Your post reminds me of this article I encountered when I was gathering sources for what would have been my first, kill-my-steemstem-career-after-one-article, pre-lightbulb moment "I should probably write about something else to warm things up," blog post on the replication crisis for steemstem.
http://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-01023-3
I think I might still write the post, but maybe after a few other articles just to show I'm not some unironic science-hate-mongerer.
I'd be quite interested in an opinion piece in that area. The flaws of the scientific process are many, and It's been at the front of my mind for some time now, especially during a series I was doing on Chinese pseudoscience. Digging into the corruption and snide ways they hide subtle but critical flaws in their design was infuriating!
Perhaps I will actually go through with finishing it up and publishing it in that case, I just didn't want to accidentally come off as one of the nutters if my literal first steemstem post just became "nods head in agreement" fodder for people who don't like science. And yes, the more I read the more I thought to myself, "how the hell did it get like this?"
Still the smartest bot on Steemit
:P
Still the smartest bot on Steemit