The Lyin’tific Method

… or ‘Why science has lost its luster’

One of the most unpleasant aspects of living under communism was an awareness that we were always surround by non-reality, i.e., artifacts fabricated by the propaganda machine, whose aim was to prevent us from seeing reality as it was.

~ Ryszard Legutko, Polish philosopher

The common feature of all totalitarian regimes … is that the regime monopolizes what is considered rationality, knowledge, and what is regarded to be truth.

~ Dr. Aaron Kheriaty, MD, Murthy v. Missouri rally, 18 Mar 2024

I’ve had death threats. My children have had death threats. I’ve been debanked and deplatformed several times. They even tried to arrest me, based upon being anonymously reported by one of my neighbors.

~ Todd Wood, Founder CDM Press, Murthy v. Missouri rally, 18 Mar 2024

Agendas, algorance, and dysethics applied in the name of science are not the result of ‘scientism’ per se, as science can never be a teleological ‘-ism’ by its very definition. Science itself is neutral. In similar thought, science delusion, a term coined by Rupert Sheldrake, is the belief that science has already ascertained the principal components of the nature of reality, and that only a small portion of the unknown details remains to be filled in.¹

Ethical skepticism supports bringing attention to this cognitive mistake on the part of mankind. However, rather than deeming such mistakes an error of science, ethical skepticism instead identifies the problem as imperious social and corporate influences—agencies which corrupt the methods of science, along with the common underlying philosophy in defense of science: skepticism.

It is not the credulous or those prone to magical thinking who are the primary opponents of science, but rather those who insist on disseminating false realities under the guise of its virtue.

As a result, science has suffered a loss in prestige within both its industry and academic spheres. A poignant example of this phenomenon is the emergence of what we term ‘The Lyin’tific Method’, exemplifying an ominous departure from the principles of the scientific method in modern practice.

The Lyin’tific Method

1. Concoct the claim your club wants to be true

2. Fund universities and direct syndicates/agencies to promote it

3. Whip up a flurry of the same exact linear-confirmation-biased statistical study and a cursory intern-run meta-study to ‘improve the statistical power’ – downplay the sudden concurrence and fund sourcing of all these studies
   A particularly egregious example can be seen by clicking on this study’s marketing push associating fasting and heart disease and our subsequent refutation of the study’s confidence and soundness.

4. Block journal access/Screen by anonymous ‘peer reviewers’ with conflict of interest and who don’t actually know the subject

5. Cite the push-marketed flurry of study as ‘the science’ loudly and repeatedly in media

6. Appeal to the virtue of the claim and cite a consensus that the ‘science is settled’

7. Threaten the careers or funding of any professionals who remain undecided on the issue

8. Remove/Paywall/Redact access to any public-owned or contrary analytical data

9. Have government direct social media/churnalists/syndicates/’skeptics’ to censor and harass dissent as ‘conspiracy theory’

10. Threaten safety of family members of those who still produce contrary study/analysis

11. Enact state oversight board and legislative mandates that penalize public or professional skepticism, dissent, or debate

12. When the conclusion fails to predict or explain observed reality, go silent, change the subject, or start a war

Our poster child example of The Lyin-tific Method was pushed in the media a mere day or so after this article was published.

Analysis of example linear-confirmation inductive statistical study: “Association of 8-Hour Time-Restricted Eating with All-Cause and Cause-Specific Mortality” – marketing push associating fasting and heart disease.

The machinations of darkness are not new. It is we who are new, guided by the wisdom and whispers of those who have come before, warning us about the habits of this ilk of control freak – those who naively regard their abusive shtick to be both clever and novel.

Algorance (from ‘Algorithm’ and ‘Ignorance’) – a circumstance wherein individuals or entities utilize sophisticated algorithms or advanced analytical tools in absence of a thorough understanding of the underlying data domain, the essence of the problem, or the fundamental question being addressed. This term encapsulates a disconnect between the complexity of the tools employed and the depth of comprehension or insight of the user. The presence of high-tech methods, programming scripts, or packaged solutions applied superficially or ineffectively, often due to a lack of foundational knowledge or subject immersion. In the context of decision-making, research, or analysis, algorance signifies a misplaced reliance on technological or industry tool bedazzlement over substantive understanding, leading to potentially flawed or misguided outcomes.

If you’re an engineer and you are wrong, a bridge collapses or plane crashes. If you’re a scientist, just shift the sample domain to Denmark, refine exclusion criteria, look for the ‘presence of an absence’, don’t use a control, and then hunt for a friendly Cox Ratio or p-value.

The discerning ethical skeptic consistently keeps this in mind, using their understanding to differentiate between sincerity and pretense, and to identify genuine groundbreaking studies amidst the abundance of subtly flawed science.

The Ethical Skeptic, “The Lyin’tific Method”; The Ethical Skeptic, WordPress, 17 Mar 2024; Web, https://theethicalskeptic.com/?p=82840