There is a tendency for real doctors with backing from Academia or whoever’s in charge of deciding how you science to just plain getting it wrong and not realizing it for a long time.

Homeopathy is a good example of this, as it appeared to get great results when it was created during the Bubonic Plague and had such staying power to the point that in the 1800’s it was considered a legitimate and mainstream field of medical practice.

Now today we know Homeopathy is nonsense… Remembers New Age Healing is still a thing Okay, those of us with sense know homeopathy is garbage. With the only reason it was getting such wonderful results was because the state of medicine for a long period of time in human history was so god awful that not getting any treatment at all was actually the smarter idea. Since Homeopathy is basically just “No medicine at all”, that’s exactly what was happening with its success.

Incidentally this is also why the Christian Science movement (Which was neither Christian nor Science) had so many people behind it, people were genuinely living longer from it because it required people to stop smoking at a time when no one knew smoking killed you.

Anyhow. With that in mind, I want to know if there’s a case where the exact opposite happened.

Where Scientists got together on a subject, said “Wow, only an idiot would believe this. This clearly does not work, can not work, and is totally impossible.”

Only for someone to turn around, throw down research proving that there was no pseudo in this proposed pseudoscience with their finest “Ya know I had to do it 'em” face.

The closest I can think of is how people believed that Germ Theory, the idea that tiny invisible creatures were making us all sick, were the ramblings of a mad man. But that was more a refusal to look at evidence, not having evidence that said “No” that was replaced by better evidence that said “Disregard that, the answer is actually Yes”

Can anyone who sciences for a living instead of merely reading science articles as a hobby and understanding basically only a quarter of them at best tell me if something like that has happened?

Thank you, have a nice day.

  • Chozo@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    2 months ago

    This is the first I’m hearing of antisemitism being at all related. Where did this come from?

    • huginn@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 months ago

      Secret ruling elites is a dog whistle - it’s Nazi cabalistic rhetoric. See also Protocols of the Elders of Zion: a Nazi propaganda piece.

      • Chozo@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        Okay but what does that have to do with dead internet theory? Last I saw, it just suggests that internet comments are largely bot-generated.

        • huginn@feddit.it
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          2 months ago

          As the original comment said: the origins of dead Internet theory pre-date the prevalence of LLMs and are conspiracy theories about shadowy cabals of elites controlling the Internet

    • fishos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      OP is inadvertantly providing another example: the phrase “conspiracy theory”. It was coined by the US government as a way to discredit ideas - to make people look like crackpots. Lots of negative propaganda was created around that phrase.

      Fast forward to today and “conspiracy theory”, though admittedly still tainted in various ways, has made a resurgence. Things that would have gotten you laughed out of the room are now proven fact(like Iran-Contra, for a simple and fairly uncontroversial example).