Firstly, people only very rarely hear scientists speak directly on the topics they research. In nearly every case, something is on sale, instead, and »journalists are »wildy spinning science. So most of what the common people hear is ‘headline’ science, which is almost always wrong, or at the very least, a misstatement of findings.

What we need is to hear the researchers themselves talking about their findings — in terms of what they might mean… and don’t mean. Even where this happens some percentage (not all, around half) of research will be found to be invalid after a number of years.

Side note: Not all scientists are sane. Scientists are regular human beings. They have opinions, biases, and perspectives. Some of them are even insane in various ways. And the researchers who are insane fully intend to grandstand and promote their ‘private research’, especially in a time when this gains attention.

Then we have the fact that research requires extremely careful review, examination of the axioms and principles, materials and methods employed, as well as examinations of bias (intentional and non). A lot of the research that gets published… is either wrong or founded on principles that are inherently unreliable.

Most of what reaches us isn’t really science. It is sensationalism and sound bites. There are exceptions, but even these have to be carefully reviewed in an »adversarial environment.

That is the nature of science. It is not the nature of pop media, perspective or … virality. Lies make the best lubricant for popularity. And the more you can associate science, or some authority with the lies, the deeper you can push your ‘textual reproductive organ’ into ‘audiences’.

Whose minds and intelligences are victimized by this.

And this is why I generally do not respond kindly to lies masquerading as science.

Or anything else, really.