“Why Most Published Research Findings Are False”

[Skipper Kenny]

Originally Posted by newhaul

here is my quote from tesla on that subject.

I like it.

I believe that evolution and creation could be congruent, however I don't believe any group will not try to co-opt it for their own benefit.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by Skipper Kenny

The error in measurement is logarithmic magnitudes greater than this veritable period of the not so distant past, and further.

https://www.livescience.com/40311-pl...ene-epoch.html

technically we are still in an ice age just a relatively warm interglacial period.
( there is still lots of ice on the planet )
I know wiki but it is correct here and understandable for those without a PhD in climatology.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interglacial

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by Skipper Kenny

I like it.

I believe that evolution and creation could be congruent, however I don't believe any group will not try to co-opt it for their own benefit.

and personal financial gain.

[senormechanico]

It's Thomas Sowell.


https://www.tsowell.com/


A brilliant mind for sure.

[Skipper Kenny]

Yes, exactly

[AndyEss]

Originally Posted by Skipper Kenny

The error in measurement is logarithmic magnitudes greater than this veritable period of the not so distant past, and further.

https://www.livescience.com/40311-pl...ene-epoch.html

Logarithmic magnitudes?
Sorry, I don't speak Gibberish - no comprende.

[Allied39]

In depth studies have shown that if you begin a sentence with the words " in depth studies have shown" you are more likely to be believed.

[SailOar]

Why Paul Ehrlich's 1968 best seller, The Population Bomb, got it wrong, but also why Ehrlich's nemesis, economist Julian Simon, also got it wrong, yet both were right.

The Peculiar Blindness of Experts: Why It's So Hard To Predict The Future

[kmartind]

This topic is interesting. I love the opinion bombs we are getting in here. Especially the ones who try to drive a political narrative about something they BELIEVE. I.E. the right believes something and that's what makes it hard to go green (paraphrasing of course).


My two cents is this;


Most research probably is "false" and that's part of why research is done. The goal of course is not to be wrong rather to prove, test or challenge hypotheses. Healthy skepticism is part of science. "Scientists/researchers" do feel pressure to produce results and even more to produce results that lead to more research $$$$. We see this a lot in colleges/universities. This pressure inevitably leads to some questionable results. This whole conversation is really what attracts me to science. The issue of bias results only being for those of industries like coal, tobacco... is not true (that is an opinion). Though when I see research that was funded by a major industry I am naturally more skeptical.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by kmartind

My two cents is this;

Most research probably is "false" and that's part of why research is done. The goal of course is not to be wrong rather to prove, test or challenge hypotheses. Healthy skepticism is part of science. "Scientists/researchers" do feel pressure to produce results and even more to produce results that lead to more research $$$$.

When non-scientists feel safe generalizing about how "science" works and the motivations of those actually doing it, alarm bells should go off.

Attacking the practitioners and institutions of science most often happens when there's a finding that one can't counter rationally (ie with better science).

I'm all for healthy skepticism; it is essential to the scientific method. But it must be intelligent skepticism that is based on all the evidence, not something based on over-emphasis on a few scientific outliers or ginned up fables about corruption or bias in science.

[kmartind]

The difference between a scientist and an engineer is knowing when something is good enough. I proudly proclaim I am not a scientist! I am an engineer. I once thought doing research was the course for me but after my masters I found it be a job I was not interested in pursuing. My proclamations are from personal antidotes, having a professor from one of Americas larges research universities explain how to defend a thesis regardless of findings taught me a lot. Sure, it's a singular data point but my opinion is now what it is based off of this. I could write a whole paper on my experience with him and how he locked up 4 million in research money from NOAA on what he knew was questionable results from research he was leading.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by kmartind

The difference between a scientist and an engineer is knowing when something is good enough. I proudly proclaim I am not a scientist! I am an engineer. I once thought doing research was the course for me but after my masters I found it be a job I was not interested in pursuing. My proclamations are from personal antidotes, having a professor from one of Americas larges research universities explain how to defend a thesis regardless of findings taught me a lot. Sure, it's a singular data point but my opinion is now what it is based off of this. I could write a whole paper on my experience with him and how he locked up 4 million in research money from NOAA on what he knew was questionable results from research he was leading.

this imo explains that quite well

[Singularity]

To paraphrase Sinclair, and I'm certain countless people have said this (particularly Freud and friends), but it's difficult to get a person to understand something when his/her interpretation of reality depends on his not understanding it...a situation ripe for exploitation.

There's no getting around the fact that that much "scientific research" is smooth-talkers with credentials telling you that you have a problem so that you'll hang around and pay their salary to hear about the solution. It's just how they put food on the table. This practice goes back to antiquity, but people tend to believe that they live in the most enlightened period in history. As Randall Jarrell [correctly] opined on the Enlightenment "Most of us know, now, that Rousseau was wrong: that man, when you knock his chains off, sets up the death camps. Soon we shall know everything the 18th century didn't know, and nothing it did, and it will be hard to live with us."

It's quite problematic when the credentialed smooth-talkers cultivate legions of uncredentialed cling-on lackeys who themselves go into the community promoting the smooth-talker agenda with existential zeal (Jarrell's point with the Nazi camps, really no different than other social-political~scientific movements). In another thread yesterday it was noted by many responders that when you make plans the universe laughs at you. The smooth-talkers/lackeys don't get this, but everyone suffers for their presence.

On engineering vs science, a snip from a Burt Rutan below:

[LakeSuperior]

I can remember the avalanche of press conferences held in 1989/1990 by the many laboratories to announce they too had reproduced the cold fusion results of Pons and Fleischmann (GRTI, Standford, etc.)

Way too much funding at stake to be standing on the outside looking in.

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by Singularity

To paraphrase Sinclair, and I'm certain countless people have said this (particularly Freud and friends), but it's difficult to get a person to understand something when his/her interpretation of reality depends on his not understanding it...a situation ripe for exploitation.

Indeed!
➥ https://www.beforetheflood.com/explo...imate-deniers/


Not to mention: Wei-Hock Soon, William Happer, Frank Clemente, et al.

The EPA is run by a former coal lobbyist. An ex-oil lobbyist heads the Department of Interior. Betsy DeVos, funder and champion of private religious schools, runs education policy. Steven Mnuchin and Wilbur Ross, billionaires who profited handsomely from the 2008 collapse, are in charge of protecting the economy. And at the Department of Justice, a top official who recommended that the federal government put more immigrants in privately-run detention centers, hopped over to a job at the GEO Group, which pays immigrants $1 for a day of labor but can’t seem to find a way to prevent detainees from dying.

No wonder the United States has plummeted in the corruption ranking maintained by Transparency International. (The Corruption Perceptions Index 2018 finds the U.S. in 22nd place, with a score of 71, right behind France and ahead of the United Arab Emirates. In 2017, the U.S. was ranked 16th.)
➥ https://www.transparency.org/news/fe...lysis-americas