E.th.ph. deals with the difference between a scientific paper and the related press release. The paper usually states that "we've discovered something, and we've been able to explain it in the existing paradigm" - maybe by tweaking the parameters here and there of by invoking some minor new objects.
Whereas the press release states that "we've discovered something, and we have no idea what to do with it", meaning: please help us in some way (send more money or graduate students etc.).
This difference is entirely based on political aspects of science. When a scientist reports to the scientific community (as is the case with the paper), he claims his superiority and at the same time pledges his allegiance to the group (so he tells the community that he can explain anything that he encounters on the same language the group itself utilizes, so he doesn't demolish the group, and at the same time he's the best in it).
But when he reports the same thing to the society, he dresses it up into a cloak of "humbleness" (from which all the claims of "baffledness" and "surprize" follow), because his point is to draw as much new resources as possible into his domain.
Finally, both "mainstream science" and "pseudoscience" disregard these clear political aspects of science itself on a regular basis.
Astonishing philosophical naivety of scientists and "pseudoscientists" of today is going to be the myth of the next era, whatever it's going to be.
0 Comments