Science Errors & Conflicts
The Crisis of Big Science by Steven Weinberg Last year physicists commemorated the centennial of the discovery of the atomic nucleus. In experiments carried out in Ernest Rutherford’s laboratory at Manchester in 1911, a beam of electrically charged particles from the radioactive decay of radium was directed at a thin gold foil. It was generally believed at the time that the mass of an atom was spread out evenly, like a pudding.
Is 'Big Science' In Trouble? : 13.7: Cosmos And Culture hide captionA 2007 artist's conception of the James Webb Space Telescope in operation. A 2007 artist's conception of the James Webb Space Telescope in operation. Science is expensive, but the payoffs more than justify the costs.
A Result Of Zero Doesn't Always Mean Zero Results Forlorn graduate students sometimes turn to a publication called The Journal of Negative Results.* In graduate student mythology, it’s the repository for toiled-over experiments that produced nothing — no effects, no detections, no differences, nothing. (*This actually does exist for specific disciplines. But it’s not really the salvation most grad students wish for.) But: a) that’s how science works, and b) negative results can still pack a punch. Last week, two astrophysical negative results appeared in high-profile journals.In Nature, the IceCube collaboration (including then-graduate student Nathan Whitehorn) describes missing neutrinos — a paucity of particles that’s problematic for theorists suggesting that gamma-ray bursts generate ultra-high-energy cosmic rays. Then, in the Astrophysical Journal, a team of astronomers in Chile concludes that dark matter doesn’t live within 13,000 light-years from Earth.
Science thrives on freedom of expression and must be at the forefront of defending it THE words "science" and "censorship" do not sit easily together. And yet over the past decade, science has come to occupy an increasingly important role in debates over free speech. This is partly due to public clashes between science and politics, from the censoring of climate science in the US under the Bush administration to David Nutt's dismissal as the UK government's adviser on drugs after voicing his views on the safety of ecstasy. Leaks, hacks and science - science-in-society - 06 December 2011
Illustration by Robert Neubecker. For a few hours last week, I'd planned to write a column about the "five-second rule." Scientists at Manchester Metropolitan University in England had released a study showing that some foods (ham, cookies) were safer to eat than others (dried fruit, pasta) after being left on the floor to collect germs. The Huffington Post picked up the story, as did Gizmodo and Good Morning America and the TODAY Show. Science in the Telegraph and the Daily Mail: What’s wrong with British journalism?
Read full article Continue reading page |1|2 For a few hours last week, I had planned to write a column about the "five-second rule." Scientists at Manchester Metropolitan University in England had released a study showing that some foods (ham, cookies) were safer to eat than others (dried fruit, pasta) after being left on the floor to collect germs. Dodgy tales of 'research' swirling the globe - opinion - 31 May 2012
Science Denial In The 21st Century Web edition : Tuesday, April 24th, 2012 Text Size MADISON, Wis. — The arc of science has faced roadblocks for centuries, but the pattern of denying the weight of evidence has taken on new virulence recently. Highly motivated people openly cast doubt on well-established evidence — the theory of evolution, the human effects on climate change, the value of vaccines and other findings that have achieved an overwhelming consensus in the scientific community. Researchers and science writers tasked with reporting on these issues gathered April 23–24 at the University of Wisconsin at a meeting titled “Science Writing in the Age of Denial.” Some noted that seemingly spontaneous denial of science in the populace is quite often a carefully choreographed attack.
A December 18 Washington Post poll, released on the final day of the ill-fated Copenhagen climate summit, reported “four in ten Americans now saying that they place little or no trust in what scientists have to say about the environment.” Nor is the poll an outlier. Several recent polls have found “climate change” skepticism rising faster than sea levels on Planet Algore (not to be confused with Planet Earth, where sea levels remain relatively stable). When to Doubt a Scientific ‘Consensus’
All else being equal, if you pay for something bad, you will get more of it. If you punish something good, you will get less of it. These basic rules of economics apply as much to junk science and scientific integrity as they do to junk food and political candor. Science and the scientific method are the jewels in the crown of Western civilization. The Financially Driven Erosion of Scientific Integrity
A few days ago, news reports claimed that 16 per cent of cancers around the world were caused by infections. This isn’t an especially new or controversial statement, as there’s clear evidence that some viruses, bacteria and parasites can cause cancer (think HPV, which we now have a vaccine against). It’s not inaccurate either. The paper that triggered the reports did indeed conclude that “of the 12.7 million new cancer cases that occurred in 2008, the population attributable fraction (PAF) for infectious agents was 16·1%”. What does it mean to say that something causes 16% of cancers? | Not Exactly Rocket Science
Climate deniers are accused of practicing pseudoscience, as are intelligent design creationists, astrologers, UFOlogists, parapsychologists, practitioners of alternative medicine, and often anyone who strays far from the scientific mainstream. The boundary problem between science and pseudoscience, in fact, is notoriously fraught with definitional disagreements because the categories are too broad and fuzzy on the edges, and the term “pseudoscience” is subject to adjectival abuse against any claim one happens to dislike for any reason. In his 2010 book Nonsense on Stilts (University of Chicago Press), philosopher of science Massimo Pigliucci concedes that there is “no litmus test,” because “the boundaries separating science, nonscience, and pseudoscience are much fuzzier and more permeable than Popper (or, for that matter, most scientists) would have us believe.” What Is Pseudoscience?
The Allure of Gay Cavemen | The Primate Diaries Third genders, two spirits, and a media without a clue. Author’s Note: Earlier this month the UK Daily Mail reported on continued excavation at an archaeological site near Prague where researchers described an individual with an alternative gender identity. The following post originally appeared at Neuron Culture hosted by Wired after the original report last year. "Cave Painting" by Nathaniel Gold In 1993 the reputable German weekly Der Spiegel printed a rumor that Otzi, the 5,300-year-old frozen mummy discovered in the Otztal Alps two years earlier, contained evidence of the world’s earliest known homosexual act. “In Otzi’s Hintern,” wrote the editors, referring to the Iceman’s hinterland, “Spermien gefunden worden.”
Geology will survive creationist undermining - opinion - 11 October 2011 Creationist infiltration of scientific conferences seems outrageous, but banning them would do more harm than good WHAT should a scientific society do when creationists want to participate in its conferences? This question faces many scientific organisations in the US. At meetings of the Geological Society of America (GSA) in 2009 and 2010, young-Earth creationists, who think Noah's flood was a historical event and the Earth is less than 10,000 years old, presented posters, gave talks and led field trips. I attended a number of these events, and I can attest that the creationists were careful to give mainstream presentations using standard geologic methods. They referred to the geologic timeline of millions and billions of years.
There’s scientific knowledge. There are the dedicated scientists who make it, whether laboring in laboratories or in the fields, fretting over data analysis, refereeing each other’s manuscripts or second-guessing themselves. And, well, there are some crackpots. I’m not talking dancing-on-the-edge-of-the-paradigm folks, nor cheaters who seem to be on a quest for fame or profit. I mean the guy who has the wild idea for revolutionizing field X that actually is completely disconnected from reality. Is how to engage with the crackpot at the scientific meeting an ethical question? | Doing Good Science
"Cargo Cult Science" - by Richard Feynman Richard Feynman From a Caltech commencement address given in 1974 Also in Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman! During the Middle Ages there were all kinds of crazy ideas, such as that a piece of of rhinoceros horn would increase potency. Then a method was discovered for separating the ideas--which was to try one to see if it worked, and if it didn't work, to eliminate it. This method became organized, of course, into science.
'Chemical-free' nonsense - latimes.com
Age of oldest rocks off by millions of years - space - 29 March 2012
In cancer science, many discoveries don't hold up
As Dutch Research Scandal Unfolds, Social Psychologists Question Themselves - Research
Red-Wine Researcher Implicated in Data Misconduct Case
Web freedoms fuel 'academic spring' journal protest - science-in-society - 13 February 2012
Many authors of psychiatry bible have industry ties - health - 13 March 2012
'Gay cure' psychiatrist apologises for flawed study - health - 22 May 2012
Leaders of controversial neutrino experiment step down - physics-math - 30 March 2012
Neuroscience Coverage: Media Distorts, Bloggers Rule
Spurious Positive Mapping of the Brain?
Gary Taubes — Author of Why We Get Fat and Good Calories, Bad Calories
Paranormal Circumstances: One Influential Scientist's Quixotic Mission to Prove ESP Exists | Mind & Brain
TED: Even More Elitist Than We Thought | Economy
Great news! Governments agree to abolish death! | Chris Snowdon
Don’t mention income inequality please, we’re entrepreneurs
Philip Kitcher: The Trouble With Scientism
What Thomas Kuhn Really Thought about Scientific “Truth” | Cross-Check
Trials and Errors: Why Science Is Failing Us | Magazine
Gould's skulls: Is bias inevitable in science? - life - 25 July 2011
Beware the Fausts of Neuroscience
The Right Way to Get It Wrong
Fritz Haber's Experiments in Life and Death | Past Imperfect
"The Nobel Prize and Einstein's Ghost" by Anders Barany
‘Open Science’ Challenges Journal Tradition With Web Collaboration
Secret Computer Code Threatens Science
Why full disclosure is healthy - health - 14 February 2012
Science publishing: The trouble with retractions : Nature News
A few simple checks would transform science reporting - opinion - 09 December 2011
The publication imperative - 24 April 2012
"Publish or Perish" by Iain Chalmers