I can think of a couple of issues besides plate tectonics where scientists have not lived up to the ideals mentioned. Can you?
One aspect of science, however, is a good model for our behavior, especially in times like these, when so many people seem to be sure that they are right and their opponents are wrong. It is the ability to say, “Wait—hold on. I might have been wrong.”
Not all scientists live up to this ideal, of course. But history offers admirable examples of scientists admitting they were wrong and changing their views in the face of new evidence and arguments. My favorite comes from the history of plate tectonics.
They have a vaccine for that!
Unsafe and ineffective?
Kuhn demonstrated pretty conclusively that this doesn’t happen. The scientists with the old ideas die off or retire and are replaced by younger scientists who believe the new ideas. Individual scientists virtually never change their minds.
Dr. Barry Marshall proved stomach ulcers are caused by h.pylori and there are still doctors to this day who try to argue that there are exceptional cases where the “stress causes ulcers” model is still valid.
Susskind is old. He came out with new ideas, when he was old.
“I can think of a couple of issues besides plate tectonics where scientists have not lived up to the ideals mentioned. Can you?”
Climate and gender are the first two issues that come to my mind regarding scientists no longer being trustworthy.
Covid would be third on my list.
Ya but none of those things affect our day to day life like plate tectonics do. Did you know that South America and Africa were once joined?
“She later focused on climate change science and studied the doubt-creation industry opposing it”
Uh-huh, she’s also on the board of the “Climate Science Legal Defence Fund” who supports Michael Mann in his quest to avoid FOIA requests.
Yes, Naomi is due, maybe overdue for her “Eureka moment”.
She has been a great defender of the established climate crisis agenda.
Ironic that this was printed in Scientific American… A leading proponent of woke junk science…
Very true.
Ironic that should be in Scientific American.
what does it take to make these schientishts change their mind?
WTF are the odds the continental shelf on east side of s america closely matches in a jigsaw puzzle way, the west side of ahfricah??
and play with the pieces enough to find other grand matching shapes etc??
what in h e hockey sticks does it TAKE?
Science:
observation, question, hypothesis/prediction, experiment, analysis, conclusion, and iteration.
Not science:
Everything else.
Every time I hear some idiot say “Trust the Science”….
I just remember that these same people telling us to “trust the science” are the exact same people who tell us Bruce Jenner is a chick now, just because he changed his name, chopped off his junk, and put on a dress.