discourses that rely on “authority”
Bullshit. You mistyped ‘religion’. Science does not and never did rely on “authority”.
> the church is the reason science exists as a discipline: they hired people to prove them right
Science existed long before ‘the church’. Go read about ancient Greece. I see no point in talking to you - I advise getting some ‘education’. I don’t recommend religious schools.
look you should really reblog pritch to talk about this stuff because im limited to like 100 words MAX at a time
Science is objective, ahistorical, transcendental, and deals only in The Truth. It doesn’t need “authority”; it has FACTS.
Sounds like fundamentalism to me.
Yeah ancient Greece wasn’t religious at all.
The sphere on the left represents all the water on the planet:
If you gathered all the world’s water—from oceans, lakes, groundwater, water vapor, everything—into a sphere, it would have a diameter of 860 miles. That’s the distance between Salt Lake City and Topeka, Kansas.
And don’t forget that that ball of freshwater is mostly out of range of our drinking glasses and irrigation systems. A full 74.5% of that much smaller ball is locked away in ice caps and glaciers and 24.7% is groundwater (much of that out of reach). There is only .56% of the world’s freshwater circulating in lakes, rivers, rainfall, soil and the biosphere.
This is why mathematicians are not allowed to make puns.
(I’ll admit I laughed.)
From Dino Sejdinović, “Mathematics of the Human-Vampire Conflict”, Math Review 16 (2008) 14-15.