I have a slight problem equating scientific findings to opinions. It simultaneously lowers the concept of scientific findings and arbitrarily raises the concept of opinions.

Opinions are based in beliefs: they are not supported by fact. Scientific fact is supported by repeated observations and can model predictions. There is a huge distinction.

When a scientist publishes his findings: that’s not opinion. That’s a scientific theory that has gone through several layers of a priori analysis and is supported by the observable world.

This article seems helpful on the surface but I think it does more harm than good when you could’ve said, to summarize, “some theories have more evidence than others”. Instead you equate scientific findings to the opinions of scientists which lowers the confidence one would have in scientists by lowering their findings to the mere opinion of a layperson.

Written by

Hi! I’m a molecular biologist turned Paramedic turned aspiring data scientist. I like all things science, history, data, math, and medicine!

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store