Kritik der Kritik (10): Immer noch können sich Naturwissenschaftler mit dem schützenden Mythos der Sachlichkeit umgeben. Um sie zu kritisieren, ist es notwendig, sich in die Produktionsbedingungen naturwissenschaftlichen Wissens hineinzudenken
Science should be done with all the "best" words. Data is shown via tweets. Folks with "intelligence" not to be trusted. China is mathematically removed in climate change projections. Hypotheses all end with a "CHA-CHING!" Scientific credentials include showing your birth certificate. "Pussy" is a medically recognized term. Citations include lawsuits. Expert peer review still sound, except for the bit about "expert." All computer stuff to be done by some guy in New Jersey: not Russia. Breibart News is a credible scientific source. Scientific community includes that crazy relative of yours who believes mermaids are real but climate change is not. Impact factor to be replaced with "Is it YUGE?" factor. Bullshit, now the norm.
People have ideas about science based on personal experiences, previous education, popular media and peer culture. Many of these ideas are commonly held misconceptions or myths about the nature of science. Here are some of the more common myths that are problematic in science education.