>>10965986Science is different than pop science.
Science abhors the very nature of pop sci: Science seeks to be as true as possible, which means it is conservative, very specific in language, and non-grandiose claiming in nature. Pop sci is the opposite: It's a click-bait title that is super general, leads to false beliefs, and makes claims far beyond possibility or uses weasel phrases/words to make it sound cooler.
Case-in-point, I use CRISPR in my work to make knockout lines. It's a rando technology, and very good at it, but nothing more. All the pop-sci bullshit is about CRISPR-babies and has stupid shit dna helixes and the same boiler plate images as the AI bullshit when making these clickbait titles. I hate it all.
