Scientific Method and Falsification

I hope so because that's a sign of progress, isn't it? Yeah. But also the cool thing about I think individuals that take the time to become more educated in the baseline stuff and build from the ground up like we were talking about before is you never really ever talk in absolutes. No. This is indicating. This suggests. This suggests. This may be the case. I think this is the best based on the current. It's likely to be. So you never actually feel like you can't go back on what you said because you're like, guess what? I learnt some more shit, you know? And back then I said it was probably the best. Now I'm saying this might be the best. whereas people that are just like no no you you only do this very dogmatic yeah that means they have to go back on their own like their own concepts i think too i think that like um something that jackson poe said to me because i do occasionally i do like consults with him on how to research right i mean who who better to do it than a meathead that uh is into the same type of shit that i'm into who also is a phd candidate so you know it's probably the best person look at or PhD. So something that he told me, he said, Luke, he goes, I want you to understand what research is. He goes, research is not there to prove anything. It's only there to falsify things. And I went, huh? He goes, yeah. He goes, we can't prove shit. He goes, if somebody says we've proven this, we've proven that he goes, they're full of shit. All we use that to is to test against stuff that we see empirically. And to say, whether if what we, if our understanding of this is close or not. And I went, man, that's a really good way of thinking about it. So then ever since then, I've always said, like, this is what the, like you said, this is what the research indicates, you know, this is inconclusive, but it looks like it's probably going to be like this. But we can't prove anything. Or if I have a theory or a hypothesis of something, and I'll tell people, like, I can't, I'm gonna, I'm pulling this out of my ass, I'm going to be straightforward with you. I cannot find this in the literature, but looking at the biochemistry and looking at the physiology of it, this looks like it makes sense. So I'm just going to tell you to just keep that in mind that this might be the way this works, but I can't prove it yet. I can't find anything that anybody agrees with me on what's going on here, right? Yeah. Well, I mean, there's certainly validity and value and weight in empirical evidence. yeah uh what there isn't waiting is is suggesting that you know why like you've just said you know that's the problem because that's when we start to get that typical dogma so we start to get people saying oh this is the only way you know and preaching shit as opposed to just saying that's what i'm what i'm seeing yeah i think what people need to is they need to have um they need to have a peanut gallery of colleagues that can tell them when they're full of shit or to go against like for me, one of my guys is Dr. Mike T. Nelson. Like he's a very good personal friend of mine. And I was actually listening to a couple of his podcasts this morning where he mentioned some talks that he and I had where we were talking about things like hydrogen ions and lactate and why someone would have high serum lactate, how that refers back to metabolic inflexibility. And we kind of both came to the same conclusion. We were talking it out. And there's a lot of times where I'll tell him like, Hey, I've got this idea, blah, blah. And you know, he'll look at me and goes, yeah, that makes a lot of sense. However, and then he'll throw like 10 papers at me. And then I look at it and I'm like, fuck, now I'm back at square one. All right. So, you know, if you have to be willing to eat a piece of humble pie and just say, okay, what I thought I knew or what I thought I figured out, um, isn't exactly how that works. And I have to be able to go back and tell people, especially if I teach it in one of my classes, I have to be able to go back and say, Hey, remember this, what I taught you? That's not actually how it works. I'm really sorry for teaching it to you that way that's how i thought it worked at the time but i've actually found something that works better or found it worked differently yeah i think that attitude is so supportive of the scientific method um because when people have dogmatic views they kind of put themselves on a team right and so even if like your football team is losing you're still going to bat for that team you're still going to support them you're not going to halfway through the game switch your hat from blue to red whatever yeah um but but when we have that attitude of this seems to be the case and then evidence comes out to kind of contradict that you're like oh well maybe this is more likely and then that's how science pushes forward and that's how we progress so i think that's that's really important for the health of progress generally yeah in science yeah appreciate