The title above is according to this article on Upworthy.com, which has a neat graphic that makes a similar claim to scientificity to whatever the original publication it critiques does.
http://www.upworthy.com/16-years-ago-a-doctor-published-a-study-it-was-completely-made-up-and-it-made-us-all-sicker?g=3&c=ufb8
http://www.upworthy.com/16-years-ago-a-doctor-published-a-study-it-was-completely-made-up-and-it-made-us-all-sicker?g=3&c=ufb8
Even though, according to the claim here, no study has ever proven a link between vaccination and autism, people continue to believe the claim of the publication being refuted. Similarly, the scientific claim of this article itself can be said to be building its message on a presentational mode that relies on belief in science, only based on social-media activism rather than prestigious publications.
This happens because science is religion. So where do you receive your dose of science from?
"إن هذا العلم دين فانظروا عمن تأخذون دينكم" (محمد ابن سيرين في مقدمة صحيح مسلم، قيلت في الإسناد و تنطبق عامة)
Note: I'm neither saying the content of this upworthy.com is true, nor is whatever it is responding to. I'm commenting on the claim to scientificity and the power that it entails. Truth can become irrelevant. Discourse regulates truth. Long as you have a presentational mode that is in line with the discourse, you have power.
Scientificity is discourse. It is religion.
