I read the headline as “Getting Nut Neutrality” and wondering if it was Novemember. I need like 20 more minutes of sleep.

we define “science” as the aggregate consciousness of scientific researchers

This is something I wish I could preach convincingly to everyone. The activity of scientists, a social group, are arguing and trying to convince one another that their interpretation of the data acquired by using their tools and methods is what become a scientific consensus.

Forefronting the method (often a vaguely defined one rooted in a hypo-deductive model from about 150 years ago that most people learned in grade school) removes the relationships between people and other people and people and institutions.

I wish I could find the paper but there’s a wonderful enthographic study on how scientists interact with each other to transform the discourse.

Edit: Found it! Science as Social Knowledge: Values and Objectivity in Scientific Inquiry by Helen E. Longino

Reminded me of this.

There are no evil viruses. Some are just detrimental to us.

Why does this matter?

Over, under, and misuse have resulted in adaptations by bacteria. Which is to say, life evolves. Its too bad, and there is still a role for antibiotics in our world, but we have to trim our use of it.

Course lengths for antibiotics isn’t well studied. From this article:

In fact, the optimal length of treatment in many common infections is not well studied and may be more than a little arbitrary. One infectious diseases doctor has suggested, somewhat satirically, that most of our current rules for antibiotic administration have more to do with the number of days in the week than they do with robust scientific evidence.

We have a growing and, frankly, terrifying issue of antibiotic resistant bacteria from over prescribing and longer than necessary courses.

Sweet corn is a mutation that was only really cultivated in the late 1700s. Before that dent and flint corn were the norm. These corns require nixtamalization to soft the corn and then need boiling, grinding, and cooking to make something like tortillas.

I can’t tell if this is in jest or ignorance.

I’m not denying that modern evolutionary theories use math and I think it’s important, but that in many sciences, math isn’t the focus like it is in physics. A lot of good science can be done without math. Darwin did good science without math.

To be very clear, science doesn’t need math. We use math as a tool to accurately describe phememona and relationships with math.

I don’t what you are saying about models being mathematical by definition eben if people can handle it. I don’t see how the model of the cell is mathematical. Models require relationships and not mathematics to describe those relationships.

I’m not familiar with what they do. Describe it and I might be able to. Or not.

I hate how we center physics and it’s use of mathematical tools as the right way of doing science. Many, if not all sciences today, leverage mathmatical tools to create models. But Darwin, as far as I recall, didn’t use math at all. A whole host of sciences don’t approach their problems through mathematically described laws or even statistical models. Earth sciences, botany, anatomy, organic chemistry, ethnography, and archelogy come to mind.

Engineering is not science. It uses science.

Nailed it.

That makes sense. The use of violence here is to control the workers and the rest of society. It gets everyone back in line during a crisis reminding people that they have the power, not only to exploit them, but to also kill, imprison, and immiserate. Get in line and you’ll be better off. Work for us help get people in line and you’ll be better off than them.

How is the slave owner using a slave driver to whip slaves different from the slaves organizing and killing the slavers?

I usually write a handful of paragraphs and then never look at them again. It’s mainly to get me into character and develop a feeling who this person is. Then I go play. If the DM wants to know more, I can either improv it or review what I’ve written.

Here’s a link to the Erya.

Throwing my vote in for Gauss.

You’re splitting hairs. When I go to the doc who says, “Look. I took money for a different drug from a different company, not for vaccines from this company,” I’m more than little disgusted. So I can give a little understanding to someone who doesn’t have the scientific background like I do when they dismiss the whole system as corrupt.