4 ms·

Please provide evidence of fraud in government funding. I have yet to see any real evidence of fraud from the DOGE reports, just contracts and projects that don

by Onawa 1y ago

Please provide evidence of fraud in government funding. I have yet to see any real evidence of fraud from the DOGE reports, just contracts and projects that don't align with the current administration's world view and priorities. Yes, scientists are human and there are certainly instances of scientific misconduct that take time to root out. In the grand scheme of things, funding for science generates many times its value in economic output. https://g.co/gemini/share/816aa7510c1a https://g.co/gemini/share/816aa7510c1a

naasking 1y ago
> Please provide evidence of fraud in government funding. Are you serious? Just go look at the recent Alzheimer's research scandal. It's the tip of the iceberg.
- Onawa 1y ago
  The fraud perpetrated by an individual which misled the field as whole is not the same as 'fraud in government funding'. Again, scientists are human and will do things for personal gain. There are mechanisms being implemented in science funding that are meant to try and curb this behavior. NIH intramural research now require the use of electronic lab notebooks, which greatly reduce the ability to doctor data post-experiment. There is also a push for scientific preregistration, which helps to prevent p-hacking and hypothesis modification. But saying that all funding towards a scientific dead-end due to misdirection by individual researchers is proof of fraud in government funding doesn't compute.
  - naasking 1y ago
    > Again, scientists are human and will do things for personal gain. Which was my original point. > But saying that all funding towards a scientific dead-end due to misdirection by individual researchers is proof of fraud in government funding doesn't compute. Who said this?
    - Onawa 1y ago
      > Why do think so much fraud has been uncovered lately? > Please provide evidence of fraud in government funding. > Are you serious? Just go look at the recent Alzheimer's research scandal. It's the tip of the iceberg. > But saying that all funding towards a scientific dead-end due to misdirection by individual researchers is proof of fraud in government funding doesn't compute. > Who said this? That was how I interpreted you bringing up the Alzheimer's scandal. When you say "why do you think so much fraud has been uncovered recently?" and mention the Alzheimer's scandal, I feel you portray it as an overwhelming or systematic issue with government funded research. The process of getting funding for science from a government agency is tedious and painful. There are many eyes that review each grant application. It takes months/years, there are usually reviews to make sure that research is on track and aligns with the original proposal... So when you say that the Alzheimer's scandal is the tip of the iceberg, it implies systematic and widespread fraud in science funding rather than individual instances of fraud and misconduct.
alabastervlog 1y ago
[flagged]
- naasking 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - alabastervlog 1y ago
    2024/06/28 DOGE got ahold of Obama's time machine? What people expect is a connection between the claims of fraud and the massive cuts, funding pauses (which effectively destroy some research, wasting any money already spent), and disruptive reorganizations. The claim is that DOGE is uncovering so very much fraud all over the place, that you practically can't enter a government office without tripping over fraud. Where's all this fraud, justifying such extreme measures? They say they found it! Where are the indictments? Where are the investigations? There should be lots of them. ... unless they're lying.
    - naasking 1y ago
      [flagged]
      - alabastervlog 1y ago
        [EDIT: The way I wrote this was mean, and why be mean? Rephrasing to be less mean: I reviewed the thread and found your claim to be inaccurate] Yeah, that's enough of this for one day.
        naasking 1y ago
        [flagged]
        alabastervlog 1y ago
        The root post of this thread was concerned with the effects of, "The Trump admins cuts", as is TFA. I think I see what you mean, however: that your original post in this thread could be read as setting that aside and treating of just the sub-topic of whether there's any fraud in science (of course there's some). However, the post I responded to (not your post, to be clear) mentioned DOGE by name: "I have yet to see any real evidence of fraud from the DOGE reports" (to be fair to that poster, I think they read your "why do think so much fraud has been uncovered lately?" as being about that, given the context of the thread, and as the most prominent claims of fraud in general and, specifically, in government funding of science lately have been from DOGE and friends, though evidently that's not what you meant). Between that, TFA, and the root of the thread, I hope you can see why I bristled a bit at being accused of being "the only person talking about DOGE in this thread", given that I was responding to a post that mentioned them by name, and that it's, more-or-less, also the topic of TFA and the root post of this thread. I do empathize with your being exhausted with the topic of Trump/DOGE, but would suggest that this is maybe not a good thread to expect to avoid it in, given the topic of the linked article.
mensetmanusman 1y ago
Might be referencing the replication crisis.

by Onawa 1y ago

naasking 1y ago

> Please provide evidence of fraud in government funding. Are you serious? Just go look at the recent Alzheimer's research scandal. It's the tip of the iceberg.

Onawa 1y ago
The fraud perpetrated by an individual which misled the field as whole is not the same as 'fraud in government funding'. Again, scientists are human and will do things for personal gain. There are mechanisms being implemented in science funding that are meant to try and curb this behavior. NIH intramural research now require the use of electronic lab notebooks, which greatly reduce the ability to doctor data post-experiment. There is also a push for scientific preregistration, which helps to prevent p-hacking and hypothesis modification. But saying that all funding towards a scientific dead-end due to misdirection by individual researchers is proof of fraud in government funding doesn't compute.
- naasking 1y ago
  > Again, scientists are human and will do things for personal gain. Which was my original point. > But saying that all funding towards a scientific dead-end due to misdirection by individual researchers is proof of fraud in government funding doesn't compute. Who said this?
  - Onawa 1y ago
    > Why do think so much fraud has been uncovered lately? > Please provide evidence of fraud in government funding. > Are you serious? Just go look at the recent Alzheimer's research scandal. It's the tip of the iceberg. > But saying that all funding towards a scientific dead-end due to misdirection by individual researchers is proof of fraud in government funding doesn't compute. > Who said this? That was how I interpreted you bringing up the Alzheimer's scandal. When you say "why do you think so much fraud has been uncovered recently?" and mention the Alzheimer's scandal, I feel you portray it as an overwhelming or systematic issue with government funded research. The process of getting funding for science from a government agency is tedious and painful. There are many eyes that review each grant application. It takes months/years, there are usually reviews to make sure that research is on track and aligns with the original proposal... So when you say that the Alzheimer's scandal is the tip of the iceberg, it implies systematic and widespread fraud in science funding rather than individual instances of fraud and misconduct.

alabastervlog 1y ago

[flagged]

naasking 1y ago
[flagged]
- alabastervlog 1y ago
  2024/06/28 DOGE got ahold of Obama's time machine? What people expect is a connection between the claims of fraud and the massive cuts, funding pauses (which effectively destroy some research, wasting any money already spent), and disruptive reorganizations. The claim is that DOGE is uncovering so very much fraud all over the place, that you practically can't enter a government office without tripping over fraud. Where's all this fraud, justifying such extreme measures? They say they found it! Where are the indictments? Where are the investigations? There should be lots of them. ... unless they're lying.
  - naasking 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - alabastervlog 1y ago
      [EDIT: The way I wrote this was mean, and why be mean? Rephrasing to be less mean: I reviewed the thread and found your claim to be inaccurate] Yeah, that's enough of this for one day.
      - naasking 1y ago
        [flagged]
        alabastervlog 1y ago
        The root post of this thread was concerned with the effects of, "The Trump admins cuts", as is TFA. I think I see what you mean, however: that your original post in this thread could be read as setting that aside and treating of just the sub-topic of whether there's any fraud in science (of course there's some). However, the post I responded to (not your post, to be clear) mentioned DOGE by name: "I have yet to see any real evidence of fraud from the DOGE reports" (to be fair to that poster, I think they read your "why do think so much fraud has been uncovered lately?" as being about that, given the context of the thread, and as the most prominent claims of fraud in general and, specifically, in government funding of science lately have been from DOGE and friends, though evidently that's not what you meant). Between that, TFA, and the root of the thread, I hope you can see why I bristled a bit at being accused of being "the only person talking about DOGE in this thread", given that I was responding to a post that mentioned them by name, and that it's, more-or-less, also the topic of TFA and the root post of this thread. I do empathize with your being exhausted with the topic of Trump/DOGE, but would suggest that this is maybe not a good thread to expect to avoid it in, given the topic of the linked article.

mensetmanusman 1y ago

Might be referencing the replication crisis.