> The scientific method as it is practiced is deeply flawed.
That's a controversial statement, and I'd have to disagree with that.
> Being critical of the scientific method is not only important, it is necessary. The temptation throughout human history is to find some "holy grail" that will lift humanity beyond its current vantage point.
That's a true and important point. However, it's also important that the critique be logical and well constructed. This article makes a number of logical fallacies, and is political in nature. It's using age old science denial tricks to sow doubt, rather than improve the scientific method in any actionable way.
That's a controversial statement, and I'd have to disagree with that.
> Being critical of the scientific method is not only important, it is necessary. The temptation throughout human history is to find some "holy grail" that will lift humanity beyond its current vantage point.
That's a true and important point. However, it's also important that the critique be logical and well constructed. This article makes a number of logical fallacies, and is political in nature. It's using age old science denial tricks to sow doubt, rather than improve the scientific method in any actionable way.