Three Answers For The Price Of One - Hate Mail

I'M DOING WHATEVER writing I'm doing these days standing up, trying to shift my position so the nerves feeding my leg aren't impinged on, so that has put a damper on writing long things.   As it is, the claim that widely held scientific knowledge is uniformly reliable is best answered by a recent video by Sabine Hossenfelder. 

You should listen to the video, there are lots of points that could be made, one of them is that the problem in the equation that led to this widespread faith in its claims were actually relatively simple to discover and understand - to the extent that physics on this level could be said to be simple to understand.   I wonder how many of the physicists and cosmologists who accepted the conclusion actually did understand it.   Considering how statements about the "singularity" and what it meant bled down into pop-scientific fandom and sci-fi, where there was nothing but materialist-atheist-scientistic faith and no understanding, you have to wonder how such ideas could ever be held to be reliable.   Indeed, even this refutation of the paper in question doesn't disprove the idea supported by the mistake, Hossenfelder gives ways in which both could be true.

More interesting than that is this except from a long discussion with the mathematician-critic of string-theory and its allies, Peter Woit about the crisis in physics.

And here's a recently posted video by Rupert Sheldrake on the reproducibility crisis in science.   Which  pretty much calls into question how science routinely practices "scientific method".