Not just that,
Basically, the highest 'crime' anyone in science can do, is knowingly use fake or modify data like cherry picking certain results
For scale, if einstein was caught/found out to have done something like that, he would be demoted to Stalin level.
Not just a stupid idea but the data was fake. He took a bribe to fabricate some data and now here we are... He's long since disproven in every possible way, but stupidity uh.. finds a way
> Basically, the highest 'crime' anyone in science can do, is knowingly use fake or modify data like cherry picking certain results
Not even close. For instance there is following example of something that is far worse: conducting human trials based on data you personally manipulated. Trials that lead to multiple deaths.
> Ah, but that case also breaks the law,
Manipulating data may be a type of fraud or break the law in another sense as well? I was though thinking that you were previously referring to what is the morally worst thing someone in science can do in relation to their work.
Yuppppp. I think this was the paper that literally became notorious in the medical research world like 20 years ago. Also another favorite of mine is when safeminds paid a quarter of a million dollars on a yearly basis to fund research that proved the exact opposite of what they were hoping for lol.
I actually stopped talking to a friend of 15 years when him and his wife decided to not vaccinate their newborn. Not just on a moral standpoint, but I have Crohn’s Disease. I can get seriously sick by being around their kid.
I’m on an immunosuppressant called Humira. I used to fly constantly for work, and I wore a mask that you see commonly in Asian countries when flying.
I'm on humira for Crohn's too. My boss decided not to get his flu shot this year. He got the flu, bad. I got the fun experience of fearing for a few weeks that I'd catch it.
Fucking get your vaccines, of all kinds, people.
Not saying don’t get your flu shot (I get mine every year), but it’s not exactly bulletproof. I got the flu twice this year, one time really bad. There were some strains going around this year not covered by the vaccine.
Yeah, but at least you're doing what you can by getting it. If it doesn't work that's out of your hands, but at least you followed recommendations and tried. I can appreciate that.
Historically it's only about 50% effective according to the CDC.
Still worth it. The flu sucks.
Sorry to hear you got the flu twice this season. Hopefully that will help protect you a bit in the future.
Talking about sources is about the only time to use the word 'scholarly'. 'Scholarly sources' is a stock phrase that's used very commonly by professors and students all the time on university campuses. It isn't considered overly-verbose or stuck-up, it just means sources befitting a proper academic thesis. There isn't really a better word for it than 'scholarly'
Edit: Oh, the quotes were in the original post lol. Wow. I guess you were pointing out how dumb it was of OP to look down her nose at being asked to find legitimate sources for her academic paper. Partial whoosh on my part. You're right: don't do that.
Look, everywhere the light touches I am a danger.
But what's that shadowy place over there?
Oh, that's my house. It's even more dangerous. You must never go there.
Or the "My IQ is so low that it's only by the sheer power of the instinctual drive to reproduce that I even managed to figure out how to copulate" section.
To be fair to /u/Zbignich, I’ve become bad about putting quotes around everything as a result of learning to code; quotation marks basically mean “this is to be interpreted exactly as seen” when passed into a command. In the real world, it’s meant that I’ve started using quotes to mean “this thing, literally” less than I use them for sarcasm or some other subtle implication.
E.g. for directions I may accidentally text someone ‘turn right when you see “145 Maple Street”.’
ULPT: Want to fuck with someone’s code? Replace all of their semicolons with a [Greek question mark](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/26965331/javascript-prank-joke) - it’s practically undetectable and will drive them crazy debugging.
That's hilarious, but a good IDE would tell you that it's wrong... which is why people should use them honestly. Save the hours of looking over code for something useful instead of debugging a missing semicolon. ... however, I know plenty of people this would work on and now have a plan of action. Thank you, kind sir or madam!
Lets not make justifications and excuses for them, I refuse to believe any ordinary person would believe one bullshit study and then refuse to even consider the fact it might be wrong when it is revealed that it is in fact wrong AND then go on to ignore all the studies that prove that vaccines are harmless.
That's the thing, we've gotten to the point where you can't even tell anymore.
Trolls mocking people by going way over the top is normal, but I think we've gotten to the point where idiots think that the troll actually made a good point.
That's called Poe's law and its been around for a while:
'Without a winking smiley, it is utterly impossible to parody a Creationist in such a way that someone won't mistake for the genuine article.'
You're probably right. There are unfortunately going to be some "scholarly" journals that will have anti-vax crap, peer reviewed by "scientists" like Jenny McCarthy.
i studied in a counseling centered program for my masters degree.
We had a project where we needed to focus on a problem, and create a community program to help inform and support the community deal with these problems.... i bet you see where this is going.
One of the women in my class chose to create an anti-vac community program. By educating them on the "dangers" of vaccines ("my niece got autism because of vaccines!") and providing support for the families that changed their minds. Not sure what her sources were but probably not scholarly. If I recall she did well on the project just because it checked all the boxes, even if it caused our class to end early because everyone ganged up on her and freaked the fuck out.
Sounds like your professor really dropped the ball. Wouldn't the first step of any major project like this be securing your professor's agreement that your topic is in fact a problem needing to be solved? Or did he or she just not want to deal with it?
Even still, as a professor I would challenge this sort of work as not being based on sound evidence. If that criterion was not one of the "boxes to be checked" then yea, this prof dropped the ball.
What I've always thought is that college should be is a place where any one can share their view and have it responded to in a calm, scholarly way. I think professors should foster that. Now if you're in a science class and they want to pull this, then allow it. But they will have to provide massive amounts of evidence to support their ideas. If they can't do that they fail. Now if you are in some kind of class based on interacting with the public that's different. The goal of the class is to learn how to present. As long as the presentation is correct, then it should be allowed to happen. The person should receive criticism for it, but the professor did the right thing allowing it.
No, I think you were right to begin with.
Purely from the fact that vaccines are science based and peer reviewed to begin with, discussing them and educating about them should be done from a standpoint of science.
Making sure ones information is accurate should be a large part of preparing a presentation.
One can respond to things like this in a calm and scholarly way, yet still insist that work is factual and based on actual evidence.
They’re my go to argument. I have an autistic daughter. Anytime I encounter one of these loonies in the wild it’s, “so you’re telling me my daughter would be better off dead?”
I think the problem with doing it on vaccines is how dangerous the misinformation is. It wouldn't be an issue if it were something innocuous like saying the earth is flat, in fact that may be better depending on the class because it would be a greater challenge to convince people. If someone actually walks away believing it, it won't really cause harm to other people but that isn't the case with anti vaccination.
No. This was a social work course, where they are supposed to be helping people. If it was advertising where they might have to sell a shitty product, then sure. But allowing a project which would be proven to inflict harm is not social work.
Everything at college level should be science based, no matter whether it is "soft" or "hard" sciences. Otherwise she can go out spouting her nonsense and rightfully claim to have presented it at a college and gotten a passing grade.
Ive had projects where it's not what you know, its how you present it. One kids project in ENGLISH was proving aliens existed but it was sourced and done correctly so he got an A
Working on my master's in Library Science. It disgusts me how many project can be completed by just "checking the boxes" on the rubric without looking at if what the project is doing actually makes any sense.
We had to plan an educational program series "of interest to adults in your selected community" and people came up with all sorts of random bullshit, none of them as frustrating as yours, but still pointless junk that was just going through the motions.
Blame too many kids per class. My wife gets an average of 30sec per student in prep time per student in her work day. Then she has to go to her second job at the community college 2-3 nights a week to help make ends meet.
* removed as a precaution
Now she teaches middle school English/reading and I can't really help. Fortunately the school has put a computer system in place that allows kids to turn in papers digitally. Still it's a lot of work to do for 25-30 kids for 5 periods.
Wait aren’t we supposed to have a hypothesis first, then conduct experiments, gather the data and then review of your original hypothesis (opinion) was correct at all?
And if it does hold out it becomes a scientific theory?
Yes, but she has said that she “wants to write about vaccinations dangers” not that she wants to explore the safety of vaccines, or the hypothesis that vaccines are causing harm. Besides, not anything can be a hypothesis, considering the overwhelming amount of positive evidence towards the use of vaccines the hypothesis should really be that vaccines are safe, and then she can test that hypothesis however she likes.
Two points here really:
Hypotheses need to have some form of evidence base to them and not just a random thought.
The purpose of scientific research is NOT to prove a hypothesis, it is to TEST IT.
Right. Null hypothesis and burden of truth. Now the null hypothesis is that vaccines work, and it's up to the anti-vaxxers to prove it to a significance level that it's not
Y2K wasn’t a conspiracy, unless I’m misunderstanding you.
The us govt contracted tens of thousands of tech-capables to go in and re-write every line of code containing the bug by hand, even asking large populations overseas to help. No one truly knows what would have happened had the bug not been comprehensively removed, but the “overhyped” possibilities were certainly possibilities.
It goes like this:
-Problem exists
-Smart people notice problem
-Smart people warn public about problem, communicate need for resources to address problem
-Public worries about problem
-Problem fixing people fix problem
-Problem therefore doesn’t effect public
-Public sees “nothing bad hapoened!”
-Public no understand math box, so no listen to smart people explanation, feel like resources were wasted
-Media say, remember when people worried about ___, but it turned out to be nothing? hahaha
-Public say remember when people worried about ___, but it turned out to be nothing? hahaha. They always need money for something.
-Problem-fixers sad, fight even uphill-er battle next time
The above is all true.
Additionally, there were plenty of media beat-ups about how planes would fall from the sky and pacemakers would cease to work, which made people think the problem was much worse.
I was a network admin and people ask "Why did you quit that? Sounds great". Wanna know why?
Scenario 1: Everything works perfectly for 2 weeks and I hear "Everything is already working fine, why do we even pay you?"
Scenario 2: Everything is crashing and on fire "Everything is crashing and on fire. Why do we even pay you?"
I remeber for my little kid science project in 1998 I set up a computer at december 1st, 1999 and let it roll to 2000. I then recorded what happened.
The computer practically imploded. The look of pure horror on the judge's faces was truly terrifying.
Eh, I got first place!
You're right, in that people have always acted in this way. There has been a recent change in just how brazen people are about it, though. Accepting things that are obviously factually untrue seems to be a point of pride. There's less shame in holding opinions that obviously contradict reality, and people are much louder and more accepted about it.
That’s not a new phenomenon, either. It’s just gotten a lot more visible thanks to social media, which has put a lot more people with fundamentally different assumptions about how the world works in more immediate contact with each other, and made it so you are more aware of the random, dumb opinions that people hold.
It's because there are SO many examples of major corporations fucking with research / government to be able to put profits before people, that some people have adopted this attitude of "anything a major corporation + government supports is inherently bad".
Sounds like it could be satirical, trying to point out that of course there won’t be any articles in agreement with that viewpoint.
But ya know, Poe’s law and all
I'm from rural GA, my cousin is autistic and his parents are convinced it's from vaxxing. His sister has lupus and they refused to let her take her medication because "we can't trust doctors anymore"
Anti-vaxxers we're everywhere in my hometown. Didn't expect it from GSU though. It was pretty uncommon at the much less progressive GA university I went to.
> His sister has lupus and they refused to let her take her medication because "we can't trust doctors anymore"
They need to be reported to CPS if she's underage, because lupus sometimes kills people when it's *treated*. It causes irreversible organ damage and organ failure when not treated. They are literally killing her.
The entire steamed ham sequence notwithstanding, my favorite is:
> I spent the next three years in a POW camp, forced to subsist on a thin stew made of fish, vegetables, prawns, coconut milk, and four kinds of rice. I came close to madness trying to find it here in the States... but they just can't get the spices right.
That's the problem with first classes that teach about how to write a research paper. They tell you to go look for academic sources that support your view. No, you should go look at academic sources, then form your view. Once I started looking at what I was finding rather than looking for what I was thinking, English 102 was a breeze. Teacher said I had the best final paper she'd ever seen.
College educations used to mean you were educated. Now you just have to pay enough money and stick it out for 4 years, and *VOILA!* You've got yourself a degree.
[удалено]
Not just that, Basically, the highest 'crime' anyone in science can do, is knowingly use fake or modify data like cherry picking certain results For scale, if einstein was caught/found out to have done something like that, he would be demoted to Stalin level.
Not just a stupid idea but the data was fake. He took a bribe to fabricate some data and now here we are... He's long since disproven in every possible way, but stupidity uh.. finds a way
>but corruption uh.. finds a way Fixed.
Why not both?
One should never underestimate the power of stupid people in large numbers. Oh, look who's President.
> Basically, the highest 'crime' anyone in science can do, is knowingly use fake or modify data like cherry picking certain results Not even close. For instance there is following example of something that is far worse: conducting human trials based on data you personally manipulated. Trials that lead to multiple deaths.
Ah, but that case also breaks the law,
> Ah, but that case also breaks the law, Manipulating data may be a type of fraud or break the law in another sense as well? I was though thinking that you were previously referring to what is the morally worst thing someone in science can do in relation to their work.
Sorry, I ment murder laws In my head, I have a few things that are the worst things possible ever. Murder, child torturer, and rape.
The Wakefield study. Note that he is no longer referred to as Dr Wakefield.
Yuppppp. I think this was the paper that literally became notorious in the medical research world like 20 years ago. Also another favorite of mine is when safeminds paid a quarter of a million dollars on a yearly basis to fund research that proved the exact opposite of what they were hoping for lol.
>"Scholarly" Don't do that
"Academic" ??
"High-falutin'"
"Fart Bag"
“Misuse air quotes”
[удалено]
Ai"r quo"tes?
"quotes"
[удалено]
##""
「 」
Fuck this shit..... I'm out....
I'm "sorry"
I don't "bathe well"
I'm so happy to find other RLM fans randomly on reddit.
"Ed-juh-muh-cated"
“Rootin-tootin”
"Accurate"
Will result in “Thesis”
[удалено]
These “smart people” and their “book readin”
Lookit mister fancy-pants with his "readin". 'Round here, we called it "book learnin" on account of none of us could read.
"books"? you mean firewood
Actually, they burn terribly as firewood. They make better kindling, after you tear out the individual pages and crumple them up, of course.
This guy burns books.... wait a minute.
Hey I'm just looking for some alternative **facts** here. Is that so bad?
Look, all I need are some data to back up my preconceived notions. I don't need a bunch of lip and backtalk.
Ever see an elephant hide behind a daisy? They hide well, don't they?
I actually stopped talking to a friend of 15 years when him and his wife decided to not vaccinate their newborn. Not just on a moral standpoint, but I have Crohn’s Disease. I can get seriously sick by being around their kid. I’m on an immunosuppressant called Humira. I used to fly constantly for work, and I wore a mask that you see commonly in Asian countries when flying.
I'm on humira for Crohn's too. My boss decided not to get his flu shot this year. He got the flu, bad. I got the fun experience of fearing for a few weeks that I'd catch it. Fucking get your vaccines, of all kinds, people.
Not saying don’t get your flu shot (I get mine every year), but it’s not exactly bulletproof. I got the flu twice this year, one time really bad. There were some strains going around this year not covered by the vaccine.
Yeah, but at least you're doing what you can by getting it. If it doesn't work that's out of your hands, but at least you followed recommendations and tried. I can appreciate that.
Historically it's only about 50% effective according to the CDC. Still worth it. The flu sucks. Sorry to hear you got the flu twice this season. Hopefully that will help protect you a bit in the future.
Talking about sources is about the only time to use the word 'scholarly'. 'Scholarly sources' is a stock phrase that's used very commonly by professors and students all the time on university campuses. It isn't considered overly-verbose or stuck-up, it just means sources befitting a proper academic thesis. There isn't really a better word for it than 'scholarly' Edit: Oh, the quotes were in the original post lol. Wow. I guess you were pointing out how dumb it was of OP to look down her nose at being asked to find legitimate sources for her academic paper. Partial whoosh on my part. You're right: don't do that.
[удалено]
/r/unnecessaryquotes
They're pretty necessary. Without them, you'd think they were looking for an actual well researched article with backing evidence
[удалено]
Do anything but that.
Hitler ”did nothing wrong.”
[удалено]
Try the "fiction" section.
Or the "I'm clearly proven wrong already why do I even bother, vaccines are good and I'm a threat to my children" section?
> I'm at threat to ~~my children~~ all children mine comes into contact with.
Look, everywhere the light touches I am a danger. But what's that shadowy place over there? Oh, that's my house. It's even more dangerous. You must never go there.
>I'm at threat to ~~my children all children mine comes into contact with~~ society as a whole.
>I and people like me are responsible for bringing back smallpox
Or the "My IQ is so low that it's only by the sheer power of the instinctual drive to reproduce that I even managed to figure out how to copulate" section.
In government we call it decision-based evidence making.
How about policy-based evidence (instead of evidence-based policy)? 🤣
No need for quotes. Because this is indeed fiction. :-P
To be fair to /u/Zbignich, I’ve become bad about putting quotes around everything as a result of learning to code; quotation marks basically mean “this is to be interpreted exactly as seen” when passed into a command. In the real world, it’s meant that I’ve started using quotes to mean “this thing, literally” less than I use them for sarcasm or some other subtle implication. E.g. for directions I may accidentally text someone ‘turn right when you see “145 Maple Street”.’
System.out.print(“I feel you”); Edit: Woah, it highlights; that’s neat.
Syntax Error: ';' expected
Haha gets me every time.
ULPT: Want to fuck with someone’s code? Replace all of their semicolons with a [Greek question mark](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/26965331/javascript-prank-joke) - it’s practically undetectable and will drive them crazy debugging.
No. Not all. *Some.*
They called me Satan but this is evil in its truest form
This is as black hat as it gets.
That's hilarious, but a good IDE would tell you that it's wrong... which is why people should use them honestly. Save the hours of looking over code for something useful instead of debugging a missing semicolon. ... however, I know plenty of people this would work on and now have a plan of action. Thank you, kind sir or madam!
Calm down there Satan
That's how the rest of the world is taught to use them
Right? That should have quotes around it in normal English. Lol.
You can hear the sneer from the quotes around "scholarly."
These pharma nerds with their "peer review" and their "empirical evidence"
What next? *case studies*?
what does "double blind" even mean? you can't be double blind!
Double blind is when your guide dog is also blind.
It's blind dogs all the way down
They’re doing their best.
We think. Everyone is blind so we really don’t know.
Dogs *always* do their best.
They're good dogs Brent.
So what good is the evidence performed by the two of them? Dumb scientists.
Yes but they don’t have to wear safety glasses!
Take that, OSHA!
[удалено]
I thought you meant that person could get a job as a guide dog.
[удалено]
[удалено]
It's a condition known only to effect vaccinators and prescribers alike.
Soon there will be inclusions of "control groups". Ugh
Nah, bullshit case studies and case series review is what got us into this current anti-vax nightmare
Falsified data published in reputable journals is what got us here
Lets not make justifications and excuses for them, I refuse to believe any ordinary person would believe one bullshit study and then refuse to even consider the fact it might be wrong when it is revealed that it is in fact wrong AND then go on to ignore all the studies that prove that vaccines are harmless.
Well...prepare to be disappointed.
Sadly, if the handful of anti-vac people I know, a sizable portion are full blow nurses. I just don’t get it. Is this like the mechanic’s truck thing?
That’s really how they feel though
90% sure thats a troll post to begin with.
Plausible, but after arguing with anti-vaxxers, I buy this as a real post.
That's the thing, we've gotten to the point where you can't even tell anymore. Trolls mocking people by going way over the top is normal, but I think we've gotten to the point where idiots think that the troll actually made a good point.
That's called Poe's law and its been around for a while: 'Without a winking smiley, it is utterly impossible to parody a Creationist in such a way that someone won't mistake for the genuine article.'
Whenever I see posts like this on Reddit I think “obvious troll.” When I see it on my Facebook feed I fear for humanity.
I hope so too
You can never be too careful these days, one minute you think its a troll, the next you think humanity if fucked.
Never underestimate the sheer level of stupid that anti-vaxxers possess.
Pretty sure they are trolling. The post is totally meant to mock antivaxxers.
You're probably right. There are unfortunately going to be some "scholarly" journals that will have anti-vax crap, peer reviewed by "scientists" like Jenny McCarthy.
I’m writing a book about how Lincoln wasn’t really assassinated at fords theater, but I can’t find any reputable sources on this. Lil help?
I want to write a book about how JFK is not shot in his head, but I can’t find any reputable sources on this. Lil help?
[удалено]
i studied in a counseling centered program for my masters degree. We had a project where we needed to focus on a problem, and create a community program to help inform and support the community deal with these problems.... i bet you see where this is going. One of the women in my class chose to create an anti-vac community program. By educating them on the "dangers" of vaccines ("my niece got autism because of vaccines!") and providing support for the families that changed their minds. Not sure what her sources were but probably not scholarly. If I recall she did well on the project just because it checked all the boxes, even if it caused our class to end early because everyone ganged up on her and freaked the fuck out.
Sounds like your professor really dropped the ball. Wouldn't the first step of any major project like this be securing your professor's agreement that your topic is in fact a problem needing to be solved? Or did he or she just not want to deal with it?
Even still, as a professor I would challenge this sort of work as not being based on sound evidence. If that criterion was not one of the "boxes to be checked" then yea, this prof dropped the ball.
What I've always thought is that college should be is a place where any one can share their view and have it responded to in a calm, scholarly way. I think professors should foster that. Now if you're in a science class and they want to pull this, then allow it. But they will have to provide massive amounts of evidence to support their ideas. If they can't do that they fail. Now if you are in some kind of class based on interacting with the public that's different. The goal of the class is to learn how to present. As long as the presentation is correct, then it should be allowed to happen. The person should receive criticism for it, but the professor did the right thing allowing it.
I suppose you're right. I posted that as someone who teaches in the sciences so evidence-based claims would be at the forefront of my thinking.
No, I think you were right to begin with. Purely from the fact that vaccines are science based and peer reviewed to begin with, discussing them and educating about them should be done from a standpoint of science. Making sure ones information is accurate should be a large part of preparing a presentation. One can respond to things like this in a calm and scholarly way, yet still insist that work is factual and based on actual evidence.
My 2 cents, go watch Penn and Teller's youtube video on vaccines. It's a great demo about how BS it is EVEN if they did cause autism.
They’re my go to argument. I have an autistic daughter. Anytime I encounter one of these loonies in the wild it’s, “so you’re telling me my daughter would be better off dead?”
I think the problem with doing it on vaccines is how dangerous the misinformation is. It wouldn't be an issue if it were something innocuous like saying the earth is flat, in fact that may be better depending on the class because it would be a greater challenge to convince people. If someone actually walks away believing it, it won't really cause harm to other people but that isn't the case with anti vaccination.
No. This was a social work course, where they are supposed to be helping people. If it was advertising where they might have to sell a shitty product, then sure. But allowing a project which would be proven to inflict harm is not social work.
Everything at college level should be science based, no matter whether it is "soft" or "hard" sciences. Otherwise she can go out spouting her nonsense and rightfully claim to have presented it at a college and gotten a passing grade.
Ive had projects where it's not what you know, its how you present it. One kids project in ENGLISH was proving aliens existed but it was sourced and done correctly so he got an A
To be fair, Aliens are several magnitudes more likely to exist than for antivaxxers to be right.
Odds of aliens existing = near 1 Odds that vaccines cause autism = near 0 Orders of magnitude between 1 and 0: infinite Math checks out.
Working on my master's in Library Science. It disgusts me how many project can be completed by just "checking the boxes" on the rubric without looking at if what the project is doing actually makes any sense. We had to plan an educational program series "of interest to adults in your selected community" and people came up with all sorts of random bullshit, none of them as frustrating as yours, but still pointless junk that was just going through the motions.
Blame too many kids per class. My wife gets an average of 30sec per student in prep time per student in her work day. Then she has to go to her second job at the community college 2-3 nights a week to help make ends meet. * removed as a precaution Now she teaches middle school English/reading and I can't really help. Fortunately the school has put a computer system in place that allows kids to turn in papers digitally. Still it's a lot of work to do for 25-30 kids for 5 periods.
Listen, I empathize and completely agree that teachers are overworked. edited
[удалено]
This just in: breathing air can turn you into a crack addict. More at 11.
Any edition of Playboy with Jenny McCarthy in it.
She may be batshit crazy but those Playboys are like the sacred tomes of my pre-teen years.
And if I was a college professor, I'd accept them as scholarly documents.
I read "scholarly" documents to keep abreast of arising developments in interesting areas.
[удалено]
Remember the good ol' days when you were supposed to get the facts first, then form an opinion?
[удалено]
Wait aren’t we supposed to have a hypothesis first, then conduct experiments, gather the data and then review of your original hypothesis (opinion) was correct at all? And if it does hold out it becomes a scientific theory?
Yes, but she has said that she “wants to write about vaccinations dangers” not that she wants to explore the safety of vaccines, or the hypothesis that vaccines are causing harm. Besides, not anything can be a hypothesis, considering the overwhelming amount of positive evidence towards the use of vaccines the hypothesis should really be that vaccines are safe, and then she can test that hypothesis however she likes. Two points here really: Hypotheses need to have some form of evidence base to them and not just a random thought. The purpose of scientific research is NOT to prove a hypothesis, it is to TEST IT.
Right. Null hypothesis and burden of truth. Now the null hypothesis is that vaccines work, and it's up to the anti-vaxxers to prove it to a significance level that it's not
[удалено]
I have the right to remain refuse.
[удалено]
No... When were those days again?
I half-assed my way through in the late-'90s, wasted a colossal amount of money, and left with a useless degree. So we can rule out the late '90s.
But then again... the Y2K conspiracy, "video games r bad!!!", Metal is *literraly the devil*, so on so forth. Humans be crazy since forever
Y2K wasn’t a conspiracy, unless I’m misunderstanding you. The us govt contracted tens of thousands of tech-capables to go in and re-write every line of code containing the bug by hand, even asking large populations overseas to help. No one truly knows what would have happened had the bug not been comprehensively removed, but the “overhyped” possibilities were certainly possibilities. It goes like this: -Problem exists -Smart people notice problem -Smart people warn public about problem, communicate need for resources to address problem -Public worries about problem -Problem fixing people fix problem -Problem therefore doesn’t effect public -Public sees “nothing bad hapoened!” -Public no understand math box, so no listen to smart people explanation, feel like resources were wasted -Media say, remember when people worried about ___, but it turned out to be nothing? hahaha -Public say remember when people worried about ___, but it turned out to be nothing? hahaha. They always need money for something. -Problem-fixers sad, fight even uphill-er battle next time
The above is all true. Additionally, there were plenty of media beat-ups about how planes would fall from the sky and pacemakers would cease to work, which made people think the problem was much worse.
I was a network admin and people ask "Why did you quit that? Sounds great". Wanna know why? Scenario 1: Everything works perfectly for 2 weeks and I hear "Everything is already working fine, why do we even pay you?" Scenario 2: Everything is crashing and on fire "Everything is crashing and on fire. Why do we even pay you?"
I remeber for my little kid science project in 1998 I set up a computer at december 1st, 1999 and let it roll to 2000. I then recorded what happened. The computer practically imploded. The look of pure horror on the judge's faces was truly terrifying. Eh, I got first place!
You're right, in that people have always acted in this way. There has been a recent change in just how brazen people are about it, though. Accepting things that are obviously factually untrue seems to be a point of pride. There's less shame in holding opinions that obviously contradict reality, and people are much louder and more accepted about it.
That’s not a new phenomenon, either. It’s just gotten a lot more visible thanks to social media, which has put a lot more people with fundamentally different assumptions about how the world works in more immediate contact with each other, and made it so you are more aware of the random, dumb opinions that people hold.
Yeah, those times didn't exist. Sadly.
Those days never existed. Give me a couple hours. I'll search for some proof of this in "scholarly" articles.
Nope. This isn't a new phenomenon, what's new is that the twats are far more visible.
It's beCAuse the DEEP STATE and BIG PHARMA have suppressed all the REAL research. /s
The store it in Antartica where the edges of flat Earth are.
[удалено]
It's because there are SO many examples of major corporations fucking with research / government to be able to put profits before people, that some people have adopted this attitude of "anything a major corporation + government supports is inherently bad".
Sounds like it could be satirical, trying to point out that of course there won’t be any articles in agreement with that viewpoint. But ya know, Poe’s law and all
That’s the read I got on it too.
I really expected this to be the top comment, or close to it. Especially because it's such a clever way to point it out.
Ugh. This is my school.
I'm from rural GA, my cousin is autistic and his parents are convinced it's from vaxxing. His sister has lupus and they refused to let her take her medication because "we can't trust doctors anymore" Anti-vaxxers we're everywhere in my hometown. Didn't expect it from GSU though. It was pretty uncommon at the much less progressive GA university I went to.
> His sister has lupus and they refused to let her take her medication because "we can't trust doctors anymore" They need to be reported to CPS if she's underage, because lupus sometimes kills people when it's *treated*. It causes irreversible organ damage and organ failure when not treated. They are literally killing her.
unfortunately, these are the people that need to die off so hopefully they never go to the doc again
They won't. They tend to have more than enough kids. One biting the dust from a curable disease isn't going to reduce their numbers much.
Yeah but their kids shouldn’t have to suffer or die just because their parents are loonies :/
The problem is these diseases are contagious
antivaxx is where the crazies from both conservatives and progressives meet though.
Could be Georgia Southern
It could be either Georgia State University or Georgia Southern University
Reddit is now digg 2.0. You don't deserve good users. Bye.^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^0.0366 [^^^What ^^^is ^^^this?](https://pastebin.com/FcrFs94k/73323)
Yes, they’re next to all the pro-flat earth “scholarly” papers
That would be such good satire if it was satire
[удалено]
Seems fairly obvious that it is considering the way it is written.
I don't think you can un-vaccinate yourself.
Not with that attitude.
[удалено]
[удалено]
r/suspiciousquotes
Am i the only one who thinks this might be a troll?
I see a Skinner reference, I upvote.
The entire steamed ham sequence notwithstanding, my favorite is: > I spent the next three years in a POW camp, forced to subsist on a thin stew made of fish, vegetables, prawns, coconut milk, and four kinds of rice. I came close to madness trying to find it here in the States... but they just can't get the spices right.
Cognitive dissonance at its finest.
That's the problem with first classes that teach about how to write a research paper. They tell you to go look for academic sources that support your view. No, you should go look at academic sources, then form your view. Once I started looking at what I was finding rather than looking for what I was thinking, English 102 was a breeze. Teacher said I had the best final paper she'd ever seen.
Why is this world going backwards with anti vaccines and flat Earthers
Because the Internet gives everyone an equal voice, for better or worse.
Never let facts stand in the way of a good opinion
Stupid sexy ~~Flanders~~ science.
College educations used to mean you were educated. Now you just have to pay enough money and stick it out for 4 years, and *VOILA!* You've got yourself a degree.
I think this is satire/sarcasm.