do you have the equipment and expertise to verify experimental results? If not, you're going to have to trust someone who does.

>>17043343
I agree with you that leftist politics hijacked “science” in the period 2016-2022 or thereabouts. Leaving COVID aside, there was this really bizarre period where transgender/transsexual activists had some sort of academic high ground to stand on, I don’t know why, but they were able to give a bunch of academic paper citations that said that biological sex was somehow not a real scientific thing but rather a “social construct” and that calling a person “he” or “she” based on looking at them and using normal ways of thinking was some evil fascist brainwashing and instead we need to base society on Zoom Meeting culture of stating pronouns in your bio or something. How this would ever translate to real life (I need to wear a nametag saying He/Him from now on?) was unclear.

I don’t think we have reached any resolution to these topics but I hope it doesn’t take another 10+ years

>Shouldn’t science be based on verifiability and whether or not it could be proven wrong?
It is. Science has never been built on whether *you personally* have verified something. And in fact without review by others, your own work product is just un-replicated anecdotal trash.

>>17043343
>whether or not it could be proven wrong
A statement being falsifiable is necessary but not sufficient. For example, christcucks love making unfalsifiable claims because their favorite fantasy setting had a story about it.
> based on verifiability
A statement about empirical reality is only verifiable within a confidence interval or error bar, unless we are talking within a verified (in the above sense) formalism or a discipline that is a priori such as math.
Peer review is one useful tool, but in practice most useful for verification of the second kind (within a framework). Experimentally it is not as useful but still worthwhile.
Of course, in reality, any thread that talks about "the science" is inevitably going to devolve into a bad faith circlejerk where the aforementioned christcucks will LARP about how science is stupid and leftist and that you should listen to their schizophrenia and appeal to gut feelings instead, preferably with a namefaggot attention whore or two raving on about jews or something.