<<koan, think of what your saying. I doubt that you actually think that.
If we are to accept what you posted, then overselling points (making claims that are too strong which you can't back up), and allowing both internal politics (political groupings within scientific debate and organizations that do research), and external politics (general politics, conservative/liberal, etc.) effect what you say and do, effect the research you do, and to an extent the conclusion you reach, is perfectly ok; and opposing it is "anti-science". That's a ridiculous, pretty much indefensible claim.>>
That paragraph assumes the scientific community is overselling points and the rejection of the science is just responsible oversight.
We all know the rejection of science is usually the result of dogma not liking the results like Darwin or Copernicus, or political like the Koch brothers dissing AGW.
Legitimate questioning is always needed, but that is a very small part of the rejection of science going on.
E.g. evolution is a slam dunk reality taught as such in every major university in the world, yet the majority of conservatives do not believe in it. That is part political and part ignornace, but in any event nonsense. |
