Scandal Rocks Scientific Community (Bell Labs)

How many papers in these journals have falsehoods in them that aren't yet discovered?

Just about any paper related to the "free energy field", as well as most of the "climate speculation presented as fact" would fit the bill.

There are lots of "Socrates moments" headed these folks way, now that the adults are again in charge of the helm.

The question being discussed is not whether the scientific community is perfect: it is you who chose the dichotomy "either perfect or be damned," and it is your unjust, unfair, over-reaching, and baseless condemnation that I wrote against.

You want to see unjust, unfair and over-reaching? You haven't seen anything yet. Ok, so let's rip into the scientific community at large. Where should I begin? How about the numbing, bureaucratic nature of the whole "grant game" from federal agencies. The varied and ongoing pharmaceutical fiascos at the DEA. Old lazy physicists on the dole at Lawrence Berkeley labs. Celera and HGSI (amongst others) owning patents on the human genome. The inability of NASA over the past 20 years to land a probe on its own butt. Richard Alpert. Making hi-def TV a national priority, and wondering why people still won't buy $1000 TV sets. Kary Mullis at the OJ trial. Dolly the cloned sheep. David Hilbert beating up Kurt Godel. Carl Sagan's novel. Stupid moebius strips. Launching the Hubble telescope with a warped lens. Tim Leary. Knee-jerk pedantic nitpicking at any criticism. I guess that's a good start... oh wait, hubris, narrow-mindedness and arrogance towards non-scientists. How about that?

YOu may have seen quite a bit, but your conceptualization of what you've seen is lagging behind your experience.

Ok, so let's rip into the scientific community at large. OK, let's.

How about the numbing, bureaucratic nature of the whole "grant game" from federal agencies. This is the management issue. It inly affects sciene but is not science at all. If you have a problem with that, it is a problem of government.

The varied and ongoing pharmaceutical fiascos at the DEA. Are you going to quote more of the failures of the government as an indication of the lack of ethics on the part of the scientists. Can you differentiate between the two?

Old lazy physicists on the dole at Lawrence Berkeley labs. Oh, my. Were you trying to date any of them and are upset with the rejection?

Celera and HGSI (amongst others) owning patents on the human genome. Again, the question of property rights, public policy -- anything but the ethics of the scientists.

The inability of NASA over the past 20 years to land a probe on its own butt. I see: this is also somehow a manifestation of the failure in the area of ethics. If only the scientists were going to chruch more often, they would surely have a drone orbiting Jupiter by now.

I think you have some unresolved issues that you yourself are facing, which you are trying to project onto others. I may be wrong in that conclusion, of course, buth nothing you have said was even relevant to the issue at hand.

This is the management issue. It only affects science but is not science at all. If you have a problem with that, it is a problem of government...

I think you have some unresolved issues that you yourself are facing, which you are trying to project onto others..

Oh, and I forgot! Unwarranted use of pop psychology: Telling critics that they have "unresolved issues", they are "projecting", and similar nonsense, instead of facing up to the criticism. What a cop-out.

Your claims along the line of "oh, it's a management issue, that isn't science" is patently useless. It is similar to religious defenders trying to put "The Church" and "Christianity" into two seperate boxes - when they are intimately intertwined.

Your defense of the scientific community amounts to "we aren't responsible for that". "It's the government's fault". "It's a management issue". Wake up! Prominent scientists fill all those posts. The government hires physicists to oversee LBL. The government hires doctors and pharmaceutical experts at the DEA. It's the scientists that beg the government for funding money in the first place.

So YES, the scientific community at large IS ultimately responsible.

I think they would get more respect if they actually took more responsiblity instead of complaining about "management" and "the government".

Stan Kubrick.

It is similar to religious defenders trying to put "The Church" and "Christianity" into two seperate boxes - when they are intimately intertwined

Yes, Christianity and the Church are intertwined, yet different entities; your parallel with what I said is valid.

I cannot argue with someone gor whom "intertwined" means "same:" take no offense, I simply do not know how to explain well what "is" is.

I have exposited the over-reaching character of the previous statement. You think that I fail, and I respect your view. I have nothing further to contribute, however.

Post your evidence that creationism or intelligent design are actual theories.

The strength of intelligent design is that it provides a non-contradictory or coherent explanation for the existence of information in biological systems and "irreducible complexity." IC refers to an entire biological system that would be inoperable if a single part was removed. Therefore it is theorized that the system could not come into existence gradually. Michael Behe provides some examples of irreducibly complex biological systems here.

As far as I'm concerned, the question of human origins is a wide-open question. Personally, I find the ID arguments more compelling than the evolutionary arguments. Regardless, the issue certainly isn't a slam dunk either way. That's why I believe that both sides should be able to present their cases in a wide open debate.

I am not saying that "intertwined" means "same". What I am saying is that defending "science" as an abstract entity is useless, because it doesn't get put into practice without a "scientific community" with all its human failings.

It is the community's responsibility to ensure that ethics, management, government oversight, etc. are all functioning well.

Thank you for playing "debate a famous director".

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.