Re: OT: New imaging method enables detailed RNA analysis of the whole brain

On 27/11/2024 9:17 am, Liz Tuddenham wrote:

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote:
 

Good science doesn't look anything like religion. If you know enough to
understand the science you won't make that mistake.

 You appear to have misunderstood what I was trying to say.  The results
of good science are being ignored and suppressed because they don't
support the 'religious' beliefs of those in charge.  The politicians and
the more ignorant of the people have been convinced by pseudo-science
into believing things in a field they don't understand - so they take
the simplic view: X=Good, Y=Bad which is fed to them by 'activists'.
 The evidence that disproved the 'scientific' claims which led to  racial
segregation in some countries and racial purges in others was suppressed
by politicians and activists because it didn't suit their dogma.
 Only the flimsiest of evidence (if any) supported the bogus claim that
lead leaching out of landfill was a major pollutant that could only be
stopped by banning lead from solder.  The evidence which would have
shown that this was untrue was suppressed by politicians and activists
because it didn't suit thier dogma.
 Try getting a grant in a British university to do research that might
produce evidence that some major aspects of the 'Climate Change' theory
are nothing but bunkum based on selected measurements and warped
statistics.  You won't; evidence like that would be suppressed by
politicians and activists because it doesn't suit their dogma.

On the contrary, politicians and activists love it when they find duff ostensibly "scientific" research that purports to show that climate change is bunkum.
The scientific community hasn't had much trouble shooting them down.
https://skepticalscience.com/print.php?r=180
To be fair, Spencer and Christy didn't set out to produce duff data, but they were slower to correct their sublte errors than they might have been. They are both fundamentalist christians, which doesn't inhibit their scientific thinking, but reduces their motivation for showing that god is less benevolent than they'd like to think.
--
Bill sloman, Sydney