How undebated findings undermine scientific institutions(integritytalk.blog)
integritytalk.blog
How undebated findings undermine scientific institutions
https://www.integritytalk.blog/p/the-twisted-path-of-trust
https://www.integritytalk.blog/p/the-twisted-path-of-trust
A missing 3) is responding lends credence to studies whose premises have long since been refuted.
This is why geology publications don't publish new refutations of every new flat-earth article.
That's part of the reason why many biologists refuse to "debate" Young Earth Creationists. (Another is that oral debates depend much more on the rhetorical skills of the speakers than the underlying evidence, and a third is Brandolini's Law, mentioned in the text.)
The author writes "Unfortunately, this phenomenon is far from only affecting the social sciences", which suggests the author isn't aware of things like the what PZ Myers terms "the panspermia mafia"[1], "a tight collaborative community of cranks" that "rubber stamp their approval" on each others' papers.[2]
[1] https://www.cnet.com/science/features/the-fungus-on-mars-and...
[2] https://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2021/08/11/rhawn-jos...
The panspermia mafia is far from the only such group in the physical sciences.