Quote:
Originally Posted by Flame Of Liberty
Do you even know what science means? Picking one study/journal article/blog post and wave it around as gospel is not "science."
If you actually read peer reviewed journals you would realize that different researcher rarely agree with each other (come to the same conclusion), each new article to the body of literature goes back and forth with previous work in the study area, usually expands only on a bit of knowledge and is most likely counter-argued in following articles. Only relatively small portion of the knowledge is actually thought to be set in stone.
Science is about searching for truth, not hand-picking research results that happen to support your position when you misleadingly present them without proper context.
|
First of all, science is NOT about searching for truth. It is about establishing a hypothesis based on observation, then experimentally obtaining evidence that supports or nullifies the hypothesis. Science is openminded, truth is black and white. Science is self correcting. Truth is not, or then it is not a "truth."
Second, and this is the most important item. Not all research is the same quality, and that's why we have to sometimes Appeal to Authority, a logical fallacy. Some articles are published in really bad journals, ones with cursory peer review. They have low impact factors (which means how many times an average article in the journal gets referenced by other scientific articles in a year).
A true scientific skeptic, or scientist if you are one, not only examines and values evidence, but it gives the most due weight to the highest quality research, usually a meta-review which rolls up data from numerous studies.
There is a misunderstanding that science is based on debate. It is not. It is based on consensus. And it takes time.
Finally, the responsibility of those who do debate this issue, usually not scientists who are genuinely appalled by the anti-GMO forces for being anti-science and who accept GMO's as safe, to bring the evidence supporting their assertions. Since proving a negative is impossible, it's the anti-GMO forces must support their assertions, that GMO's are unsafe, with serious, scientific, peer-reviewed, published research. They've failed at this.