This is the core problem...let's say there are 10 scientists working together. 3 of them say that a procedure is safe while the other 7 says it's not. Clearly a definitive conclusion has yet to be met.
However, some rando claims that the 3 scientists are correct, simply because the conclusion of those 3 fits in with their agenda. If you bring up the other 7, you get called a science denier.
Science is a constant work in progress. Biased individuals only push scientists that fits their agenda.
However, some rando claims that the 3 scientists are correct, simply because the conclusion of those 3 fits in with their agenda. If you bring up the other 7, you get called a science denier.
Science is a constant work in progress. Biased individuals only push scientists that fits their agenda.