Hacker News Reader

We also need to listen to the science on things that are clearly established. The replication crisis is not something that affects almost anything in public debate. Evolution is well established science. Large parts of Climate Change are well established science. Etc.

View on HN

Yea, evolution and climate change are pretty solid. But the projected models do no favor to climate science. Those are bogus. They've mostly been wrong in the past and will be mostly wrong again in the future. There are way too many variables and unknowns, and those accumulate the further out the model reaches.

And your evidence for that is what exactly? Since this replication problem is already known to appear in multiple disciplines, it's quite likely that the same misconduct is happening in other areas too. I think you're being a little too quick to hope that it doesn't affect those areas where you have a vested interest.

There is small but non-zero chance that any given paper on climate change is wrong or fraudulent, but it is absurd to go from that to claiming that we should disregard literally all scientific research that has ever been done. At a certain point you have to accept basic truths like that 2+2=4, or that the earth revolves around the sun, or that the composition of the atmosphere impacts our climate

Reply on news.ycombinator.com