Re: [Utah-astronomy] Science editorial in the Chronicle
No, as compared with the way scientists sometimes act today. ------------------------------ On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 12:34 PM MDT erikhansen@thebluezone.net wrote:
“...science needs to show more integrity, more facts, and less
speculation.”
As compared to what? Religion? Intuition?
In my opinion, what seems to be the problem is too much public opinion about what constitutes science and what doesn’t. Most public have no clue. Kind of a thorny statement since I am included in the “public”. I‘ve worked in the public sector for decades. Most of us have. Their grasp of scientific issues is close to zero. It seems to be getting worse. I’ve told numerous students at the university level that, despite their leanings, stupidity is not a virtue. Never scored well on evaluations with those students. Wonder why?
To me, what seems disingenuous is the constant reporting that there is some “controversy” within the scientific community where none exists. The posturing is an attempt to sway public opinion about a particular scientific issue (climate change, for instance). However, most people have no clue as to what the scientific consensus is on any given scientific topic. They don’t realize that their opinion doesn’t matter, that their belief system doesn’t matter. All that matters (as far as science is concerned) is that you have a naturalistic theoretic construct that explains the data better than the currently accepted construct. If you don’t, you’d better get one if you want to be taken seriously by the scientific community. Despite appearances to the contrary, science is not public opinion.
It doesn’t matter where your funding comes from if the science is done properly. The scientific methodology will out those results that don’t pass muster. That’s why you hear about “tainted” studies. Sometimes the less-rigorous (and outright embarrassing) results slip through for a significant period of time. However, further scrutiny almost always reveals some flaw. Recall superluminal neutrinos?
I don’t know what the cure is for scientific hype. Unfortunately, it’s here to stay.
Dave
On Apr 11, 2013, at 8:56 AM, Don J. Colton <djcolton@piol.com> wrote:
science needs to show more integrity, more facts, and less speculation
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy
Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com
The Utah-Astronomy mailing list is not affiliated with any astronomy club.
To unsubscribe go to: http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Then enter your email address in the space provided and click on "Unsubscribe or edit options".
_______________________________________________ Utah-Astronomy mailing list http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy
Send messages to the list to Utah-Astronomy@mailman.xmission.com
The Utah-Astronomy mailing list is not affiliated with any astronomy club.
To unsubscribe go to: http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy Then enter your email address in the space provided and click on "Unsubscribe or edit options".
Joe, I'm just admiring your restraint. I had thought that you had handed Corey the tranquilizer dart gun, with instructions to shoot you if you made a move towards the computer. ;-) On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 1:20 PM, Joe Bauman <josephmbauman@yahoo.com> wrote:
No, as compared with the way scientists sometimes act today.
participants (2)
-
Chuck Hards -
Joe Bauman