What is the Scientific Method?
https://ozanvarol.com/want-right-prove-wrong/
When our minds remain closed, when we keep opposing arguments at bay through unfalsifiable arguments, and when we associate flip-flopping with being weak or two-faced, misinformation and pseudoscience thrive. Our tribal echo chambers get louder and louder with the sounds of the same misleading voices.
The solution is simple: Attempt to prove yourself wrong on a daily basis. When our focus shifts from proving ourselves right to proving ourselves wrong, we seek different inputs, we combat deeply-entrenched biases, and we open ourselves up to competing facts and arguments.
+++++++++++++++++
Fortunately, a meteorologist is in the best scientific profession of all to learn this lesson early, then practice it constantly if they want to survive and even better......thrive.
Think about it. What other profession features you coming in every day(even the same day) and looking at weather models that show you that your last forecast was wrong because you are looking at better, fresher data and the objective is to hurry up and update the NEW forecast ASAP and bury the old one forever.
Then, the next day and every future day, trying to find reasons for why that last forecast is wrong and celebrate being able to make the forecast EVEN BETTER!
Yes, it's nice to be able to call an event accurately over a week in advance. But the models are flawed because the equations that represent the physical laws of the atmosphere are not perfect and we can't measure every square inch of the atmosphere (there are big data gaps in places where data matters).
Very small errors will grow over time. It's EXPECTED to be wrong with the extended forecast. ...........a lot.
No serious meteorologist would forecast next Thursday's weather for Evansville, IN for instance, then spend the next 6 days only going to places or models that show that forecast is right(even if it means using OLD data) and ignoring everything else so they never have to change it.
That's what most people do with most things in their lives, don't they?
At least in this profession, we are trained to practice the scientific method 365 days a year.
So a meteorologist is constantly HELD ACCOUNTABLE by virtue of having to reconcile the actual weather when it happens with the forecast before hand.
By metmike - May 24, 2025, 11:29 a.m.
Trump, Allies Spread Unfounded Claims About Biden’s Cancer Diagnosis
By Alan Jaffe
Posted on
Some have argued that the standard guidelines should not always apply to a president. At the same time, deviating from them could mean subjecting a president to unnecessary risks or procedures.
+++++++++++++++
This is the quintessential example of a biased, medically ignorant fact checker pushing a political position and presenting it as a fact check. NO IT ISN'T a fact check because they have gathered their own, 1 sided, very misleading and medically uniformed facts as a fact check when it is just propaganda.
This is always a risk in this age of disinformation. If somebody knows more than you, they can bamboozle you about that topic.
The solution is to become better informed so the YOU KNOW MORE THAN THEM. That should always include acquiring a mountain of facts/evidence from ALL/BOTH SIDES. Not just the political side that you affiliate with. The fact checker above is clearly a democrat that lets their bias impact their fact checking.
This isn't just a disagreement of opinion between me and them. I showed the indisputable DEFINITIVE facts in this thread that are NOT opinions. I've also done alot of educated/informed speculating to fill in the blanks which Biden has not provided. However, it's absurd to justify no PSA for a president for over 10 years that had prostate surgery in 2019 for an enlarged prostate and is on some sort of meds and clearly has to still be under the care of a urologist because of this condition. No way that urologist would not have tested Biden's PSA NUMEROUS TIMES. If not, then its justification to have his license revoked because of blatant negligence. If not, then he is completely to blame for Biden's prostate cancer spreading to his bones. But I'm 99.9% certain that he/she did test Biden's PSA.
++++++++++++
The moral of the post is...........don't trust fact checkers unless you can verify their facts because they sometimes serve as biased political propaganda sources. As always, I try to show PROOF/EVIDENCE of statements here.
Peer Reviewed
“Fact-checking” fact checkers: A data-driven approach
https://misinforeview.hks.harvard.edu/article/fact-checking-fact-checkers-a-data-driven-approach/
The low percentage (i.e., around 6.5%) of matching claims between two major fact checkers, Snopes and PolitiFact, from 2016 to 2022 is an intriguing finding. This could suggest that fact-checking is a complex and multifaceted process that involves numerous variables, including the nature of the claims being fact-checked and the fact checkers’ methods and priorities.
++++++++++++++
What this proves is that fact checkers can find THEIR OWN facts independently to support whatever they want as opposed to a set of DEFINITIVE facts that they should all agree on.
Let's take the laws of gravity or photosynthesis or physics/astronomy as an example.
If somebody claimed the sun revolved around the earth, every fact checker should agree on the same explanation using proven physical laws/astronomy. to bust it.
On many medical issues, including this one, there are also principles that define areas like urology. Our fact checker friends above are violating some of those principles in supposedly busting Trump and allies.
By metmike - May 24, 2025, 11:45 a.m.
Regardless of me busting the previous fact checker, in general fact checkers do a pretty good job.
They are much better than most media sources. Fox for instance is the worst source for anything related to politics.
And much MUCH better than political sources affiliated with 1 party.
At the very least, we can use fact checkers to practice the scientific method. Check to see if they have facts that disagree with our own and then use them to reconsider what WE THOUGHT THAT WE KNEW.
These are some good ones:
https://my.lwv.org/michigan/copper-country/reliable-sources-fact-checking
+++++++++=
I will add that fact checking on climate change has tons of bs because they often site the almighty sources, like the scientifically corrupt, political IPCC which is the worlds authority.
Their reports are considered the "climate bible" for climate religion.
++++++++++++++++
Use fact checkers to practice the scientific method. If you have an opinion, especially a strong opinion, check to see if fact checkers agree. If they don't..........compare the authenticity of your facts with theirs.
I discussed the use of the scientific method here: