That's not true, not even in science. Science has strong gatekeeping and moderation in the form of peer review. You can't just publish any old shite.
And we've seen what happens to online spaces when you get rid of gatekeeping and moderation. You get 8chan. You get the Christchurch shooting.
That's not true, not even in science. Science has strong gatekeeping and moderation in the form of peer review. You can't just publish any old shite.
That, in large part, is why I have a particular dislike of self-described "autodidact" grifters that tend to run rampant in Silicon Valley circles, getting subsidized by the ultra-rich because they are bullshit artists and sometimes outright cult leaders (see "MIRI" for example), promising miracles and transcendence to the ultra-rich where peer-reviewed scientific inquiry won't.
"Which is why I've made it my mission, at great personal cost, to suppress better arguments!"Also, nothing but love for Carl Sagan. I want to live in the world he believed in. But! Sometimes the best cure for a fallacious argument is a picture of a pig with poop on its balls
As I've heard elsewhere, like so many bazingas, he doesn't "love science," he stares at science's ass as it walks by.
this can easily applies to internet pop history lovers too, i'll remember this one
Wish I had heard that back when the "I fucking LOVE science" FB group was the gravity well of bazingas.
