Reddit reviews Science and Other Cultures

> science is the scientific method

Application of the scientific method does not happen in a vacuum. Academia is one context within which science is conducted; there are others. These contexts alter what scientific research is undertaken, how that research is undertaken, what results are produced, and how those results are promulgated.

There is actually quite a lively epistemological debate about whether science is entirely a social construct. I'm not much of a post-structuralist myself, but there is a large literature that takes this question very seriously. Here are two good books to get you started:

• "Is Science Multicultural?" http://www.amazon.com/Science-Multicultural-Postcolonialisms-Feminisms-Epistemologies/dp/0253211565
  
• "Science and Other Cultures" http://www.amazon.com/Science-Other-Cultures-Philosophies-Technology/dp/0415939925
  
  But simply saying "science is the scientific method" is a childish tautology that simply reveals your ignorance of the real research world.
  
  > So where have you observed Darwinian evolution taking place, or replicated it through experiment?
  
  Seriously? You actually think the "where has evolution been observed?" argument flies? Do you live under a Creationist rock, or are you just clinically retarded?
  
  
• antibiotic resistance: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antibiotic_resistance
  
• E. coli evolution at Michigan State (Lenski experiment): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E._coli_long-term_evolution_experiment
  
• Tusk weight of Ugandan elephants
  
• Podarcis sicula lizards on the Croatian island of Pod Mrcaru (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/04/080417112433.htm)
  
• Poecilia reticulata (freshwater guppies): http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/276/1677/4335
  
• Ensatina escholtzii (California salamanders - you can even watch instead of having to read about this one): http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/evolution/evolution-action-salamanders.html
  
  etc, etc
  
  And then, of course, there is artificial selection which applies to all domesticated plants and animals on Earth: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_selection
  
  A particularly spectacular example of artificial selection is Dmitri Belyaev's silver fox breeding project that began in the 1950s in Russia, which turned foxes into dogs, complete with motley coats and floppy ears, in just 40 years: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domesticated_silver_fox
  
  Edit:
  
  Poking through your comment history, there is so much absurdity in there that it's possible you're just trolling, in which case bravo sir.
  
  But if your comments are genuine, it's clear you're not a stupid person. You are, however, a profoundly ignorant person. The good news is that this is simply a problem of Garbage In, Garbage Out. You're working with bad information, and you're only going to get bad results if that's what you keep using. The solution is simple: start working with good information.
  
  Good information is not produced by Fox News, or by bloggers, or by your pals at the bar, or by your local preacher, or by politicians. Good information is produced in universities by people with PhDs: people who write books about facts instead of opinions, and who win awards for being smart. You need to stop watching your fucking TV and start reading real books, or no matter how naturally bright you may be you're never going to be anything but the ignorant, bitter, selfish, racist fool who has been posting comments with your username.