i'm not an expert in the phacking crisis, that other people have looked it more closely than i have. The many, many scientists use statistics as a kind of black box. They don't actually have training in statistics. And so they don't necessarily understand why what they've done is wrong. So part of the challenge then is tonation of people are better trained in statistics.
In this interview, based on her landmark book, Why Trust Science?, historian of science Naomi Oreskes offers a bold and compelling defense of science, revealing why the social character of scientific knowledge is its greatest strength — and the greatest reason we can trust it. Drawing vital lessons from cases where scientists got it wrong, Oreskes shows how consensus is a crucial indicator of when a scientific matter has been settled, and when the knowledge produced is likely to be trustworthy.