Maybe it's time for dissident scientists to create their own journal. They could follow good transparency practices like including their raw data and any code they write as part of the analysis. It's a given that the academic establishment would try to blacklist the new journal, but as long as the editors maintain scientific rigor and don't become comprised they would have a lot of credibility with anyone who isn't a woke retard. There's a lot of demand for real science instead of the politicized shit that "the experts" are peddling.
A dissident mad science joirnal would be pretty cyberpunk.
But there are some massive hurdles to overcome. What we call "science" uses network effects like citation and prestige to convey legitimacy. That network took decades if not centuries to manifest organically.
The network itself wouldn't be difficult to create. The problem is, science requires money, and all that money is held by universities and the government, both of whom belong to the leftist hegemony. The only way dissident science could be achieved is via private funding, and unfortunately most wealthy right wing people don't care about buying nudges to the Overton window, unlike nearly all wealthy left wing people.
Thousands of scientific journals exist and new ones get created on a regular basis even by dissident scientists who want to publish their own research, however crazy it might be (there is notably long-running one even for cold fusion topics, I'm aware several exist for parapsychology, etc), but they don't have the "Impact Factor" of Nature, so almost nobody cites or even reads the papers they feature.
All science journals are laughable garbage. Their entire purpose is knowledge laundering:
Random nonsense-> write in journal -> citation magic! -> scientific knowledge.
Burn the whole system. Peer review is superstition. Science that works is called engineering. If you don't have a product or real-world result, fuck off.
There exists useful science that doesn't produce an immediately-usable product: Theoretical mathematics.
Coincidentally, this science ALSO has no real place in a scientific journal. "I found a cool way to multiply sums-of-primes" doesn't make for dentist waiting room literature.
You're never going to convince the mainstream media not to shill for the current establishment. That doesn't mean that there's not a significant demand for honest science from people who already know not to trust the media.
One of my favorite stories from the so-called experts was a scientist admitting that her and other scientists believed early on that the virus came out of a lab, but they didn't want to say that because they didn't want to be associated with Trump.
Don't forget https://arxiv.org/. Their eprints are a model of what actual open publishing should be. You could add a review system through simple forum software.
Maybe it's time for dissident scientists to create their own journal. They could follow good transparency practices like including their raw data and any code they write as part of the analysis. It's a given that the academic establishment would try to blacklist the new journal, but as long as the editors maintain scientific rigor and don't become comprised they would have a lot of credibility with anyone who isn't a woke retard. There's a lot of demand for real science instead of the politicized shit that "the experts" are peddling.
A dissident mad science joirnal would be pretty cyberpunk.
But there are some massive hurdles to overcome. What we call "science" uses network effects like citation and prestige to convey legitimacy. That network took decades if not centuries to manifest organically.
The network itself wouldn't be difficult to create. The problem is, science requires money, and all that money is held by universities and the government, both of whom belong to the leftist hegemony. The only way dissident science could be achieved is via private funding, and unfortunately most wealthy right wing people don't care about buying nudges to the Overton window, unlike nearly all wealthy left wing people.
Thousands of scientific journals exist and new ones get created on a regular basis even by dissident scientists who want to publish their own research, however crazy it might be (there is notably long-running one even for cold fusion topics, I'm aware several exist for parapsychology, etc), but they don't have the "Impact Factor" of Nature, so almost nobody cites or even reads the papers they feature.
All science journals are laughable garbage. Their entire purpose is knowledge laundering:
Random nonsense-> write in journal -> citation magic! -> scientific knowledge.
Burn the whole system. Peer review is superstition. Science that works is called engineering. If you don't have a product or real-world result, fuck off.
There exists useful science that doesn't produce an immediately-usable product: Theoretical mathematics.
Coincidentally, this science ALSO has no real place in a scientific journal. "I found a cool way to multiply sums-of-primes" doesn't make for dentist waiting room literature.
You're never going to convince the mainstream media not to shill for the current establishment. That doesn't mean that there's not a significant demand for honest science from people who already know not to trust the media.
One of my favorite stories from the so-called experts was a scientist admitting that her and other scientists believed early on that the virus came out of a lab, but they didn't want to say that because they didn't want to be associated with Trump.
Don't forget https://arxiv.org/. Their eprints are a model of what actual open publishing should be. You could add a review system through simple forum software.
"just create your own X" is always immediately followed by "no you aren't allowed to make that, it's illegal"