Nah, real science starts with a conclusion and then works backwards to find evidence for said conclusion. I think it is a more modern approach. Instead of validating reality, we are validating feelings.
Nah, science has always worked like that. This is what peer review is for.
What’s better than finding evidence that proves your own preconceived notions? Finding evidence that contradicts someone else’s. Schadenfreude is the great engine of scientific progress.
Except psychopaths who know their claim is garbage but lie through their teeth to get it published. That’s not a mistake, that’s corruption.
Nah, real science starts with a conclusion and then works backwards to find evidence for said conclusion. I think it is a more modern approach. Instead of validating reality, we are validating feelings.
Nah, science has always worked like that. This is what peer review is for.
What’s better than finding evidence that proves your own preconceived notions? Finding evidence that contradicts someone else’s. Schadenfreude is the great engine of scientific progress.