4 ms·

Sure but what if it was never a fact. 'Fat makes you fat' or similar falsification that have real impact to society[0] We shouldn't attribute everything to mal

by 551199 10y ago

Sure but what if it was never a fact. 'Fat makes you fat' or similar falsification that have real impact to society[0] We shouldn't attribute everything to malice, but there are clear issues in science: 'Too many of the findings that fill the academic either are the result of shoddy experiments or poor analysis Last year researchers at one biotech firm, Amgen, found they could reproduce just six of 53 “landmark” studies in cancer research. Earlier, a group at Bayer, a drug company, managed to repeat just a quarter of 67 similarly important papers. A leading computer scientist frets that three-quarters of papers in his subfield are bunk. In 2000-10 roughly 80,000 patients took part in clinical trials based on research that was later retracted because of mistakes or improprieties. Careerism also encourages exaggeration and the cherry-picking of results. In order to safeguard their exclusivity, the leading journals impose high rejection rates: in excess of 90% of submitted manuscripts. The most striking findings have the greatest chance of making it onto the page. Conversely, failures to prove a hypothesis are rarely even offered for publication, let alone accepted. “Negative results” now account for only 14% of published papers, down from 30% in 1990. Yet knowing what is false is as important to science as knowing what is true. The failure to report failures means that researchers waste money and effort exploring blind alleys already investigated by other scientists.'[1] [0] https://www.amazon.com/Salt-Sugar-Fat-Giants-Hooked/dp/0812982193/ https://www.amazon.com/Salt-Sugar-Fat-Giants-Hooked/dp/08129... [1] http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21588069-scientific-research-has-changed-world-now-it-needs-change-itself-how-science-goes-wrong http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21588069-scientific-re... [2] Alan Sokal - Beyond the Hoax: Science, Philosophy and Culture https://www.amazon.com/Beyond-Hoax-Science-Philosophy-Culture/dp/0199561834/ https://www.amazon.com/Beyond-Hoax-Science-Philosophy-Cultur... [3] How to Lie with Statistics - https://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/0393310728/ https://www.amazon.com/How-Lie-Statistics-Darrell-Huff/dp/03... [4] Nassim Taleb 'Incerto', twitter.com/nntaleb

splawn 10y ago
Despite all of your examples, science is still the best way we have for understanding the universe. If you have a better way then by all means enlighten us.
- Chris2048 10y ago
  OP posts about the current state of science, A better way of doing science is needed.
  - 551199 10y ago
    Exactly, we could do some much better. Religious attitude is really hurting science.
    - splawn 10y ago
      Sure, there will always be room for improvement. However, I disagree with your latter point, putting ignorant, anti-science, religious, magical thinking people into power is really hurting science. Unlike religion, philosophically, Science is always open for improvement. Edit: I had a comma party.
      - 551199 10y ago
        Repeat of study should be the bare minimum. We are in a situation where lot of underlining assumptions are false. It's hard for common people to experiment science but lets examine something that everybody can experiment daily. Nutritional science. It turns out most of the findings are complete bs or paid by special interests. Probably its not as bad elsewhere but faces similar issues presented in The Economist article.

by 551199 10y ago

splawn 10y ago

Despite all of your examples, science is still the best way we have for understanding the universe. If you have a better way then by all means enlighten us.

Chris2048 10y ago
OP posts about the current state of science, A better way of doing science is needed.
- 551199 10y ago
  Exactly, we could do some much better. Religious attitude is really hurting science.
  - splawn 10y ago
    Sure, there will always be room for improvement. However, I disagree with your latter point, putting ignorant, anti-science, religious, magical thinking people into power is really hurting science. Unlike religion, philosophically, Science is always open for improvement. Edit: I had a comma party.
    - 551199 10y ago
      Repeat of study should be the bare minimum. We are in a situation where lot of underlining assumptions are false. It's hard for common people to experiment science but lets examine something that everybody can experiment daily. Nutritional science. It turns out most of the findings are complete bs or paid by special interests. Probably its not as bad elsewhere but faces similar issues presented in The Economist article.