Supreme Court Logic and The Gun Control Debate

[CWS]

every living human has "bias" that doesn't render all scientific research invalid.

I agree. Good science can lead to bad conclusions and bad science can lead to correct conclusions, too. I'm saying that highly political studies are more prone to bias and it can usually be found. Does that invalidate the study? Often, yes. Often, no.

 

[qazplm]

I agree. Good science can lead to bad conclusions and bad science can lead to correct conclusions, too. I'm saying that highly political studies are more prone to bias and it can usually be found. Does that invalidate the study? Often, yes. Often, no.

As I've said about others today who throw around everyone is the same or it's all this way, that's an intellectually facile and lazy approach.

Most scientists aren't biased to the point that their science is "bad." Science gets the wrong answer sometimes, or no answer, or a partial answer. The whole point of the scientific method is to reduce bias to a level where the end result is closer to truth. Yes, sometimes (not often, sometimes) a study is just junk, trying to prove this or that...but it's not nearly as often as you appear to think.

 

[CWS]

I don't have a narrow view, it's called discerning . My career is based on science and my job relies on me discriminating between good and bad science and applying that good science for the help of mankind. I actually have two four year degrees in science and use them both daily. I actually know statistics, too. I didn't major in statistics, but I did get a 100% score for the year in my college stats course. Intellectually lazy I am not. Am I a skeptic? Absolutely. More and more so every year, for better or for worse.