Posted on 06/01/2009 9:56:17 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
You Can Trust a Scientist – Can’t You?
May 31, 2009 — After the flap over the “missing link” Ida last week (05/19/2009), paleontologist Christopher Beard warned about how such stunts damage scientific credibility. “The only thing we have going for us that Hollywood and politicians don’t is objectivity,” he told Science magazine.[1] Can the public trust the objectivity of scientists as a class? Do they get more credibility points than other groups of professionals? Do the processes of scientific publication warrant a higher level of trust?
A study reported on Science Daily may shake that trust...
(Excerpt) Read more at creationsafaris.com ...
ping!
As opposed to creationists, whose biases and agendas are obvious for all to see. I guess there’s some value in that...
not so long as they have to step and fetch for government and foundation grants to put bread on their tables....
Thanks for the ping!
As the son of a world-renowned scientist, I can personally attest that those who are certain their judgment is "objective" are fully susceptible to deluding themselves.
Their confidence in their own objectivity only serves to make them more arrogant and condescending in expressing their personal biases.
One of the more important lessons I learned in high school physics was the procedure of “fudging” the results to get the desired answer. In that case, the payoff was a better grade.
To a working scientist, the payoff is continued funding.
At least the creationists have the advantage of not believing their wisdom is the ultimate measure of all things.
Humility is just another foolish notion to those you defend.
It is so funny that when it’s a creationist, their world view is automatically labeled as biased, and the scientists’ worldview NEVER is.
The fact is that everyone is biased. People who claim they are objective when they are not, are hypocrites. That’s what makes scientists worse. They say they aren’t biased when it’s clear they are. Same reason most of us cannot stand the MSM - they claim objectivity, yet 90% of them vote democrat and on any issue, if you watch how any certain story is reported, they all have the same liberal talking points. We know it’s not surprising given that over 90% of thme MSM admits voting democrat, yet they still try to convince us that they are objective and unbiased, only FOX news is biased.
Same damn thing here.
HAHAHAHAHAHOHOHOHO!!!!
“Objectivity”. Hee Hee Heee.
“American Association for the Advancement of Science” “Objective”.
Uh-huh.
Ouch.
You'll get stuffed into the 'science hater' box if you keep that up. ;-)
Yes, when there is so much funding at stake....there is fraud to be had. Wow.....so since there is some fraud, nothing is to be trusted but the Bible in all affairs concerning the sciences.
Having been in the field, I’d say most of the fraud I witnessed was “passing on someone else’s work as your own”....and not “making it up” “fudging the numbers” or any other statistical play.
Where in the Bible does God tell Noah to NOT gather up a male and female of each kind of dinosaur? Or was the decision all Noah’s....to purposely let hundreds of species of God’s creations become extinct on a humanly whim?
what an apropriate screen name!
To a working scientist, the payoff is continued funding.
I actually left my first job out of graduate school - at a start-up pharma development company - in part because of the poor working relationship that developed with my supervisor after I refused his "suggestions" that I fudge some data to make the results look better for what the company wanted.
The other part was because this same supervisor was a drunk driver - with me and other co-workers in the vehicle with him, not noticing until after he started driving - which caused me to question his judgment.
Scientists are flawed like everybody else.
The atheists more so.
Thanks for the warning, but I've long since reconciled myself that in here on FR, as in our culture in general, there are many who will "stuff us into boxes" based on the views we express.
Just look at the example our dear President Obortion is setting with his institutionalized racism (which, BTW, I feel quite confident MLK would strongly condemn): Bigotry can be a good thing, as long as it's the bigotry YOU want.
Why can’t Dr. Daniele Fanelli get his research published in a REAL journal?
Studies examine withholding of scientific data among researchers, trainees
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1565120/posts
It May Look Authentic; Here’s How to Tell It Isn’t
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1563746/posts
Most scientific papers are probably wrong
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1473528/posts
Most Science Studies Appear to Be Tainted By Sloppy Analysis
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1896333/posts
Why Most Published Research Findings Are False
http://medicine.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124&ct=1
What then the intent of this essay if not to attempt to discredit science, scientists and the scientific method?
LOL...Allmendream can’t distinguish between science and the fallible human beings who practice science!
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.