Somehow I do not believe what they are saying in this video. Seems like just another layer of disinfo campaign.

What exactly do you think is disinformation? They're showing how disinformation is spread.

How do you tell that what is spread is disinfo and not truth? Nothing in the video proves that their point of view is the truth.

The reason science lost trust is because it got peddled in the media to further someone's goal. When was the last time someone showed you the actual data and not the conclusion he wanted you to reach? When was the last time someone wanted you personally to reproduce his cool experiment to see whether you'd get the same result?

Science as the media peddles it is nothing but marketing to make you believe certain things. Science™ said it, so it must be true. Except that's not how science works.

In actuality science isn't so complicated that only some "scientists" can understand it and the public doesn't really need the media playing "translator" to what "scientists" said. Especially since everyone knows that the media is full of shit concerning topics he himself knows something about. There's no reason to believe that it isn't full of shit for the stuff we don't know much about, either. Can't blame them, either. Reporters can't know everything. That's why their job used to be to only report on what they saw. Or at least that's what would make more sense than them trying to translate to the public what so called scientists say, without understanding anything themselves.

But then, whenever you take a look at the data, there's nothing really conclusive and the whole thing about how nobody can replicate results from experiments anymore is so well known that it got it's own Wikipedia article: "The Replication Crisis".

Doesn't stop NPCs from gobbling up what the media peddles about science as fact. Like the stupid climate change thing, which is full of holes if you look at the actual data. It's just that the media has repeated this bullshit over decades again and again, that by now lots of people actually believe in man made climate change.

In actuality science isn't so complicated that only some "scientists" can understand it and the public doesn't really need the media playing "translator" to what "scientists" said.

Yeah, I have to disagree there. Why do you think people require multiple years, sometimes even decades, to study stuff? The average person simply doesn't have the necessary knowledge and understanding of the subject matter to grasp what's happening in a scientific paper. Nobody's an expert in everything.

Have you tried reading the papers published in recognized journals? They are by no means trivial and sometimes even if the article is written in an understandable manner and seems plausible, the wrong statistical methods could've been chosen, the experiments may have been setup incorrectly, or a bunch of other stuff could've happened that wasn't accounted for - or explicitly accounted for but hidden to achieve a certain result.

Doesn't stop NPCs from gobbling up what the media peddles about science as fact. Like the stupid climate change thing, which is full of holes if you look at the actual data. It's just that the media has repeated this bullshit over decades again and again, that by now lots of people actually believe in man made climate change.

Have you actually looked at the data yourself? And where did you find that data? Additionally, are you a climatologist / do you think you are better equipped than a climatologist to interpret the data?

The difficult part is figuring things out. You'd be amazed how easy stuff is once someone else has figured it all out. Scientific papers mostly are written to be obtuse on purpose. But they don't matter. The data the paper is based on matters.

Scientific papers remind me of translators that want to be clever in their subs. I watch a lot of foreign language stuff and there have been occasions, when I was understanding the original language that I don't actually speak for a sentence, but couldn't make sense of the English subtitles under it.

Science really isn't that hard. There's just some gatekeeping involved, but once you see past the bullshit, it's fairly simple. And yes, I trust myself more than journalists to understand the underlying data.

As for climate stuff, I haven't found any data that paints the picture the media is selling. I keep asking for data when the topic comes up, but no one has been able to provide anything so far proving that humans influence the climate. Yeah, temperatures go up (global warming), but then not consistently, so the buzz word got changed, but that's just climate in general. Some glaciers have been melting for hundreds of years and I've also heard that we are at the end of an Ice Age. Earth had a couple of those before humans even were around. And yeah, when they end things tend to get warmer.

By the way, did you hear what happened to the ozone hole? This was all over the media some twenty odd years ago with the goal to ban something and then they did and everyone just stopped talking about it. I'm pretty sure it's still there, though. But I guess no one wants to use it's existence to ban something anymore.

Scientific establishment had wasted their credibility, just like the boy who cried wolf. And now their puppeteers have to waste money on these nicely animated glittering videos full of shit and spread them through disinformation network that bans opposition. Talk about unrelated non-issues and introduce as the matter of course climate hoax and covaids, factless conclusions that require your trust but afraid to stand in the light of open discussion and investigation.

In the middle the shill was talking about 'established' facts of science that no one should touch exactly because they're established and parrots example with g, so here is another inconvenient video for you https://worldtruthvideos.org/watch/banned-ted-talk-the-science-delusion-rupert-sheldrake_M8cdRnJkMgm2VNB.html apparently scientific establishment was very unhappy with it.

Also it's not about money, it's about power and control. TL;DW agenda 21.

i understand inaf of scientific papers actually and i dont have any university made

give some info about the climate and the subject you said maybe there is missing information on climate change