Microfisking

Science isn’t a consensus. Consensus isn’t science.

Science is about evidence and proof, not agreement. Whenever a scientist holds up how many other scientists say they agree with him rather than the evidence itself, he is doing it because the evidence is weak.

7 Comments

  1. Vyvyan says:

    yup, that is the standard ideology first posture of today’s scientific community. They are their own Holy Inquisition enforcing their misquided will on the masses. The ridiculous and tragic attempts to stop the spread of aides is a sister example.

  2. Kevin Baker says:

    Have you seen author Michael Crichton’s speech Aliens Cause Global Warming? He makes that point specifically, and emphatically:

    Let’s be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus.

    There is no such thing as consensus science. If it’s consensus, it isn’t science. If it’s science, it isn’t consensus. Period.

    Good speech.

  3. Tig says:

    I say bring it on. Yehaw! Evolution will weed out the ones that can’t stand the heat. Ask the little animals livin’ up next to Chernobyl. The essense of life seems to keep on findin’ a way to keep goin’ ‘spite the worst we throw at it.

  4. Phelps says:

    Seen it, KB, and heartily recommend it. Anyone who hasn’t read it, follow his link and RTWT.

  5. guy in the UNLV Jacket says:

    4 out of 5 flouescant cock roaches agree!!!

  6. memer says:

    Not so fast. There is a huge element of corroboration that part and parcel of Science. You can’t have a reputable theory that cannot be reproducible/corroborated by others.

    Outside of math or other forms of deductive logic, there is no such thing as “proof” — there is only ever evidence to suggest.

  7. Phelps says:

    But it is the reproduction of the results that matters, not the consensus. The issue isn’t “do you think you could reproduce the results”, the issue is “did you reproduce the results?”

    No one says, “well, 100 scientists did the experiment, and eighty of them got the same results so it must be right, because that is a consensus.” If there are 20 that are running the experiment right and aren’t getting the results, then the hypothesis is wrong. That is science. 100 out of 100 is science. 80 out of 100 is religion.