One in Seven Scientists Say Colleagues Fake Data

Foxnews ^ | 6/5/2009 | Staff

[Red in Blue PA]

Faking scientific data and failing to report commercial conflicts of interest are far more prevalent than previously thought, a study suggests.

One in seven scientists says that they are aware of colleagues having seriously breached acceptable conduct by inventing results.

Around 46 percent say that they have observed fellow scientists engage in "questionable practices," such as presenting data selectively or changing the conclusions of a study in response to pressure from a funding source.

However, when scientists were asked about their own behavior, only 2 percent admitted to having faked results.

[RatRipper]

Global warming fakers probably head up the list.

[PBRSTREETGANG]

1 out of 7 scientists apparently knows a colleague involved in “Global Warming” research.

[xcamel]

Fake story..
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2264439/posts
;-)

[Tallguy]

In HS Chemistry we used to call it “fudging the data.” Don’t know where that term came from, or whether it is still used today.

[garyhope]

So, all his colleagues must be “Democrats” or Obammy voters lead by the chief liars, Gore, Kerry, Obammy, Reid, Murtha, Pelosi, et al....etc., etc., etc.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

Most scientific papers are probably wrong

[a fool in paradise]

43% of all statistics are made up.

[twigs]

My husband ditched many months work of research while getting his Ph.D. because he couldn’t reproduce his initial findings. His dissertation advisor told him his problem was that he checked over his data. He’s never completely trusted scientific testing since that day. His idealism was shattered. He’s still teaching, but he went to a teaching institution. He and his colleagues teach; they do little research.

[Scythian]

I would disagree, most proclamations made about space are total hogwash ...

[Scythian]

43% of all statistics are made up

Did you hear about the statistician who drowned in a river whose average was 1" deep?

[edcoil]

“they are aware of colleagues having seriously breached acceptable conduct by inventing results.”

Yet they never say anything ...

Serpico.

[Political Junkie Too]

Biologist denies tainting survey

Lynx-fur furor focuses on science role

[LYNX HOAX] Wilderness Institute Calls Federal Action Against Scientific Fraud By ESA Officials

-PJ

[HiTech RedNeck]

How common is it for scientists to be viewed through the lens of sociology? The present article would be an example. They will of course tell you that they do “rigorous peer reviews” but how much of that is winking at fudge according to a careful ceremony? (Again this is a sociological question.)

I have more respect for applied technologists and engineers because they know that whatever goes out the door has to actually work as promised, not just look good on paper.

[Kirkwood]

I suspect that ignoring data is common, while the actual faking of data is rare. It is easy to just ignore data that don't fit your hypothesis by making up some excuse to throw it out. Making data up out of thin air is more difficult because there are always competing labs out to prove you wrong. They would shoot down your results in short order. Also there are usually 1 or 2 disgruntled people working in every lab who would love to turn in the boss for faking results.

[w1andsodidwe]

I always throw out an absolutely true statistic. 50% of the girls in my grade school class have been diagnosed with breast cancer.

Of course, there were only two girls in the class. Much too small of a sample size to extrapolate anything, but it is true nevertheless.

[aMorePerfectUnion]

This couldn’t possibly be true!
Good Freepers have TOLD me scientists
have nothing to gain from this sort
of, um, human behavior. That studies
were peer reviewed so that fakery was
impossible.

I’m shocked!

[w1andsodidwe]

I suspect that ignoring data is common, while the actual faking of data is rare.

Not so with the Global Warmist Hanson of NASA. Last November he announced that we had just experienced the warmest October on record. A couple of astute internet observers pointed out that they had used the same temperature data for Siberian in October that they did in September. When caught, Hanson said he just didn't have time to check data. But he had time to go to the press a trumpet erroneous data. When you considered that October has one more day the September it makes it even less likely that he would do this as a accident.

[Vendome]

One in Seven Scientists Say Colleagues Fake Data but, That may be Just a Guess.

[Lorianne]

One in seven is not a consensus of scientists ... so it can’t possibly be true.