I think it’s funny when people say “I believe in science”.
What a complete oxymoron…
Scientific analysis has nothing to do with belief.
Your belief is irrelevant and inconsequential.
Your belief does nothing to promote or validate science.
Belief systems are the very antithesis of science.
If you want to defend science as a layperson (such as myself) leave the belief systems to the science deniers and charlatans.
When Trump asserted that climate change is a hoax he referenced nothing but his own disbelief as evidence. Conversly he also called for your belief in his assertion. “Believe me“.
The Scientific Revolution of Renaissance Europe marked the emergence of The Scientific Method. After centuries of harsh theocratic rule in which the nature of reality was explained by dogmatic religious belief systems, finally the priests had been defrocked from their positions as the purveyors of explanation.
In other words, belief was replaced by science.
Granted, conjecture is employed in developing a hypothesis. But hypothesis are subject to rigorous empirical testing through experimentation and peer review (at least they’re supposed to be). No decree from a man in a robe and a funny hat is needed.
Lately people have been posting selfies showing off their completed covid19 vaccination forms. They often include a narrative such as, “because I believe in science”.
Truthfully what it should say is something like… I believe that the scientists who developed the shots are being honest with us about the safety and efficacy of them.
Don’t play “Science Says”
Science doesn’t say anything. Science is a methodological approach. It’s not a consensus. Not every scientist has reviewed the data. Science at large does not green light the covid vaccine. Only a fraction of the scientific community have been involved in the conversation. WHO are they? Who funded them?
Don’t refute charlatans by talking in their language. When somone says “believe me” don’t say I believe in science. Science is not an invisible spectre operating autonomously. It’s a system of formulating and testing hypothesis.
Although science has become somewhat of a buzzword for the political left, merely parroting the word without providing any actual scientific data is fruitless. In laymens terms, which is all I know, if you ain’t got a labcoat you dont get to invoke science. Show me the “science” you believe in.
Thanks for Reading
Well said. I haven’t worn a lab coat in years, but that does not make my science degree nor research invalid either! Double-blind reviews being corrupted is a significant problem that universities and government agencies have needed to address for at least 15 years now, likely since Galileo or we would not have had the Tesla/Edison issues manifest either.
Thank you Georgette! As I mentioned i am a layperson; however, it seems more than reasonable to me that whenever endowments are granted from special interest, whether government or private foundations, suspicion of fowl play is reasonable.