True but people also use this as an excuse to dismiss any research they disagree with which is idiotic.
Most research is legit. It just might not be interpreted correctly, or it might not be the whole picture. But it shouldn’t be ignored because you don’t like it.
People are especially prone to this with Econ research in my experience.
And under socialism in the 20th century, science was an institution that only funds research that advances whatever narrative the hermetic powers-that-be decided to push and strengthen their grip on power, their obsession with secretiveness and projecting an image of infallibility.
Take the Soviet Union.
T.D. Lysenko and his crackpot food engineering ideas is one such glaring example. But boy oh boy could he talk a “toe the party line” game and suck up to Stalin.
Or how about how the kremlin rendered nearly one quarter of Kazakhstan uninhabitable due to their relentless nuclear testing. And they nearly did that for all of western Europe with Chernobyl.In the name of workers and science, we shall poison your land. Science for the workers’ paradise, rejoice, comrades!
Science is easily corruptible, but of most relevance to us is how it is being corrupted here
Does anyone remember all the bogus studies that showed smoking was healthy?
What methodology finally disproved that?
People kinda… um, died?
And how did we connect that, and rule out other things?
Science doesn’t change just because some groups try to use it to forward an agenda.
What it is vs how it’s (ab)used
Or “real science” versus “imaginary science”
Bonus round : “real science has never been tried”
Based
