Quote:
Originally Posted by graciegirl
The scientific method, taught to me years ago, went like this;
Define the problem.
Gather facts on the problem.
Come to a trial conclusion.
Check the trial conclusion.
I am NOT a scientist, nor am I greatly educated, but I loved all the sciences taught to me in the Columbus Public Schools in the fifties; Botany, Zoology, Biology, Advanced Biology, (Didn't LOVE Chemistry) but passed it. I think it was a very good basis for other learnings in life. I also still really see the obvious truth in Darwin's Theory of Evolution and selective breeding. I wish that I understood Genetics better, because I truly think that the future of medicine rests on it.
|
Yes, I learned this as well. But what it fails to include is that the "scientists" are not flawless. They make mistakes, can have an agenda, can be biased (even if not conscious of it) and so on. Scientists are humans too and there is a lot of pressure politically on them today that there wasn't back then. Also a lot of pressure within the field itself.
Add to this the difficulty in doing a study. There are multiple factors that need to be controlled in order for the study to be credible. And as I mentioned above the individuals must be unbiased. Meaning they have to have an excellent sense of self awareness cause it it very easy for anyone to bring bias into a study. There are other factors to consider as well such as the length of the study, the number of subjects studied, cross section of the subjects being studied, etc, etc. It's really quite surprising how many people quote "studies" as being factual without ever looking into how the study was done and the many factors that may have skewed the study. Even what the CDC puts out needs to taken with a grain of salt. Esp since it's a government entity that is vulnerable to persuasion by the powers to be.