WhatIsH2O4

I agree with you last point, and I really, really want to with the first.

Sometimes science feels more like an art, for chemistry at least. I suppose the counter-point to this is: if you provide sufficient detail to reproduce but your results are still difficult to reproduce reliably by others, then your process wasn't very robust and should have undergone more development before publishing. Those details may be so minor that you don't even realize that you overlooked something.

Counterpoint: the scientific method is much simpler than you described.

1. Fuck around
2. Find out
3. Write it down

The rest are details of the above or elitism.

The liberal who doesn't believe in the concept of critical support.

Alternate PhD

Spoken like a round leaf.

What a shit parable.

All media is biased despite some of it trying to be objective or parading a facade of objectivity. The nice part about obviously bias articles is that their bias is obvious, you don't need to read between the lines.

If that means you feel it's a waste of time to read, then you find out it's a waste of your time faster and can move on.

Some megacorp called Stellantis as of 2021.

Fucking GOOD! Holy hell, still a terrible story to imagine.

It's often the same for science, though there are actual experts who occasionally weigh in too.

And the jolly rancher.

That's assuming they are competent enough to even use a PDF.