3 ms·

I am an engineer so I know very well that industrial replication is far from easy, but that's a whole different topic here. That's why when manufacturing at sca

I am an engineer so I know very well that industrial replication is far from easy, but that's a whole different topic here. That's why when manufacturing at scale you implement numerous controls for each step to ensure you remain into "whats known" territory. Now, when you publish a discovery in a paper, common sense demands that you are sure that you results are not random, and the only 100% reliable way to do that is by replicating your results. There's no way around that. The fact that most people who publish stuff and the system that allows it never ever do that undermines any credibility in said "science". Hence this is cargo cult. This is typically something that mimics the look of Science by using the scientific method, but it has none of its properties, because the incentives to cheat are obvious and there is nothing in place to prevent them.

bsder 3y ago
"Difficult to replicate" does NOT mean "wrong". The fact that your experimental technique sucks is not my problem, thanks. Go get some better grad students. And this is before we start getting into medicine which has both ethical and expense issues with running multiple experiments. Your position is both unrealistic and untenable. Medicine and science would literally grind to a halt. > the incentives to cheat are obvious and there is nothing in place to prevent them. The real issue is that Marc Tessier-Lavigne has caused an entire industry to waste millions (possibly billions) of dollars,d elayed Alzheimer's research for decades and will suffer no real punishment. He's 65 years old and has made a shitload of money based on the fraud. The real question is "How do you punish this in order to disincentivize it?"
- ekianjo 3y ago
  > Your position is both unrealistic and untenable. Medicine and science would literally grind to a halt. Medicine and Science would grind to a halt if we try to replicate things? Did I read this correctly? If you don't do replication, you are not doing Science, period.
wolverine876 3y ago
> I am an engineer so I know very well that industrial replication is far from easy And industrial replication, if I understand your meaning, is far down the development line - for technologies that have been discovered, researched, passed the test of viability, and then developed to the point where they can be used commercially. Scientists are way back in the discovery and research phases; they don't have the benefit of all that, or the budget. They are doing the unproven and untried.

bsder 3y ago

"Difficult to replicate" does NOT mean "wrong". The fact that your experimental technique sucks is not my problem, thanks. Go get some better grad students. And this is before we start getting into medicine which has both ethical and expense issues with running multiple experiments. Your position is both unrealistic and untenable. Medicine and science would literally grind to a halt. > the incentives to cheat are obvious and there is nothing in place to prevent them. The real issue is that Marc Tessier-Lavigne has caused an entire industry to waste millions (possibly billions) of dollars,d elayed Alzheimer's research for decades and will suffer no real punishment. He's 65 years old and has made a shitload of money based on the fraud. The real question is "How do you punish this in order to disincentivize it?"

ekianjo 3y ago
> Your position is both unrealistic and untenable. Medicine and science would literally grind to a halt. Medicine and Science would grind to a halt if we try to replicate things? Did I read this correctly? If you don't do replication, you are not doing Science, period.

wolverine876 3y ago

> I am an engineer so I know very well that industrial replication is far from easy And industrial replication, if I understand your meaning, is far down the development line - for technologies that have been discovered, researched, passed the test of viability, and then developed to the point where they can be used commercially. Scientists are way back in the discovery and research phases; they don't have the benefit of all that, or the budget. They are doing the unproven and untried.