Science
36 watchers
Feb 2024
1:39pm, 15 Feb 2024
611 posts
|
George Smiley
cymascope.com This is company he founded |
|
Feb 2024
1:47pm, 15 Feb 2024
612 posts
|
George Smiley
I don't know how you debunk these things. Initial you tube looks like legitimate experiment with control, measuring equipment. That is issue, there is a lot of pseudo science, which adheres closely enough to science "protocols" to appear believable. YouTube doesn't go much for peer review sadly, unless name calling in comments section counts š.
|
Feb 2024
2:02pm, 15 Feb 2024
49,409 posts
|
HappyG(rrr)
Exactly George Smiley. My concern is my wife consumes a lot of information from these sources. She is an intelligent woman, but not from a science background. She is also a much more open person, and doesn't start from a position of scepticism like I probably do. I'm trying to find compelling and easy ways to suggest to her to "check the source". But when I tried to do that, I found it wasn't easy. My usual position would be: if I can't find it in Science, Nature, one or more uni publications, one or more gov't publications etc. then it's unproven. Of course, it could be that genius innovators are publishing early findings on YouTube and other internet platforms. I doubt it, but I suppose I could be missing out! Anyone else got any quick way of checking a source as valid / invalid? Thanks.  G
|
Feb 2024
2:05pm, 15 Feb 2024
21,606 posts
|
rf_fozzy
If people are announcing scientific discoveries on YouTube, it's most likely bollocks.
|
|
Feb 2024
2:27pm, 15 Feb 2024
613 posts
|
George Smiley
Google Scholar, can show if other academics cite work and any papers published by author, which might flag up concerns, if little published. Of course won't help with the tin foil hatters who will just see it as evidence that scientific world is silencing them. Are they selling anything? Always a red flag |
|
Feb 2024
2:30pm, 15 Feb 2024
49,410 posts
|
HappyG(rrr)
Yip, I recognise all the red flags - generally YouTube only (esp if it has advertising!), linked to a company selling something etc. But I was looking for something concrete e.g. their Doctorate was suspect etc. That Google Scholar sounds good. Will check out. Thanks. G
|
Feb 2024
2:33pm, 15 Feb 2024
13,330 posts
|
sallykate
I looked at the website posted by George Smiley, raised my eyebrows at the fact that the first person mentioned used to be an ecclesiastical embroideress and gave up at DNA reprogramming.
|
|
Feb 2024
2:35pm, 15 Feb 2024
13,331 posts
|
sallykate
Google Scholar is indeed an excellent resource scholar.google.com - you might not get much full-text there but you'll get a sense of whether things have been published in peer-reviewed journals and, as GS points out, to what extent they are being cited.
|
Feb 2024
2:59pm, 15 Feb 2024
16,493 posts
|
jda
If itās not in the scientific literature itās quackery. Even if it is in the scientific literature, it still might be quackery. Truth is messy and hard and most people canāt handle it. Donāt even want to handle it. They want easy shortcuts that conform to their world view. |
|
Feb 2024
3:17pm, 15 Feb 2024
49,411 posts
|
HappyG(rrr)
Yeah, agree with all that jda. But I'm trying to make kind comments and suggestions to my beloved, so trying to say, here, use this to check things and point to something easy or clear. But I agree too, such a thing may not exist and it requires us all to be discerning and questioning consumers of info on the internet. sk, thanks for that and for links. G
|
Related Threads
-
Night sky aka Star gazing aka Astronomy :-)
Jan 2025
-
What's your view on someone who believes Earth is being or has been visited by UFOs/UAP's
Dec 2024
-
Rise of the robots :-)
Aug 2024
-
Interesting study
Jul 2024
-
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is progressing at warp speed - A bit nerdy but I think you'll be amazed
Jun 2024
-
Units of measurements
Feb 2022
-
Mars Landing
Feb 2021
-
No limit to the benefits of exercise in reducing the risk of cardiovascular disease
Jan 2021
-
No such thing as too much exercise
Oct 2018
-
Rocketeers!
Apr 2017
