The Magic Café
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Scientists behaving badly (0 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page 1~2 [Next]
rockwall
View Profile
Special user
762 Posts

Profile of rockwall
Along with the Population Bomb thread, we've got another case of Scientists behaving badly. Or should we call this one Scientists gone wild?

https://nypost.com/2018/06/14/famed-stan......st-says/

"Famed Stanford Prison Experiment was a fraud, scientist says"
Cliffg37
View Profile
Inner circle
Long Beach, CA
2492 Posts

Profile of Cliffg37
There is a sad and long history of scientists doing what they need to get the results they hope to get.

As a scientist myself, I have to believe that most science is the real deal, done by scientists who do the real research or real experimentation under exacting conditions. A navy scientist needs permission from three superior officers to change or delete a failed experimental result. This is to keep everyone honest. Biased (intentionally or not) results do not really help science. They might make a rep for a fraudulent scientist, but these days the truth is likely to come out.

The oldest example I can think of was the famous monk botanist Gregor Mendel. He is considered the father of modern genetics, despite the fact that he was apparently known to have ignored results that did not fit his design.

Don't forget the Harvard fellow who decided how different races stacked up on the intelligence scale. African races lowest, Latino Races next, with White and Asian close. It was believed that Asian may be a bit superior but that was inconclusive. Anyone remember how that one ended? The prof had done no research of any kind as was simply fronting for the Ku Klux Klan. There was no study.

It makes me sad when these things come out, but I'd rather they come out than be falsely believed.
Magic is like Science,
Both are fun if you do it right!
rockwall
View Profile
Special user
762 Posts

Profile of rockwall
I agree that it's better they come out. It's sad that sometimes it takes decades. And I also agree that it's a minority that fake the results but it's amazing how easily fooled so many other scientists are and for how long.
balducci
View Profile
Loyal user
Canada
230 Posts

Profile of balducci
IMO, the thread title should be psychologist behaving badly. There are a lot of good reasons why psychology is not a real science. Several are listed in this article:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/ca/blog/......e-debate

A few excerpts:

"The reason many are rightfully skeptical about its status is found in the body of scientific knowledge—psychology has failed to produce a cumulative body of knowledge that has a clear conceptual core that is consensually agreed upon by mainstream psychological experts."

"Psychology completely lacks agreement from the experts about what it is and what it is about, what its foundational theories or even frameworks are, what its key findings are, and how it fits with the rest of the body of scientific knowledge. The fact that psychology has been around now for almost a 150 years and remains pre-paradigmatic is undeniably a very serious threat to the field's status as a real science."

"[A] key feature of real scientific knowledge is that there is a clear, consensual center that provides a foothold to describe how (portions of) the world actually work. And it is here that psychology falls down in ways that physics, chemistry and biology do not. And it is in that sense that psychology is not a real science."

The superstar (now disgraced) psychologist Diederik Alexander Stapel wrote a nice book about his own massive frauds.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diederik_Stapel

It is freely available here (this goes to a pdf):

http://nick.brown.free.fr/stapel/
Make America Great Again! - Trump in 2020 ... "We're a capitalistic society. I go into business, I don't make it, I go bankrupt. They're not going to bail me out. I've been on welfare and food stamps. Did anyone help me? No." - Craig T. Nelson, actor.
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20613 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
Well this guy being a psychologist in no way mitigates the other problems.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
R.S.
View Profile
Regular user
CT one day I'll have
173 Posts

Profile of R.S.
All this proves is that it takes better science to overturn bad science. And scientists are just people, after all. They can make mistakes. They can have bad motivations. But that in no way discredits the scientific method - the best method we have for separating fact from fiction.

And imo, on the list of all the occupations that can start with "(name the occupation) Behaving Badly", I think that scientists would be among the better behaved.

Ron
"It is error only, and not truth, that shrinks from inquiry." Thomas Paine
Cliffg37
View Profile
Inner circle
Long Beach, CA
2492 Posts

Profile of Cliffg37
Quote:
On Jun 14, 2018, R.S. wrote:
All this proves is that it takes better science to overturn bad science. And scientists are just people.

Ron


True enough Ron.

But who publishes fake data? I can think of four types, though I will only count three.

1) The scientist who has decided to commit fraud and does not care about consequences. (My previous example involving Harvard and the Ku Klux Klan fits here)
2) The Scientist who has good data, but also has bad data and commits wilful bias. (My Gregor Mendel example) Note: Mendel still stands up today because he was right despite his bias.
3) The scientist who has good intentions, but when the work fails he is too arrogant or too scared to admit it. (look up cold fusion for an example)
4) The scientist who does real work, and publishes real results, but the work cannot be duplicated. (I don't count this one as I don't believe it really happens. The old adage "On a given day anything can happen," is real enough... and that is why scientists do not publish anything based on a single result.
Magic is like Science,
Both are fun if you do it right!
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20613 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
Yes Ron this is true. But it does mean that simply holding science itself to a standard should never result in being called names like denier should it?
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
NYCTwister
View Profile
Loyal user
267 Posts

Profile of NYCTwister
What's REALLY sad about these threads is the motivation behind starting them.

Thankfully, in a few generations, those with those motivations will be gone. Hopefully they'll have the decency not to poison their children with their stupidity.
If you need fear to enforce your beliefs, then your beliefs are worthless.
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20613 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
Isn't what I said true? Isn't science always self correcting? So is it smart to just blindly accept things that they say until they get around to correcting them? Maybe a questioning nature is not such a horrible thing.

If you believe that in a few generations people will blindly accept what their government tells them then I will be happy not to be part of that world. I for one am teaching kids to question things prior to blind acceptance. Your mileage obviously varies.

I hope those that choose to call others names when they disagree with them will be gone in a few generations and I hope THAT trait is not passed on. The divisive nature of treating everyone who disagrees with you as stupid is not a useful trait in a society. Unfortunately it does not seem that this has gotten any better, and is getting worse.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
Cliffg37
View Profile
Inner circle
Long Beach, CA
2492 Posts

Profile of Cliffg37
Is science self-correcting?

Just so we are all clear on this, when a scientist publishes a paper, and let's say he really did the work and really got the result, the journal will check out both the scientist and the work before agreeing to publish. There will be a peer review and maybe more than that. Newspapers, magazines, and journals hire people called "fact checkers" to do just that.

There are journals that are neither peer-reviewed nor "fact-checked." Some are scam journals and some may be trying to give the little guy a "first paper" boost. But these journals do not give a scientist credibility in the publishing world.

Two years ago I presented a paper at the conference of The American Association of Physics Teachers. My topic was "Challenges of teaching High School Physics in the Inner City." This presentation was not an experiment, nor was it researched. Rather it was experiential; autobiographical if you will.

I have been requested three or four times now to publish my work in a journal that is NOT of high reputation. (No fact checkers, willing to publish anyone or anything) I will not do it. My presentation has no business being there and any legitimate Physicist would know that from the start. If I did research (I could if I wanted to) and published a real paper that would be different.

So, is science self-correcting? Largely the answer is yes, but not always, and it does as previously stated, take time.
Magic is like Science,
Both are fun if you do it right!
NYCTwister
View Profile
Loyal user
267 Posts

Profile of NYCTwister
Quote:
On Jun 14, 2018, Dannydoyle wrote:
Maybe a questioning nature is not such a horrible thing.


No, it's the only thing.

Quote:
I for one am teaching kids to question things prior to blind acceptance.


Nice of you to allow them to question - before they accept blindly.

Btw, should they question their parents? Their teachers? Their CLERGY???

Quote:
I hope those that choose to call others names when they disagree with them will be gone in a few generations


Fear not Daniel. By then 45, the OP, and the rest of OWCFTG's will be gone!!
Smile Smile Smile
If you need fear to enforce your beliefs, then your beliefs are worthless.
R.S.
View Profile
Regular user
CT one day I'll have
173 Posts

Profile of R.S.
Quote:
On Jun 14, 2018, Dannydoyle wrote:
Yes Ron this is true. But it does mean that simply holding science itself to a standard should never result in being called names like denier should it?


Some people deny that climate change is occurring. Some people deny that the Earth is flat. Some people deny that we went to the Moon. Some people deny that the holocaust occurred. Some people deny that Elvis is dead. Some people deny that the Earth is older than a few thousand years. These people are all "deniers", plain and simple. They do not deserve "equal time" in scientific circles because there are no "two sides" to these issues. Some things are known to such a high degree of certainty that to deny them would be absurd.


Ron
"It is error only, and not truth, that shrinks from inquiry." Thomas Paine
R.S.
View Profile
Regular user
CT one day I'll have
173 Posts

Profile of R.S.
Quote:
On Jun 14, 2018, Dannydoyle wrote:
So is it smart to just blindly accept things that they say until they get around to correcting them? Maybe a questioning nature is not such a horrible thing.


"It is error only, and not truth, that shrinks from inquiry." Smile

Quote:
The divisive nature of treating everyone who disagrees with you as stupid is not a useful trait in a society. Unfortunately it does not seem that this has gotten any better, and is getting worse.


Another concern is the trend these days for some people to devalue science and to favor their own personal feelings.

Ron
"It is error only, and not truth, that shrinks from inquiry." Thomas Paine
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20613 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
Quote:
On Jun 15, 2018, NYCTwister wrote:

Btw, should they question their parents? Their teachers? Their CLERGY???


Yes. Yes. And definitely yes.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20613 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
Quote:
On Jun 14, 2018, Cliffg37 wrote:
Is science self-correcting?

Just so we are all clear on this, when a scientist publishes a paper, and let's say he really did the work and really got the result, the journal will check out both the scientist and the work before agreeing to publish. There will be a peer review and maybe more than that. Newspapers, magazines, and journals hire people called "fact checkers" to do just that.

There are journals that are neither peer-reviewed nor "fact-checked." Some are scam journals and some may be trying to give the little guy a "first paper" boost. But these journals do not give a scientist credibility in the publishing world.

Two years ago I presented a paper at the conference of The American Association of Physics Teachers. My topic was "Challenges of teaching High School Physics in the Inner City." This presentation was not an experiment, nor was it researched. Rather it was experiential; autobiographical if you will.

I have been requested three or four times now to publish my work in a journal that is NOT of high reputation. (No fact checkers, willing to publish anyone or anything) I will not do it. My presentation has no business being there and any legitimate Physicist would know that from the start. If I did research (I could if I wanted to) and published a real paper that would be different.

So, is science self-correcting? Largely the answer is yes, but not always, and it does as previously stated, take time.


See some just want to blindly pretend science is just having all answers needed at any given time.

Politics had invaded science probably even before "Silent Spring". Politicians have ruined the faith people have in science and the global warming debate is the result. The exaggerations and doomday prophet crowd have just blurred the line. Then the equivalent of that on the other side don't help.

Science has too many in the debate with an opinion and an agenda. They are a referee with a favorite team they have been caught betting on and making questionable calls for. Now nobody trusts them except for that team. Is that so shocking? The impartial nature is what many question and in most cases who can blame them?
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
karnak
View Profile
Special user
Connecticut
640 Posts

Profile of karnak
Quote:
Another concern is the trend these days for some people to devalue science and to favor their own personal feelings.


Which reminds me of this well-known quote by Isaac Asimov (from his article "A Cult of Ignorance" published in a 1980 issue of Newsweek magazine):

"There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge'."
For a supernatural chiller mixing magic (prestidigitation, legerdemain) with Magic (occultism, mysticism), check out my novel MAGIC: AN OCCULT THRILLER at http://www.amazon.com/Magic-Occult-Thriller-Reed-Hall/dp/1453874836
balducci
View Profile
Loyal user
Canada
230 Posts

Profile of balducci
Quote:
On Jun 14, 2018, Dannydoyle wrote:
Well this guy being a psychologist in no way mitigates the other problems.

I'm not saying that scientists cannot / do not commit fraud, I'm just saying that this particular example does not involve a 'scientist' but rather a psychologist. Psychology is rife with fraud, (IMO) way beyond what goes on in science.
Make America Great Again! - Trump in 2020 ... "We're a capitalistic society. I go into business, I don't make it, I go bankrupt. They're not going to bail me out. I've been on welfare and food stamps. Did anyone help me? No." - Craig T. Nelson, actor.
Jonathan Townsend
View Profile
Eternal Order
Ossining, NY
27157 Posts

Profile of Jonathan Townsend
...to all the coins I've dropped here
landmark
View Profile
Inner circle
within a triangle
5024 Posts

Profile of landmark
I was gifted this book as a young boy:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fads_and_F......_Science
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Scientists behaving badly (0 Likes)
 Go to page 1~2 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2021 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.21 seconds requiring 5 database queries.
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café
are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic.
> Privacy Statement <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL