1
-1

[–] TelescopiumHerscheli 1 point -1 points (+0|-1) ago 

There's no point in mentioning this here. (a) This is Voat, which is full of anthropogenic client change deniers. (b) You've posted this in /v/science, which is untrustworthy as a source of scientific articles following the elimination of moderators in this subverse a few months ago. Articles cited here now have to be voted on by non-scientists and loons of assorted stripes before they pass muster. I long ago stopped reading /v/science, and I imagine there are many others like me. I only saw this because it made the front page. Popularity is not an appropriate criterion for judging scientific results.

0
0

[–] Boris ago 

Well where do you suggest us non-science folk go?

0
1

[–] TelescopiumHerscheli 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

To be honest, I don't know. If you mean "where should non-scientific people with an interest in science go for their news?" I'd suggest a dedicated science news website, but I'm not sure which is the best one to recommend. I'm not a scientist myself, though I have a fair degree of training in mathematical physics from earlier study, so although I can spot drivel I'm not best placed to name the best science news website.

If you mean "where should us non-science folk go to express an opinion on the accuracy of scientific results?" I'd suggest that you simply refrain from doing so. If you're not a scientist you're probably not really qualified to express an opinion on peer-reviewed papers. I certainly don't, as a general rule, express an opinion of matters of scientific fact and experimental results, and I suggest you don't either. We're not well-informed enough and it's ludicrous to suggest otherwise.

If, however, you mean "where should us non-science folk go to discuss the social implications of some scientific result we've read about?" I suppose Voat is as good a place as any. The truth is that most of us are incompetent to discuss such things seriously, so keeping our comments to Voat, where they are nicely isolated from the serious world, is probably wise. I wouldn't look to Voat for a serious discussion of the morality of cloning, or GMOs, or global warming, or any of a thousand other scientific issues, because Voaters are not serious thinkers, at least insofar as they post on Voat. (I include myself in this, of course.) Tragically, people come to Voat to howl. (Again, I include myself in this!) When I first joined Voat I had some hopes that it would be an interesting place to share serious and entertaining opinion and comment, but these days I recognise that it's just another puddle of pond life.