Michael Hipp wrote:
Matthew Carpenter wrote:
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Many Scientists Admit Unethical Practices |
| from the only-human dept. |
| posted by Zonk on Friday June 10, @14:52 (Science) |
| http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/06/10/1243222 |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
jangobongo writes "A surprising number of [0]scientists engage in
questionable research practices says a story at the Washington Post.
According to a large-scale survey of scientific misbehavior, 15% admit to
changing a study under pressure from a funding source. Other reasons for
altering data include dropping data from a study based on a gut feeling
and failing to include data that contradicts one's own research. This
[1]chart gives a quick rundown of the percentage of U.S. based scientists
who reported having engaged in questionable research practices according
to the survey."
That 15% is, by definition, only the ones that admit it.
Science has always been the noblest of secular human pursuits. Let the
data speak for itself. Let the facts lead where they may. Question
everything.
But it appears to be a very significant corruption over the last 50 or
so years of those that will compromise it for sake of a) notoriety, or
b) funding, or c) to support the correct political agenda, or d) to
support any alternative to the existence of God.
Sad. May it RIP.
I think it is because we have the money angle setup all wrong. To get
tenure at the U of M, a professor needs to bring in $200,000.00 a year
in research money. Who has time to teach with that kind of mandate?
Some of the shenanigans are to preserve funding for your own project,
remember Neural Nets or Cold Fusion? Both disproved using bad
assumptions or cooked data. Look at global warming, spend a few minutes
researching what happens to scientists that disagree with the political
consensus. Ask why prof. Mann has not released the code for his "Hockey
Stick" graph, that no one else can duplicate from the same data. Simple
things that make it impossible to find out what is really going on.
When careers are on the line for "faulty" conclusions and research
dollars drive what gets researched, science is in trouble. What else
have we got?
-- Alma
_______________________________________________
[email protected]
Unsub/Pause/Etc : http://mail.linux-sxs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/general
