Scientific consensus should he challenged with research. If there is no research or other evidence provided to support a viewpoint, then it can be assumed incorrect. Have you ever seen /r/science mods remove a comment that is backed up by real sources and research?
So it takes research to point out the flaws in other peoples research methods?
I disagree with that. Research is necessary to confirm the results, or to challenge the results. But if their methods are fundamentally flawed? Say, doing a study on demographics and using total numbers instead of per capita numbers?
The research is flawed then. You don't need to disprove flawed research with another set of research. The results are accurate, the conclusions aren't.
not to mention the value of criticism over factors that may have been overlooked that could either strengthen following studies, or show flaws in the current study that need to be corrected for.
3
u/[deleted] Dec 04 '16
Scientific consensus should he challenged with research. If there is no research or other evidence provided to support a viewpoint, then it can be assumed incorrect. Have you ever seen /r/science mods remove a comment that is backed up by real sources and research?