How Science Got Sound Wrong

I guess when people cannot form coherent arguments against a concept that does not coincide with their world-view, they have to attack the underlying basis of how that concept was derived. Sort of weird here, as it appears to be an attempt to use science in a very anti-science attack.

Thanks to some of the posters in here, I realize that you can argue just about anything, some actually did it for pure pleasure and hubris and self indulgence. I though "science" was a done deal, but this thread shows otherwise. Now I have to think twice before drinking water because apparently science could be wrong and I have to think if water is good for my health.

 I though "science" was a done deal, but this thread shows otherwise. Now I have to think twice before drinking water because apparently science could be wrong and I have to think if water is good for my health

Even though you thought otherwise, science has never been a done deal...in fact as a collective endeavor one of its strengths has always been an insatiable curiosity that forces it to move forward and morph into different forms...it is not as most people think a quasi-religion that has a credo chiseled into stone and absolutely inviolable. The who, the what, and the why always changes.

And by the way drinking water, even the most pure water, has its problems...

 

However, drinking too much water can also be dangerous. Overhydration can lead to water intoxication. This occurs when the amount of salt and other electrolytes in your body become too diluted. Hyponatremia is a condition in which sodium (salt) levels become dangerously low

.

Which btw has become a problem among endurance athletes ( there is even a TED talk dedicated to this problem )....who thought, like you, drinking water is , uhhh, just drinking water.

Religion and science are only 2 complementary part of the human endeavor, what the great Philosopher Ernst Cassirer and Goethe student called " symbolic forms"...They are others, the most central one being language...Religion and science are unintelligible at the end without a deeper understanding of the language function...


My best to all...

Is that my cue?

“Seeing with humility, curiosity and fresh eyes was once the main point of science. But today it is often a different story. As the scientific enterprise has been bent toward exploitation, institutionalization, hyperspecialization and new orthodoxy, it has increasingly preoccupied itself with disconnected facts in a psychological, social and ecological vacuum. So disconnected has official science become from the greater scheme of things, that it tends to deny or disregard entire domains of reality and to satisfy itself with reducing all of life and consciousness to a dead physics.

Science seems in many ways to be treading the weary path of the religions it presumed to replace. Where free, dispassionate inquiry once reigned, emotions now run high in the defense of a fundamentalized "scientific truth." As anomalies mount up beneath a sea of denial, defenders of the Faith and the Kingdom cling with increasing self-righteousness to the hull of a sinking paradigm. Faced with provocative evidence of things undreamt of in their philosophy, many otherwise mature scientists revert to a kind of skeptical infantilism characterized by blind faith in the absoluteness of the familiar. Small wonder, then, that so many promising fields of inquiry remain shrouded in superstition, ignorance, denial, disinformation, taboo . . . and debunkery.”

When talking about science, I always quote people who have:
- No training in the sciences
- No experience working in the sciences
- No scientific accomplishments

If you take an excerpt of one of his quotes, he does nail someone pretty accurately though ... ^^^^^^     "speak with little or no authority on the subject matter of which they are so passionate"