Friar Bijou wrote:
Facts never change. Period. They can't.
They do, actually.
Old data gets superseded by new data all the time. That really is
how science works.
No. New data gets added to the pool of old data we already have, leading us to create new models to incorporate that new data. We then loop back as we gain yet more data (almost always because we find new and more interesting/precise ways to measure and observe things), and the models change again. Rinse and repeat. That is how science works.
How did you graduate High School without learning this?
Because I understand that science isn't a result, it's a process.
The point of my statement is that you test for best answer instead of just going "I think this is right, therefore it must be right" instead of, you know, testing the model.
Absolutely. My point was that the folks most likely to argue that they are on the side of science, while the other side is not, are *not* following this methodology at all. They are the ones declaring their conclusion to be fact and that no additional testing or changing of models should be allowed. I'll ask you to noodle out who uses the phrase "settled science" as a means to shut down dissenting opinions all the time. It's ain't folks on the right.
Science specifically allows for changing conclusions and recommendations based on those conclusions as time goes by and the facts we know increase. Yet, during this covid crisis we're repeatedly heard liberal pundits claim that Trump is "ignoring science" when he does just that. I've seen far too many times where folks on the left will cherry pick one expert or one out of context statement about something, and declare that to be "scientific fact", against which there can be no other possible conclusions. Just look at the whole hydroxycloroquine thing (probably butchered the spelling, but whatever). We get claims that Trump is ignoring science, based on word games (FDA hasn't approved it for use against covid, so it must be unsafe and ineffective despite the fact that the FDA hasn't approved *any* treatment for covid, since it takes years to do so). Or we get false comparisons like potential damage that could occur (only over long time periods and with much higher dosages than being recommended here). Or falsely interpreted statistics like that it's was ineffective when used by folks in the late stages of covid, when the recommendation is to use it in the early stages to prevent getting that far along in the first place.
That's the "science" the folks on the left are using. And don't even get me started on the whole mask thing. Or the ridiculous and illogical shutdown rules that some states and cities have imposed. That's not science. That's insanity. And this is just covid silliness. We've been seeing this for a couple decades now with the whole global warming thing (oh, sorry, it's "climate change" now). Don't have a problem with changing the predictions of outcomes (warming to "change" for example), but then you also kinda have to change your recommendations as well. But they haven't. Which is what tells us that this is the policy leading the science and not the other way around. But hey! It's the GOP who don't follow science, right?