>>8061275

I was not that person and I posted in the wrong thread.
Sorry for intervention

>John Oliver took almost 20 minutes to explain effectively fucking nothing for anyone with a first year science education

this is literally the first thing.

so fucking good.

john oliver, the buzzfeed of scientific consenus.

No worries, it happens.

Thanks.

>The host basically says that when you hear "a new study suggests" in any form of media, namely news, it's bullshit and should be taken with a grain of salt.
Yup, that'd be hard to argue with. It's more of a problem for journalism than for science though.

>some researchers have to distort the data in clever ways to reach a conclusion that will get good attention
I'm kinda on the fence about this one, probably because the nuance is lacking here. I'll get back to the thread when I have a chance to watch the video with sound.

thank fucking god people finally realize this.
Hopefully climate science is next in line.

>Hopefully climate science is next in line

solid b8

Cuz science doesn't sell, sensationalism does.

I don't care if you think it's bait, I know I'm right and you're a moron.

I mean come on it's 2016.

>statistically are more intelligent

you sound like you get your information from the very news sources the john oliver video was criticizing

>I know I'm right and you're a moron.
sounds like we have a real scientist over here

OP isnt even trying.

I watched the full video.

He's shitting on the shitty medias sensationalistic shitty reporting of shitty scientific reports from shitty scientific journals.

He's saying to be skeptical of what you hear, and not to blindly trust what others say, which is exactly what the scientific method teaches you to do.

Stupid thread.

Those aren't Veeky Forums users, retard. You got trolled by brain dead stormniggers from /pol/. Don't hang out in containment threads.

...

> its pol guise, not the whole world trust me
> white people are evil lol xD
back to SJWtard. fuck off with your ebola posts

the only part of that cartoon is philosotard part. the rest uses scientific method

Wrong. And stop samefagging.
Philosophy has nothing to do with "u can't kno nuffin"... I don't even know where that meme came from.
> We can't know anything
> VS
> There is a difference between Empiricism/Testing and Presumption
Philosophy accepts that Empiricism is pragmatic.

philosophy does NOT use scientific method, others does. Until this simple fact magically changes, you and your philosotards will always remain as a meme

No, but science uses both logic and falls under the category of the philosophy of science.
False syllogism much?
Google it please.

You are changing goalposts like the desperate retarded philosotard that you are.

Any practise that does NOT use scientific method is a meme and doesn't belong to this board, AKA : philosophy. No matter how hard you play with semantics.

Neither does math. Why would philosophy use the scientific method?

because otherwise it will be labelled with the rest of the practises that don't use scientific method. You know like religion, spritiualism, semantics, the dailymail, tumblr blogposting, etc...

This seems like a pretty apolitical issue, especially since this is unarguably something everyone is guilty of.

I'm glad this show is doing more topics like this. I hope to see something more in depth, since this is an issue I think every scientifically educated person is aware of. I wish he made less random jabs at other people, they're irrelevant and he could be taking that time to talk about how fields that don't get publicity do it well. He brought up the lack of redundant studies in a lot of fields, but this exact thing happens with almost every mathematical and physics paper, it's almost an assumption that nothing is credible until someone has gone over it and tried to replicate its results, or in the mathematical case, it's checked and approved by an authoritative body.

The fields that are guilty of this shit are the sexy ones: nutrition, biology, medicine, often physics, but he mostly just brought up the first three. I think it's easy to blame the scientific bodies for taking advantage of the fact that people will pay attention to good headlines, but ultimately it's the media and ignorant people who are at fault here.

tl;dr It's not science, it's popular science, most fields don't to suffer from these issues.

Nice fallacy fallacy.

Scientific method is defined by science, and therefore is self-inclusive.

I would argue that Philosophy uses philosophic method and there's nothing you can do to debate that because philosophic method would exist only in philosophy just like scientific method only exists in science.

Likewise a gardener would use a gardenidic method to plant his plants and a sea cucumber would use the cucumberific method to do whatever it is sea cumcumbers do.

I've had enough of your fallacies and flawed logic and argumentation.

Anyone who works in research knows this friend. Journalists do a poor job explaining research and do not completely understand what they are reporting.

Sorry you got trolled.

good, now fuck off back to your philosophy board with your gods and aliens and magic. this is a science board that uses scientific method.

(You)

>There are autodidacts, which statistically are more intelligent than diploma-suckers.

Don't try skewing reality to fit your comfort levels just because you are an academic failure.

...