this post was submitted on 30 Oct 2023
1363 points (98.7% liked)

Gaming

2346 readers
238 users here now

The Lemmy.zip Gaming Community

For news, discussions and memes!


Community Rules

This community follows the Lemmy.zip Instance rules, with the inclusion of the following rule:

You can see Lemmy.zip's rules by going to our Code of Conduct.

What to Expect in Our Code of Conduct:


If you enjoy reading legal stuff, you can check it all out at legal.lemmy.zip.


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] emergencyfood@sh.itjust.works 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Yes. It is unethical to give someone a disease so you can study it. Best we have are case studies of people who got the disease and are being treated for it.

In climate studies, it is not practical to increase temperature or humidity by x% and see the effects. Again, you have case studies - either from the past or from parts of the world that are warming much faster than the rest. Or you can do mesocosm experiments where you warm, say, a square metre of grassland, and see the effects. But then there is a lot of uncertainity in scaling up the findings of such small-scale studies.

[โ€“] uis@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago

You don't need to give anyone a disease to study medicine. Moreover, medicine is not limited to diseases. And it has both predictions and experimets.

In climate studies, it is not practical to increase temperature or humidity by x% and see the effects.

You still can observe, describe, analyze and model(predict). The goal of every science is to create prediction function.