GSandSDS Yes – you see where i’m coming from The scientific method is held up as “the holy grail” of fact finding when we’re in elementary school when it’s really a method of fact finding that works very well, but it’s not infallible and sometimes theories get thrown away from technicalities which turn out to be true decades later.
I guess that’s why I mention science can be faddy. Part of it is funding: If you want to get funded in science in the 1990s, you had to add a mention of Global Warming. That’s where the money for funding is.
Science doesn’t usually happen in a vacuum. Someone pays for the research. The people who pay for the research are usually NOT scientists and have their own agenda, whatever they may be.
Because non-scientists are driven by fads, and non-scientists fund the research the scientists will make, the scientists often will have to customize their research to fit the fads of the day.
beyond that, though, by fad I mean “what’s popular” in scientific circles vs “what’s rejected”. Example; The Aether. We’re taught in school to mock the 19th century for believing in the Aether.
Yet, if you really look at different theories through the past century, the Aether comes back over and over under different names.
Currently it’s Quantum Foam.
There’s nothing wrong with the Luminiferous Aether concept being reused in different ways; I think the ppl in the 19th century had the right idea IN PRINCIPAL but it needed more knowledge to be reworked.
That’s my point about fads. There are things you are not allowed to talk about and have it called science, even if they may be true. There’s a lot more forbidden than not. You will be rejected if you don’t use the right language, get published in the rght journals (some journals are considered junk, some are considered Golden) – and there is a lot of competition in Science.
“Publish or Die” is one of the reasons why I didn’t go into science. I heard horror stories when I was young about the process and thought, ‘no no, not for me”.
I’m not mocking science; just saying there’s a difference between the “idea” of science – which is often held up as the Holy Grail of Truth – and the reality of science, which is quite messy and political and full of public relations, press releases, funding problems, gossiping and backbiting, etc.
Just like every field where humans are.