Replies

Why are you bashing conservatives who criticize scientific misconduct or unethical or politicized constructs couched in pseudo-science? Is criticism by conservatives of Global warming opportunistic? There have been many insightful exchanges of views and criticisms of science on FR over very many years.

I am a scientist. I hold a PhD from one of the top 3 university departments in the world in my subject matter which is one of most difficult hard science subjects. I have been involved in myriad studies, trials, experiments and publications. I’ve written millions upon millions of dollars worth of federal and private foundation grants.

I find the polemic of FR in passionate exchanges of science discourse to be refreshing and revealing. There are many scientists here on FR that come clean with their unobstructed views on misapplication and ill motive of scientific research, especially federally funded research.

I read the ‘solutions’ posed by this ‘crisis’. First, I am not persuaded that there is a crisis above that which has existed for previous decades since the explosion in federally funded research.

Here is the gist of the so-called solution proposals:

“The proposals and initiatives mentioned above draw attention to improving methodological protocols, and require a more thoughtful approach to statistical reporting practises.”

Statistical reporting practices or practises indeed. Aside from the fact that the misapplication of statistics is not at all a new issue or ‘crisis’, the suggestion of a more thoughtful approach to statistical methodology has been an issue in science for centuries. And the solution has nothing to do with shallow suggestions of mediocre bureaucracy, namely reproducilibity index reporting, regulation of funding bodies or ‘random audits’.

And I note this work product of phys.org appears from the ‘soft science’ of psychology which is a field largely of lazy discounted PhDs who are the biggest abusers of statistical methods because they don’t understand and mostly do not possess the capacity or scientific acumen to absorb the mathematical philosophy of statistics. They are no better that political poll con artists. How’s that for a bit of Freeper bashing?

Statistics is like a scalpel, the outcome or result is entirely dependent on the training and experience of the surgeon.

And here is the heart of any so-called ‘crisis’:

“We might broadly consider these to be issues of researcher integrity.”

Yes indeed, this is the crux of all scientific pursuit, political debate or legal justice, the search for truth.

“What is truth?” John 18:38

One cannot legislate an effective or impose an enduring system to regulate ***sound moral character*** in human beings which is vital for matters involving the search for truth. It must come from within.

It’s clear your comment targeting Freepers for ‘bashing science’ has no merit. If you were experienced in Freeper discourse over the decades, you would know that some of the finest legal, political and scientific minds write commentary on FR, and do so for free while donating to keep FR operating. You should respect this fact.