Matt BlazeMay 28, 2025

HHS Secretary RFK Jr is proposing banning NIH-funded researchers from publishing in top-tier journals, including JAMA and Lancet.

This is bonkers for all sorts of reasons, but let me just mention one. He points out that Lancet has retracted articles. This is factually correct, but it's a reason these journals are *more* trustworthy, not less.

Journals and peer review don't guarantee that what's published is "correct". It's merely the best process we have to get closer to finding the truth.

Show threadMatt BlazeMay 28, 2025
When people say "scientists (or experts generally) are untrustworthy because they change their opinions all the time", they're actually describing an important reason science is *more* trustworthy.
Show threadDeb ChachraMay 28, 2025

@mattblaze There was, of all things, a FRIENDS episode where Lisa tries and tries to get Ross the paleontologist to admit that evolution might be wrong and she finally got him to admit that, yes, maybe it could be wrong.

It would have been a very short episode if he said. “Yeah, it’s a *theory*, of course it could be wrong, that’s how science works.”

Show threadMatt BlazeMay 28, 2025
@debcha And people don’t understand that a “theory” is generally the strongest thing we can get.
Show threadDeb ChachraMay 28, 2025
@mattblaze [you can tell how annoyed I was by the presentation of science and scientists in this episode by the fact that I still remember it, maybe the only FRIENDS episode I remember]
Show threadMatt Blaze
@debcha Even the laws aren’t usually laws. They’re generally just extremely well tested theories that would be especially interesting to find out were wrong.
May 28, 2025 at 9:44pmWeb