Dysology Hypothesis

Dr Mike Sutton's Mythbusting

Files

 

Dr Mike Sutton (award winning criminologist)

Letting scholars get away with publishing fallacies and myths signals to others the existence of topics where guardians of good scholarship might be less capable than elsewhere. Such dysology then serves as an allurement to poor scholars to disseminate existing myths and fallacies and to create and publish their own in these topic areas, which leads to a downward spiral of diminishing veracity on particular topics.

A Call To All Scientists

 

Following his election in 2016, the USA inaugurated President Donald Trump in January 2017.

 

As a norm, the conventions of science seek to separate the world of scientific conceptions and discoveries from popular news and politics. However, in 2016 and 2017 the world took a twist towards populist politics, facilitated by voter decision making based upon favouring leaders who disseminate fake facts. For example, Trump has declared by way of publication on social media that he believes vaccinations cause autism and that the scientific concept of global warming is a Chinese conspiracy.

 

Such unscientific politicization of science must not be allowed to pass unchallenged by the scientific community, including social scientists. However, to have the voice of objective reason in debates of evidence-led veracity versus beliefs in unevidenced claptrap, science should ensure its own house is order, else face the embarrassment of defeat in debate with purveyors of seriously harmful nonsense. For that reason, dysology promoted by scientists, supported and facilitated by the institutions of science, must be detected and corrected as a matter of moral and scientific urgency.

 

Dr Mike Sutton Feb 1st 2017

Listen to the League of Nerds interview between Myles Power and me - on what the "New Data" means for Charles Darwin's reputation as an honest icon of science: HERE

The Miraculous Virgins Darwin and Wallace Analogy perfectly explains what the New Data means for Darwinism. Moreover, it reveals what happens in a discipline that is clearly unable to police bias resulting from the diefiction of Darwin - the namesake of Darwinists.