Comment on Give us your best infodump.

KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

• jol@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Science research on the one hand is cursed to follow the money.

  source

  • angrystego@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    My own experience leaves me a bit more optimistic, although I do see some cursed bits.

    The presence of money in research depends greatly on the field and the ability of the scientists to make their research sound sexy. You can mask a lot of wierd niche basic research topics with sexy applied research talk.

    Also, there’s still a lot of science research without much money, being sustained by sheer enthusiasm.

    source

    • AnarchistArtificer@slrpnk.net ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      I agree. A great example of why can be found in this excellent article about an extensive “dossier” of fraud allegations against a top Alzheimer’s researcher: (science.org/…/research-misconduct-finding-neurosc…)

      Specifically, this snippet:

      “Microbiologist and research integrity expert Elisabeth Bik, who also worked on the Zlokovic dossier, contributed other Masliah examples and reviewed and concurred with almost all of the findings.”

      Elisabeth Bik is someone who has an incredible eye for fraudulently edited Western Blots images and someone I greatly admire. Calling her a “research integrity expert” is accurate, but what I find neat is that (to my knowledge) she doesn’t have any particular training or funding towards this work. A lot of work she does in this area starts on, or is made public on PubPeer, an online forum. This is all to say that Elisabeth Bik’s expertise and reputation in this area effectively stems from her just being a nerd on the internet.

      I find it quite beautiful in a way, because she’s far from the only example of this. I especially find it neat when non-scientists are able to help root out scientific fraud specifically through non-scientist expertise. As a scientist who often finds herself propelled by sheer enthusiasm, sometimes feels overwhelmed by the “Publish or Perish” atmosphere in research, and who worries about the integrity of science when there’s so much trash being published, it’s heartening to see that enthusiasm and commitment to Truth still matters.

      source
• Jax@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Which, ironically, defeats the entire purpose of science.

  source

  • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    thankfully i’m not a scientist, but if the people much smarter than me, and collective consensus say one thing, i’m likely to agree broadly with that sentiment. If not, same goes but in reverse.

    Now if i were doing science on the other hand…

    source
• justme@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Research is based on the so-called scientific method (therefore science) and that is something you can’t proof, just belief in. But it’s the best we have with extraordinary amount of evidence to back it up.

  source

  • infinite_ass@leminal.space ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    There was this guy who spent his whole life in rural Arizona. All evidence indicated that the world is made of sand.

    Never discount errors of perspective.

    If you consider something that all scientists do then you might see a vast shared error.

    source

    • justme@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      It was evident that the world was bigger than what the guy saw, he was just not checking (lazy or insatiable or whatever) what’s further. There is the difference.

      source

      • infinite_ass@leminal.space ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        Good call man. And the sun in the sky too. He should have thought of that too.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
  • KillingTimeItself@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    using the scientific method to demonstrate that the scientific method is the most effective method of science is definitely one of the moments of all time, for science.

    source