Is science lying to us?
Is it possible that the government and top tier billionaire scientists are defining things as scienfific facts when they are actually false to keep us as a society close minded and blind to their actual goals , issuing things as facts to help build their cash and fuel their greed ... lying to the average citizen and the lower level scientists and researchers , is it possible all that we’ve been taught is factual is actually false?
- SmegheadLv 71 year agoFavorite Answer
There is no person authorized to speak for SCIENCE who gets to dictate what is and is not true. Scientific truth is defined by the general consensus of thousands and thousands of scientists who evaluate evidence published in scientific, peer-reviewed journals. The entire scientific infrastructure is designed to make it nearly impossible to fake results or to accept things as true without hard evidence.
- 1 year ago
I think you're wrong and misinform. Government and Science has nothing to do with each other.
the governing body of a nation, state, or community.
"an agency of the federal government"
the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment.
"the world of science and technology"
As you can see Google confirms they are not the same thing. If you say Google is wrong, go check on bing and if you say Bing is wrong than everything you ever learn is a lie. You're not human you're a talking robot, Cut yourself and find out.
- busterwasmycatLv 71 year ago
I would put that primarily in the government sphere. Scientists generally do not lie purposefully, although it does happen. It usually ends your career if you are caught.
This is not the same as a scientist promoting a world view that he has come to conclude is true based on his interpretation of observations. The scientist can be wrong but does not believe he is wrong, and thus is not lying. Not lying is not quite the same as being correct. Most scientists make a lot of effort to avoid falling into that trap, but we are trained to observe and interpret, so we do. And we are often not correct, even if a lot of times we are not exactly incorrect either. Being not quite right is not the same as being totally wrong. Most of science is a history of people offering interpretations that are only partially true, and advancement occurs when the true part is kept and new ideas replace what is found to be untrue (or incorrect).
It is a work in progress. There is no "consensus" so those who argue that there is and this is proof of "truth" are being deceptive, at best. A thing either works or it does not work. If it works (even if imperfectly), we tend to live with it until something better comes along, until someone figures out how to make better and more accurate predictions. the concept is one of looking at what happens, interpreting why it happens the way it does, and then proposing a process which is responsible. How good that suggested process is can be best tested by how well it predicts.
I don't particularly accept the AGW (man-caused global warming) argument because the predictions are so poor. I am sure that CO2 has a role in heat exchange but the system itself and the importance of CO2 in system behavior is very obviously poorly understood.
- oikoσLv 71 year ago
Put . . . . . down . . . . . the . . . . . Kool-Aid.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- MARKLv 71 year ago
No! There is no single person who controls science. The highlight for a scientist is finding out another scientist was wrong. All science is properly done through peer-review and it would not be possible for what you describe to happen.
- Mr. SmartypantsLv 71 year ago
There are no billionaire scientists. Scientists have no reason to lie, to conspire among themselves to push fake facts. Politicians do that, and religious leaders (who are also politicians in their way). Corporate leaders do that if it will make them a lot of money (like the tobacco companies creating their own 'research institute' to tell us cigarettes aren't harmful, or oil companies arguing with climatologists.)
Real scientists have occasionally been caught slanting research results to favor their own pet theories, or to get research grants. But not nearly as bad as the tobacco and oil companies, plus they often get caught and it hurts their reputations.
- 1 year ago
You just now figuring that out?
- daniel gLv 71 year ago
For every day there is, there is a new conspiracy theory.
- Anonymous1 year ago
Science is an intangible, inanimate object. It is therefore incapable of lying. Can scientists sometimes get it wrong? Absolutely. Is it unreasonable to think there is this cabal of scientists spreading disinformation? Yes. It's beyond unreasonable. It's paranoid and deluded. There is an entire world of scientists out there. So if one or a few were to falsify findings with falsified evidence, there are literally thousands of other scientists in the world who would instantly call them on it, and then that would involve even more scientists to come in and review the findings and duplicate whatever experiments or studies that underpinned them to see who was telling the the truth. And if you think you can rope thousands and thousands of scientists worldwide into lying in some giant conspiracy, then you really are delusional. It's nigh unto impossible to even rope two people into telling a lie convincingly without one eventually betraying the other, so thinking that thousands upon thousands of scientists would compromise their ethics and their belief in the scientific method is plane folly. That's just a story we like to tell ourselves when the facts don't match what we wish they were.
- Anonymous1 year ago
Yes. Computers don't exist. I am in your mind now. I am here. Obey me.Source(s): You are now in the Twilight Zone.