3 ms·

> Horrifying as these experiments were, they did provide insight into human anatomy. And trying to revisionist history that away is just wrong. Too bad their e

by cyphar 4y ago

> Horrifying as these experiments were, they did provide insight into human anatomy. And trying to revisionist history that away is just wrong. Too bad their experimental method did not correctly segregate subjects into control groups, they did not record many important variables necessary to actually use the data, and several of their results are at odds with modern understandings of anatomy (meaning the data was fabricated). Seems like pretty bad science to be championing for. Let's not forget, these scientists believed in scientific racism -- why on Earth would you assume that they would honestly record their experimental data on human anatomy? To quote the conclusion of the report: > This review of the Dachau hypothermia experiments reveals critical shortcomings in scientific content and credibility. The project was conducted without an orderly experimental protocol, with inadequate methods and an erratic execution. The report is riddled with inconsistencies. There is also evidence of data falsification and suggestions of fabrication. Many conclusions are not supported by the facts presented. The flawed science is compounded by evidence that the director of the project showed a consistent pattern of dishonesty and deception in his professional as well as his personal life, thereby stripping the study of the last vestige of credibility. On analysis, the Dachau hypothermia study has all the ingredients of a scientific fraud, and rejection of the data on purely scientific grounds is inevitable. They cannot advance science or save human lives.

b112 4y ago
So your assertion is that racism was not common in, for example, the US? Or that, as a separate example, all Nazi scientists documented poorly? There is a very strange modern trend, where if someone is racist, or a murderer, or some other horrid thing, that be interference everything they did was wrong, and incorrect, and has zero value. The assessment of a person(eg racist) is a valid act and required, but this does not invalidate any positives. It merely means that said person is a racist, and that action/punishment on that front should occur. Pretending otherwise is a lie, and true scientific fallacy.
- cyphar 4y ago
  Probably not a good idea to do a whataboutism when we're talking about the actual Nazis. I don't have anything more to say on the topic -- you're completely ignoring the fact that the data that we got from the one Nazi experiment that was once thought to be useful is bad data, partially because of bad experiment design (including not caring whether their "test subjects" died due to mistreatment) and partially due to outright fabrications. If you disagree with the conclusion of the peer-reviewed report I linked (as opposed to having a general issue with the fact that it turns out that the Nazis were shit scientists -- something I can't sympathise with sadly) you can write it up as a paper and get it published in a peer reviewed journal.

by cyphar 4y ago

b112 4y ago

So your assertion is that racism was not common in, for example, the US? Or that, as a separate example, all Nazi scientists documented poorly? There is a very strange modern trend, where if someone is racist, or a murderer, or some other horrid thing, that be interference everything they did was wrong, and incorrect, and has zero value. The assessment of a person(eg racist) is a valid act and required, but this does not invalidate any positives. It merely means that said person is a racist, and that action/punishment on that front should occur. Pretending otherwise is a lie, and true scientific fallacy.

cyphar 4y ago
Probably not a good idea to do a whataboutism when we're talking about the actual Nazis. I don't have anything more to say on the topic -- you're completely ignoring the fact that the data that we got from the one Nazi experiment that was once thought to be useful is bad data, partially because of bad experiment design (including not caring whether their "test subjects" died due to mistreatment) and partially due to outright fabrications. If you disagree with the conclusion of the peer-reviewed report I linked (as opposed to having a general issue with the fact that it turns out that the Nazis were shit scientists -- something I can't sympathise with sadly) you can write it up as a paper and get it published in a peer reviewed journal.