It comes up time and again in low-carb vs low-fat arguments, but also in arguments about vaccines, or glyphosate Basically, the idea is that you can ignore science completely when you don't like the way it was generated
-
-
And you see this all the time in anti-vaccine arguments as well New massive study comes out that shows that vaccines don't cause autism? Well, it was done in Denmark and we all know the Danish are unethical just look at this other guy who once lived in Denmark (ACTUAL ARGUMENT)
Show this thread -
So there are dozens of studies that directly contradict Taubes' viewpoint. What of it? They're done by people once paid by industry, or are meta-analyses, or don't have the exact specifics of the one study whose evidence he will accept that conveniently supports his opinions
Show this thread -
Ultimately, it's very hard to argue against these viewpoints because the often it seems that the only evidence that's accepted is confirmatory Anything that isn't just gets discarded Which is not how science works at all. Fin.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.