3 ms·
While it is dramatic, these kinds of issues are often used by people who want to deny any scientific subject. They can claim that all research is worthless.
by Gravityloss 13y ago
While it is dramatic, these kinds of issues are often used by people who want to deny any scientific subject. They can claim that all research is worthless.
- tokenadult 13y agoDeniers like that publish in publications with a lot less integrity and peer review than the journal Nature, so they shouldn't use incidents like this as a basis for their delusional beliefs.
- glenra 13y agoDoesn't that make it even more important that research journals should be transparent and follow their own policies? If top journals were willing to admit mistakes promptly it would be much harder to claim that valid alternative views are being suppressed for political (or other) reasons.
- Gravityloss 13y agoYes.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- emerod 13y agoI'm not sure I get your point. Are you saying that we shouldn't be discussing problems of scientific methodology, since it strengthens the people who claim there are problems with scientific methodology?
- Gravityloss 13y agoNo, I did not mean that. But blowing it all out of proportion is not good either. It was just a reminder that such uses happen. People don't have a balanced exposure to science.
- emerod 13y agoYes, there is a tendency to believe that the most recent thing published represents "the last word" on the subject. A balanced exposure to science would include an historical view of the contingency of scientific knowledge. But this could only be acquired by reviewing all the published literature.
- nknighthb 13y agoI don't "deny any scientific subject", nor do I think any research is worthless, but over the last few years as these sorts of stories have come to light more, I have become convinced that publication and peer review as currently manifested are worthless.