No, it’s not.
Otherwise we would find politically incorrect scientific research suppressed with the threat of criminal prosecution.
Eric Holder would be all too eager to prosecute anyone who dares question AGW. Or whether homosexuality is genetic trait vs a choice. Or whether fetus feels pain.
Speaking of childbirth, what about prosecuting the invalid “study” that led to higher numbers for caesarean sections due to hospitals not wanting to be sued....
Equally important is the fact that gov’t policy is based on that research. Everything from the Endangered Species List to EPA’s reaction to Global Warming “research” is predicated on this kind of research. That said, there’s a fine line to walk, however. If it is criminalized, one runs the risk of ending some research that might lead to major breakthroughs. On the other side is the pure crap that some put out under the guise of research, when it is little more than empirical How To Lie With Statistics meant to please the underwriters of the research so the researchers can get more funds. Perhaps a good place to start is to throw Al Gore in jail and see what happens.
We should be careful here. Or should we. Should we trust the government to decide which science is science and which is heresy? This is like trying to get congress to pass laws enforcing the enforcement of the constitution with criminal reprisals for deriliction of duty.
Anyway you look at it, you are inviting the source of the problem to go against it’s own instincts and natural tendency to change itself. It’s like trying to get big snakes to raise baby rats. A lot of snakes eat their own young. Same thing goes here.
We don’t want to invite anymore government oversight over anything the government has an interest. Today, unfortunately, our government is vested in EVERYTHING. They can no longer “help” fix anything for the citizenry.
Criminalize it and you’ll have grad students turning up dead.
Some of you know what I’m talking about.
Here is why (in very few words.)
Science has been corrupted by the liberal politicians.
The liberal politicians more or less own the courts.
The liberal politicians absolutely own the Department of Justice
The Global Warming “Denialists” would be the first to see the inside of a jail.
From Amazon (emphasis added):
"In this illuminating book, the renowned theoretical physicist Lee Smolin argues that fundamental physics -- the search for the laws of nature -- losing its way. Ambitious ideas about extra dimensions, exotic particles, multiple universes, and strings have captured the public’s imagination -- and the imagination of experts. But these ideas have not been tested experimentally, and some, like string theory, seem to offer no possibility of being tested. Yet these speculations dominate the field, attracting the best talent and much of the funding and creating a climate in which emerging physicists are often penalized for pursuing other avenues. As Smolin points out, the situation threatens to impede the very progress of science. With clarity, passion, and authority, Smolin offers an unblinking assessment of the troubles that face modern physics -- and an encouraging view of where the search for the next big idea may lead."
Sound familiar?
Better idea: let whoever funded the research sue to get their money back.
This makes me very concerned, because the very first people who would be attacked with this would not be the real fraudsters, like the MMGW crowd, *but* those skeptical scientists who did not toe the MMGW line, and have already been threatened, and in some cases punished, for doubting.
Or perhaps this fraud by the CDC?
http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/27/health/irpt-cdc-autism-vaccine-study/
Instead, the “deniers” will be criminalized.
Beware this slippery slope!
Criminal or even harsh civil procedural provisions can be used from both sides. Al Gore and his followers would not hesitate to imprison scientists who disagreed with them.
The way to uphold scientific standards of searching for the truth is to control the money and come down harshly on entire institutions that harbor even one fraudulent scientific investigator.
Justice in the military is often meted out to entire units and not individuals. If one member of a unit fails or violates the code, the entire unit is punished.
So it must be with centers of science; let one principle researcher be convicted of fraud and punish the entire center. Then watch how science center leaders climb all over every research project to save their own hides. The peer review process would once again become a serious endeavor, (my apologies to the thousands upon thousands of scientists and researchers who take their profession seriously and already act to uphold the highest scientific standards).
Here’s what happens when you’re on the wrong side of Big Pharm so this suggestion may be ill-advised.
How do you think the left would use this sort of law?
“I can’t think of a better example in which to criminalize serious scientific misconduct than the hack hypothesis of Global Warming. “
I’d say yes to this, but the problem is the thing that will be criminalized is dissent with the “accepted, settled, consensus” science. It will be like hate speech in, say, Canada, where you can be prosecuted for speaking the truth about Islam, abortion, race relations, etc. (The problem with ANY law is it will immediately be coopted by the Left.)
Somehow they had to be able to make adjustments in the medication.
Same goes for MRI's. It occurs to me that tests needed to be conducted which would allow them to know how to refine the dials.
Did they use any of the studies done with electro-shock therapy? Were those experiments conducted honestly and legally and ethically?
How many of those studies included Nazi doctor input?
These are just a few of the questions floating around in my head right now.
Been there. Done that. Didn't wok so well.............