I don't even know what the term "mainstream science" is supposed to mean.
My science education was devoid of any such reference - too much focus on sciencey stuff I guess :)
It was never presented as "up for grabs"
This modern shit, of thousands of doctors WORLDWIDE screaming about a virus, and a cheap effective cure, and masks and lockdowns being deadly, and they get SHUT DOWN AND DE-LICENSED, is completely outside the realm of science and civilized human behavior.
In any other era, if a group of doctors rose up and said we have a better cure, everyone would LISTEN to them!!
Science is taught as an iterative approach of creating better and better models of reality. There is a focus on allowing yourself to see what's really there, regardless of your axioms or biases.
However, there are areas of research that are heavily frowned upon, no matter the evidence. There are things that are labeled "conspiracy theories" or "pseudo-science" even when there is evidence to support it. You can only get funding for "approved" areas of research. Anything outside of those approved areas gets no attention because there is no funding, and if you do look outside of it you are shunned by the community as a quack, as if their PhDs are better than yours.
All my life I had wondered why that would be. Why the larger community would take this obvious anti-science approach to science; teaching a completely open minded path with an anti-dogma sentiment, yet socially and monetarily forcing each scientist on an "approved" dogmatic path. Now I have a pretty good idea why.
That is what "mainstream science" means. It is the actual approach we take, not the one we are taught.
I don't even know what the term "mainstream science" is supposed to mean.
My science education was devoid of any such reference - too much focus on sciencey stuff I guess :)
It was never presented as "up for grabs"
This modern shit, of thousands of doctors WORLDWIDE screaming about a virus, and a cheap effective cure, and masks and lockdowns being deadly, and they get SHUT DOWN AND DE-LICENSED, is completely outside the realm of science and civilized human behavior.
In any other era, if a group of doctors rose up and said we have a better cure, everyone would LISTEN to them!!
Science is taught as an iterative approach of creating better and better models of reality. There is a focus on allowing yourself to see what's really there, regardless of your axioms or biases.
However, there are areas of research that are heavily frowned upon, no matter the evidence. There are things that are labeled "conspiracy theories" or "pseudo-science" even when there is evidence to support it. You can only get funding for "approved" areas of research. Anything outside of those approved areas gets no attention because there is no funding, and if you do look outside of it you are shunned by the community as a quack, as if their PhDs are better than yours.
All my life I had wondered why that would be. Why the larger community would take this obvious anti-science approach to science; teaching a completely open minded path with an anti-dogma sentiment, yet socially and monetarily forcing each scientist on an "approved" dogmatic path. Now I have a pretty good idea why.
That is what "mainstream science" means. It is the actual approach we take, not the one we are taught.
"Post Modern" Science where "evidence" can be whatever you want it to be.