• FundMECFS@piefed.zipOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Many literal scientists assume the correlations they find are causative without much thought. Definitely a pervasive problem the assumption of correlations as causations.

    • 14th_cylon@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      8 hours ago

      they will pay for it. every single person who mistakes causation and correlation will die!

    • bedwyr@piefed.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      9 hours ago

      The real reason though, those scientist trained hacks are signing on to what they are paid to, to design studies to work backwards from poisoning the population is actually totally safe.

      But yes.

      • FundMECFS@piefed.zipOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 hours ago

        The other month in our field some random team published a paper where they surveyed people sick with a chronic illness and people who had recovered from that illness. They found the recovered people had better mental health than those who were ill.

        The authors in all their wisdom decided that means mental health causes the illness. It apparently didn’t cross their mind that being chronically ill is not fun so you have worse mental health and being recovered is comparatively great so you have better mental health.

        Now some right wing chuds are citing this silly study to try and paint the illness as fake.

        • The_v@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 hours ago

          The amount of shit science being published today is appalling. It’s always been a significant issue, but it has gotten worse with time. I have read articles published in the top journals who’s methodology should have made a 1st year graduate student cringe. I have no idea how they made it past peer review and were published.

          • FundMECFS@piefed.zipOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            7 hours ago

            I really agree. The decline in methodology and proper hedging (not overstating) is really appalling. It feels like science publishing has become about marketing your paper not trying to uncover the “truth”…

          • OwOarchist@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 hours ago

            I have no idea how they made it past peer review and were published.

            The authors aren’t the only ones getting paid off.

            I suspect, at some point, it will slip and become a major scandal that reviewers at major scientific journals have been accepting “gifts” from interested parties to help ensure that specific articles get approved and published.

      • 4am@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        9 hours ago

        “Guys! It’s the scientists who are bad!” said the smartest person in the room

        A point which he arrived at through correlation, without citing any causation.

        Curious.

        • bedwyr@piefed.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          9 hours ago

          Gtfo of here, we should all know trade groups hire agencies to construct studies from it’s cool to reach that conclustion.

          You are either ignorant and given to trolling people you think (often incorrectly,) have made some offense, or a fucking moron.

          Now piss off.

          • AVincentInSpace@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 hours ago

            “Some studies are done with funding contingent on a certain result, therefore all science is junk and science as an institution is untrustworthy”

          • JadenSmith@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            8 hours ago

            Your argument may be better received with less hostility. People are going to criticise your ideas throughout life, however this reaction could be seen as a distraction to your focus on the subject. Everyone is at dismay at a topic, and many topics have the capability to become heated, yet you will be amongst greater levels of respectability for future interactions if you consider refraining from attacks today (even if you feel as though this is being done to you).
            Just trying to help, not scold. There’s always a better way to get your point across without making people dislike your comments, is what I’m essentially trying to get at.

            • bedwyr@piefed.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              8 hours ago

              First of all, I don’t give a fuck how I’m received, until I am satisfied my comment is in the common good. And I stand by this comment entirely. I am proud of my preceding comment, and if you don’t like it, I don’t care. Not one little bit. Other than caring enough to argue a bit obviously.