How do we recognize Bad Science from Sound Science?

Use this forum to discuss the philosophy of science. Philosophy of science deals with the assumptions, foundations, and implications of science.
User avatar
chewybrian
Posts: 1594
Joined: May 9th, 2018, 7:17 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Epictetus
Location: Florida man

Re: How do we recognize Bad Science from Sound Science?

Post by chewybrian »

RJG wrote: January 25th, 2022, 9:28 am It is not "me" making claim #1, this is a well known, established fact of science.

[Refer to the Mosquito Analogy to understand the mechanics of this protection].

Again, it is not "me" making this claim. This is a well known scientific fact.
Okay, you say it is not you making these claims (though my searching on the internet tells me that the "mosquito analogy' is your own invention and not even proposed by a scientist, much less verified).

Certainly you can see the folly of saying what you just said (repeatedly) and not being able to back it up. So, put up or shut up, maybe?
"If determinism holds, then past events have conspired to cause me to hold this view--it is out of my control. Either I am right about free will, or it is not my fault that I am wrong."
User avatar
RJG
Posts: 2767
Joined: March 28th, 2012, 8:52 pm

Re: How do we recognize Bad Science from Sound Science?

Post by RJG »

RJG wrote:1. What is the ONLY thing that all legitimate scientists and medical experts agree on that stops the continuous perpetuation (mutations) of this virus?
- Answer: herd immunity.

2. What is herd immunity?
- Answer: Herd immunity is the protective effect resulting from immune people surrounding vulnerable people, so as to prevent the transmission of the virus from infecting the vulnerable population. If enough immune people "participate" in achieving herd immunity this will effectively eradicate the virus (and its future mutations).

3. How does one "participate" in herd immunity?
- Answer: firstly one must be immune (healthy and preferably vaccinated/or acquired natural immunity). Secondly, they must socialize unmasked around vulnerable people. To help better understand the mechanism of herd immunity, refer to the famous Mosquito Analogy.

4. What is the role of 'vaccination' in achieving herd immunity protection?
- Answer: vaccination helps give us immune people. And immune people that "participate" in achieving herd immunity give us herd immunity protection.
chewybrian wrote:Okay, you say it is not you making these claims (though my searching on the internet tells me that the "mosquito analogy' is your own invention and not even proposed by a scientist, much less verified).
Now you are being intentionally disingenuous. Claim #1, #2, #3, and #4 claim NOTHING about the Mosquito Analogy. The claims revealed in #1 through #4 above are SCIENTIFIC FACTS. Again, these are not "my" facts, these are facts of science. The Mosquito Analogy (mentioned in Claim 3) is just an "analogy" (not a claim!) written by me to help those (like yourself) that struggle with understanding the mechanism behind the protective effect of herd immunity.

Your refusal to accept the well known facts of science should be a tip-off to yourself that maybe you have been led astray by some Bad Science.
User avatar
chewybrian
Posts: 1594
Joined: May 9th, 2018, 7:17 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Epictetus
Location: Florida man

Re: How do we recognize Bad Science from Sound Science?

Post by chewybrian »

RJG wrote: January 25th, 2022, 1:53 pm Your refusal to accept the well known facts of science should be a tip-off to yourself that maybe you have been led astray by some Bad Science.
Your trumpeting "BASIC FACTS OF SCIENCE!" without being able to quote an actual scientist having said any of them is very telling.

Again, if I said that motorcycle helmets caused more fatalities than they prevented, I would certainly expect people to challenge me and ask me to give some kind of source for my belief. I can't simply state that I alone have discovered that we riders endanger ourselves if we wear a helmet. I should cite a study that backs up my belief, or at least be able to quote an alleged authority on the subject who says I might be right. If I can't, why should anyone take me seriously?
"If determinism holds, then past events have conspired to cause me to hold this view--it is out of my control. Either I am right about free will, or it is not my fault that I am wrong."
User avatar
RJG
Posts: 2767
Joined: March 28th, 2012, 8:52 pm

Re: How do we recognize Bad Science from Sound Science?

Post by RJG »

Chewy, are you seriously doubting these 4 well known facts of science? Check the science yourself if you don't believe me. I'm sure there are lots of great references out there.

Here is a video that might help https://youtu.be/8BUCi5Tuzms
stevie
Posts: 762
Joined: July 19th, 2021, 11:08 am

Re: How do we recognize Bad Science from Sound Science?

Post by stevie »

RJG wrote: January 25th, 2022, 9:28 am
stevie wrote:Ok but then you have to specify "logic" and based on that specification define "logically sound".
"Logic" refers to deductive logic.
"Logically sound" refers to logical conclusion drawn from true premise statements with a valid argument structure.
To say ""Logic" refers to deductive logic."" does not define the logic referred to by you.

The context is:
RJG wrote: January 24th, 2022, 1:32 pm
stevie wrote:To differentiate "bad science" and "sound science" isn't appropriate. Science is science. But those persons who call themselves or are called "scientists" may be applying science and deserve to be called "scientists" or may not be applying science and not deserve to be called "scientists".
Stevie, this is how I define these terms:

Bad Science = Science that disregards or contradicts logic.
Sound Science = Science that is logically sound.
And
stevie wrote: January 25th, 2022, 3:05 am
RJG wrote: January 24th, 2022, 1:32 pm
stevie wrote:To differentiate "bad science" and "sound science" isn't appropriate. Science is science. But those persons who call themselves or are called "scientists" may be applying science and deserve to be called "scientists" or may not be applying science and not deserve to be called "scientists".
Stevie, this is how I define these terms:

Bad Science = Science that disregards or contradicts logic.
Sound Science = Science that is logically sound.
Ok but then you have to specify "logic" and based on that specification define "logically sound".
mankind ... must act and reason and believe; though they are not able, by their most diligent enquiry, to satisfy themselves concerning the foundation of these operations, or to remove the objections, which may be raised against them [Hume]
User avatar
RJG
Posts: 2767
Joined: March 28th, 2012, 8:52 pm

Re: How do we recognize Bad Science from Sound Science?

Post by RJG »

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Pcwk344ALUM&feature=share

Interesting.

Also note the reference to the Great Barrington Declaration, which is a group of tens of thousands of medical experts and scientists that also see the dangerous "Bad Science" of Dr. Fauci.
AverageBozo
Posts: 502
Joined: May 11th, 2021, 11:20 am

Re: How do we recognize Bad Science from Sound Science?

Post by AverageBozo »

RJG wrote: January 24th, 2022, 1:32 pm
Bad Science = Science that disregards or contradicts logic.
Sound Science = Science that is logically sound.
Sorry. Your definitions are not just idiosyncratic, but they are also just mistaken.

Good science is peer-reviewed. It is based on reproducible observations.

“Unsound science” can make valid connections between false statements.

If logic concurs with experimental data, then good on you.
AverageBozo
Posts: 502
Joined: May 11th, 2021, 11:20 am

Re: How do we recognize Bad Science from Sound Science?

Post by AverageBozo »

Your thread, RJG, is not about distinguishing good science from bad science, but rather one more expression of the same proposition you have raised repeatedly.

Think hard: why is it that you have not convinced most anyone of your logically sound opinion about natural herd immunity?
User avatar
Sculptor1
Posts: 7091
Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am

Re: How do we recognize Bad Science from Sound Science?

Post by Sculptor1 »

RJG wrote: January 25th, 2022, 7:32 pm ***youtube*com/watch?v=Pcwk344ALUM&feature=share

Interesting.

Also note the reference to the Great Barrington Declaration, which is a group of tens of thousands of medical experts and scientists that also see the dangerous "Bad Science" of Dr. Fauci.
Not interesting. In less than a minute and a half he has stated a fallacy. Basic evolution does not suggest that universal vaccination could drine the virus to a more pathogenic state.
In fact the emergence of omincron demonstrates the complete opposite.

I am astounded that any one could say that. Ending vaccination would mean the virus would run rampant and more able to mutate as there would be more hosts, being infected for longer, and giving more severe disease.
Unless you actually want to wipe ou another 10 or 20 million people vaccination is the best route to herd immunity.

Malone is the guy now infamous for taking money from the manufacturers of famotidine (an antacid remedy) AND ivermectin (a veternary worming pill) , as a treatment for hospitalised COVID patients.
I do not think it worth trusting his views.
Last edited by Sculptor1 on January 26th, 2022, 9:05 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
RJG
Posts: 2767
Joined: March 28th, 2012, 8:52 pm

Re: How do we recognize Bad Science from Sound Science?

Post by RJG »

AB, again, Bad Science is science that disregards (or contradicts) logic. If you can't understand this, then sorry, I don't have the patience or energy to explain such a simple statement or play semantic games.

Just ask yourself - whats the end game? How many more mutations and deaths will there be following the advice of Dr. Fauci? How will this all end given the same trajectory?

When will we realize and see that we are accelerating the mutation process by blindly following this Bad Science? When will we stop and look at this problem from a logical perspective?

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/01/25/the-nex ... -says.html

How will it all end?

It is foolish (and logically impossible!) to believe that we can vaccinate our way out of this mess if we continue to mask and socially isolate our healthy vaccinated population.

Soon, we won't have enough healthy people to slow or stop the monster that we created (...created out of ignorance to logic and blind adherence to Bad Science).
Last edited by RJG on January 26th, 2022, 9:58 am, edited 1 time in total.
Atla
Posts: 2540
Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm

Re: How do we recognize Bad Science from Sound Science?

Post by Atla »

Can I vote on banning these anti-vaccine topics from the forum? RJG can explore his suicide fantasies alone.
True philosophy points to the Moon
User avatar
RJG
Posts: 2767
Joined: March 28th, 2012, 8:52 pm

Re: How do we recognize Bad Science from Sound Science?

Post by RJG »

Atla wrote:Can I vote on banning these anti-vaccine topics from the forum? RJG can explore his suicide fantasies alone.
Atla, I have NEVER been anti-vaccine! We need vaccines to get enough immune people to stop this thing!

Atla, instead of perpetuating lies, how about you try understanding my words, and put the "cancel-culture" BS away? ...and stop making up lies, ...fair enough?

Read the OP to understand the role of vaccination to getting us immune people to "participate" in getting herd immunity to stopping this virus.
Atla
Posts: 2540
Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm

Re: How do we recognize Bad Science from Sound Science?

Post by Atla »

RJG wrote: January 26th, 2022, 10:03 am
Atla wrote:Can I vote on banning these anti-vaccine topics from the forum? RJG can explore his suicide fantasies alone.
Atla, I have NEVER been anti-vaccine! We need vaccines to get enough immune people to stop this thing!

Atla, instead of perpetuating lies, how about you try understanding my words, and put the "cancel-culture" BS away? ...and stop making up lies, ...fair enough?

Read the OP to understand the role of vaccination to getting us immune people to "participate" in getting herd immunity to stopping this virus.
The existing vaccines don't give us immune people, so what vaccines are you talking about?
True philosophy points to the Moon
User avatar
RJG
Posts: 2767
Joined: March 28th, 2012, 8:52 pm

Re: How do we recognize Bad Science from Sound Science?

Post by RJG »

Atla wrote:The existing vaccines don't give us immune people, so what vaccines are you talking about?
"Immune" refers to those who are not susceptible to the ill effects of covid. Immune people are those that have strong, healthy, fast responsive immune systems. Vaccinations to healthy people further enhance the immune response to the virus.

"Vulnerable" people are those that are susceptible to the ill effects of covid. Vulnerable people are those that have weak or compromised immune systems. Vaccinations to vulnerable people may (or may not) help enhance the immune response to the virus. Vulnerable people, whether vaccinated or not, are still susceptible to the ill effects of covid (as the empirical evidence has shown).

At the first iteration (mutation) of this virus, we had more than enough immune people to put out this fire (stop this virus), but we did the worst thing possible, we masked and socially isolated our fire extinguishers (our healthy immune population), thereby allowing the virus to spread and to further mutate.

And at each new iteration (that we are intentionally and foolishly allowing), our army of available immune people is getting smaller and smaller. Each new iteration is seemingly more contagious, and potentially more deadly. https://www.cnbc.com/2022/01/25/the-nex ... -says.html

Because of our foolishness (our disregard for logic, along with the 'blind' adherence to Bad Science) we now have to rely on vaccinations to get us enough immune people to protect the vulnerable and help put out this fire. But vaccinations themselves do not necessarily protect the vulnerable, nor stops this virus -- healthy immune systems ("immune people") protect the vulnerable and helps stop this virus! Without immune people socializing unmasked, the virus will continue to mutate into potentially more contagious and deadly variants.

When will we realize and see that we are foolishly accelerating the mutation process by blindly following this Bad Science? When will we stop and look at this problem from a logical perspective?
Atla
Posts: 2540
Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm

Re: How do we recognize Bad Science from Sound Science?

Post by Atla »

RJG wrote: January 26th, 2022, 2:02 pm "Immune" refers to those who are not susceptible to the ill effects of covid. Immune people are those that have strong, healthy, fast responsive immune systems.
...
Yeah that's clearly not what happened in the last 2 years, countless people with otherwise healthy immune systems also got the virus and spread it more easily without masks. Some of them went through hell, they don't need your suicide fantasies pushed on them.
True philosophy points to the Moon
Post Reply

Return to “Philosophy of Science”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021