Where did I say “all science must be condemned”? I’m saying that science has been corrupted to the point that you can’t simply trust that the community is putting out honest material and self-correcting.
When I say monolithic, I mean there is no such thing as branches or subgroups in the scientific community because they are all expected to be adhering to the scientific method.
The problem is that there are many examples of falsifying data to get conclusions because of grants, status, political views, etc.
So when you say you are a scientist, you are not able to differentiate yourself from the scammers, since they also call themselves scientists and say they are adhering to the scientific method. How is the average person supposed to tell the difference?
Where did I say “all science must be condemned”? I’m saying that science has been corrupted to the point that you can’t simply trust that the community is putting out honest material and self-correcting.
When I say monolithic, I mean there is no such thing as branches or subgroups in the scientific community because they are all expected to be adhering to the scientific method.
The problem is that there are many examples of falsifying data to get conclusions because of grants, status, political views, etc.
So when you say you are a scientist, you are not able to differentiate yourself from the scammers, since they also call themselves scientists and say they are adhering to the scientific method. How is the average person supposed to tell the difference?