>The scientists I worked with seemed to know about the situation, but personally, I lost the very strong belief in natural science results. Turns out, there was

>The scientists I worked with seemed to know about the situation, but personally, I lost the very strong belief in natural science results. Turns out, there was no rigorous fact and results checking culture, as in mathematics. This may reflect the feeling that for experimental sciences, the most reliable results checking may be to re-do the experiment, or perform a related experiment that is expected to produce similar results. In math (as I understand it), a proof is a proof -- the result is complete. In experimental science, an experimental result is often reproducible, but does not in fact guarantee that the hypothesis is correct. While reproducibility and correct results are obviously important; most experimental scientists look for supporting experiments and a mechanistic framework before changing their beliefs.