• UlyssesT [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Are you doing a blowhard long winded workaround way of calipers-free-but-still-racist “shitty” science under pious pretenses of it still being scientific enough to get attention?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdyin6uipy4

    Who is the arbiter of what compromises junk science, if not the scientific community?

    Release all the science.

    It’s clearly a losing battle within that community if you’re making excuses for “shitty” science getting attention that it both doesn’t deserve and that will actually harm people.

    • Chetzemoka@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      No more than you’re suggesting that there are racist astronomy studies being published, even though I could choose to disingenuously represent your position with that statement.

      Racist studies need to be refuted. It’s not that hard. Restricting access to all science (which I see you now notice is what that other commenter was suggesting) isn’t going to magically stop racist studies from being published.

      And again, who are you suggesting should be the arbiter?

          • UlyssesT [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            That arbiter is not doing a good job considering the proliferation of antivax, race “science,” and climate change denialism, among other things.

            Feel as above the fray as you like, but normalizing the mass distribution of junk/shit or otherwise false science under some lofty ideal of “the free marketplace of ideas will select for the correct data” is clearly, demonstratively, and repeatedly not doing that and hasn’t in the past either.

            • Chetzemoka@startrek.website
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              You have utterly no idea what’s even present in scientific publications. Antivax and climate change denialism are not rampant in published science. They’re rampant amongst ignorant members of the public. That’s not even remotely the fault of science.

              And here’s a summary of the current state of race science:

              “Race does not stand up scientifically, period.”

              https://www.scribd.com/article/350285350/What-Both-The-Left-And-Right-Get-Wrong-About-Race

              • UlyssesT [he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Someone else responded better than I could to what amounts of your wall of arrogance that was toward someone with an opinion and a take so similar to yours that it applies to you as well.

                Every single time someone does a report on crime and breaks down data by race you’re seeing racist social science in action. The way we do clinical trials. Decisions about what to study, like the impacts of lead, or education, or pharmaceuticals, all of it lies on top of and interpermeates racist superstructure. Recent? Forced hysterectomies. Public statements from researchers that genetics are not politically correct. Mauna Kea. Environmental impact studies in Guam. I mean, it’s never ending.

                • Chetzemoka@startrek.website
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  It’s not never ending. We’re very critical of the racism and sexism in medical research. And the younger generations of doctors are far more aware of it.

                  We used to butcher women in radical mastectomy surgeries and we don’t do that anymore. We used to do medical experiments on black Americans without telling them and we don’t do that anymore. For everything that you can point to as a current problem, I can point to another thing that used to be a problem and now has been corrected.

                  And still none of that has anything to do with physics, chemistry, materials science, geology, oceanography. You can’t just say “racism impacts some sciences therefore we shouldn’t do science at all”

                  • UlyssesT [he/him]@hexbear.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    We’re very critical of the racism and sexism in medical research.

                    You’re demonstratably actively and overtly ignoring examples given to you, right now, showing just how flawed your claimed “critical” status is of such issues.

                    And still none of that has anything to do with physics, chemistry, materials science, geology, oceanography.

                    Yes, you have that ivory tower of yours crammed so high that you’re willfully ignoring intersectional issues that do affect the application, interpretation, even the funding and political will to allocate resources to such fields.

                    For everything that you can point to as a current problem, I can point to another thing that used to be a problem and now has been corrected.

                    That only demonstrates that correcting the process and actively rejecting bad/false science requires ongoing vigilance, not smug and arrogant dismissal of concerns.

                    therefore we shouldn’t do science at all

                    No one said that and you’re willfully ignorant at this point.