Posted on 10/06/2016 10:03:00 AM PDT by Heartlander
For years, scientists and non-scientists alike have complained that something is fundamentally wrong with the way we do this business. Something has corrupted the integrity of our science.
This is a serious charge because it means that more and more government policy -- from limiting carcinogens to regulations on carbon emissions -- is based upon an increasingly polluted canon of knowledge. If that were somehow corrected for, we would live under a far less intrusive government.
Last week, this view received strong support when two researchers published a bombshell article in a journal of Britain's Royal Society called "The Natural Selection of Bad Science." Put simply, it is a closely argued, mathematically rigorous demonstration that the way we now reward scientists is actually making science worse.
The things that scientists crave -- like tenure and research funding -- incentivize frequent publishing of massive numbers of academic papers. To publish that much, you need a tremendous amount of financial support. And when it comes to scientific work that could have regulatory implications, almost all of the money comes from Washington.
... this rush for the printing presses leads to sloppy science and declining standards of rigor. So, by extension, the more money the government throws at some field with an initially limited number of practitioners (think global warming) the worse the science will become.
What constitutes "bad science"? It's the epidemic of positive results, in which a researcher reports that the data support his or her prior hypothesis. Stanford's Daniele Fanelli has shown a distressing increase of positive results in recent decades, something that can't be true in the real world. Think about it -- we are not suddenly becoming more intelligent and getting everything right. What's happening is that scientists are responding to incentives.
(Excerpt) Read more at investors.com ...
Yes—By the US federal government.
with money
Yep, academic welfare...
Politicized. Just like the SCOTUS, FBI, IRS, NFL, and all other institutions in our society.
It’s Alinsky’s Revenge.
“research has become central, it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.
Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been overshadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.
The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present – and is gravely to be regarded.”
Eisenhower’s farewell address
Junk science has been prominent for a lot longer than a few years. Far too many researchers are being driven by the quest for grant money.
The majority of “scientists” have become grant whores who will say anything and do anything to keep the Spice flowing.
Eisenhower’s Farewell Address
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/ike.htm
...Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers...
The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present – and is gravely to be regarded...
SJWs is what happened.
Science is no longer science when consensus replaces challenging the accepted.
Science has always been about challenging the accepted or there would have been no advance of science.
Massively polluted. It starts in college without “Environmental Sustainability” courses that make outrageous claims like there is no God, that man caused a global warming, that C)2 is killing everyone, man won’t survive extinction, etc.
They are mandatory classes in every college in the US.
Follow the money, ALWAYS!
The big money is in “proving” globull warming now.
The problem, imho, is that different types of science have different levels of “testability”. For example, physics and chemistry are extremely testable. Any hypothesis or result can be immediately put to test by many labs and see if the results are reproducible. Medical science less so. Much of our advances in medical science comes from statistical analysis of long term results (typically against a placebo), not from “knowing” how the body works in full. Over time we’re getting better at understanding the body and develop better technology and drugs. We still have to rely on lengthy processes to prove something is safe for the market. So it’s still testable but not as directly or quickly.
Then we have other sciences, like “climate” and “social” sciences. These “sciences” are not testable. We do not have a spare earth where we can test changing a variable to see the impact and effect. Similarly, we can’t change everyone’s opinion on social issues to prove or disprove their validity, they’re really just ideas.
I’m unaware of any “testability index” for the various sciences, showing how much more testable one type of science is vs another. For climate science, you’re reduced to “computer models” because you can’t change variables for experimentation on a global scale. Nothing more than garbage in garbage out. When the models don’t match reality you don’t have “science”.
If by “polluted” you mean “politicized,” then the answer is “Yes, the worst since Galileo.”
Is a bear Catholic?
Excellent post.
The whole premise of testability and falsifiability has been thrown out the window by modern science. There are many areas where scientists should admit they can make no conclusions, but so many have an agenda now that they have lost all sense of humility.
Much of “science” is now at the point where they ask their masters what result they want before they begin. The Apostle Paul knew all about that too:
1Ti 6:20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:
The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded. Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientifictechnological elite. - Eisenhower’s Farewell Address
Not polluted.
Corrupted. Truth in modern science is whatever keeps the grants flowing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.