This guy should learn to view science more like a constructivist. Pretty much everything in science is just something we made up that mostly aligns with the natural world, and just because one model is less accurate than another does not mean it’s no longer useful.
We didn’t abandon Newtonion physics when Einstein’s model was proven for instance, since Newtonian physics is still very useful, and much easier to use compared to others.
The amount of people who think that scientists don’t understand how bees fly is evidence that most people don’t have this world view. As if someone would see a bee flying, not only having been around for eons, but a very common creature most people are familiar with, would just throw their hands up and say “WHOA! THIS VIOLATES ALL THE LAWS OF PHYSICS! THIS SHOULD BE IMPOSSIBLE!”
This guy should learn to view science more like a constructivist. Pretty much everything in science is just something we made up that mostly aligns with the natural world, and just because one model is less accurate than another does not mean it’s no longer useful.
We didn’t abandon Newtonion physics when Einstein’s model was proven for instance, since Newtonian physics is still very useful, and much easier to use compared to others.
I mean, it’s a shit post about how nutrition science is hard and full of misinformation.
Well did I miss hearing that someone has proven Einstein?
I wasn’t familiar with the term, but I always (until this moment) assumed that everybody viewed science that way.
The amount of people who think that scientists don’t understand how bees fly is evidence that most people don’t have this world view. As if someone would see a bee flying, not only having been around for eons, but a very common creature most people are familiar with, would just throw their hands up and say “WHOA! THIS VIOLATES ALL THE LAWS OF PHYSICS! THIS SHOULD BE IMPOSSIBLE!”