Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Slashdot Deals: Prep for the CompTIA A+ certification exam. Save 95% on the CompTIA IT Certification Bundle ×

Comment Re:Germany does have a unique history (Score 0) 717

"We aren't going to pretend this didn't happen." Except that is exactly what they did. You cannot even learn about the Nazis in Germany, as they ban all content the mentions them. America and the rest of the world gets Nazi and holocaust documentaries and novels, German citizens don't.

Comment Re:why that is (Score 1) 255

"However, science is self-correcting." Except this statement is completely unfounded by evidence. This study, and others like it, show that this science starts out incorrect, and continues to be incorrect. And at no point in time does it magically get self-corrected.

"The scientific process is not perfect but it's the best solution we currently have to removing the people problem." The scientific process is the only method we use. And there are many alternatives that no one in modernity has seriously measured against science to see if they are perhaps better. People say that science is the absolute best possible solution we are ever going to get, but no one has ever bothered to back that up with evidence. While the evidence we do have implies that flipping a coin instead of using double blind trials might actually yield better results!!!

I will title it the "Random Luck Method" and will revolutionist the field of Cancer research by reducing the cost of research to basically zero (flip a coin, heads the hypothesis is true, tails it is false) while increasing the reproducible (and objective truthiness of the results) by up to 40% more than science is giving the field. (Some studies have found reproducibillity as low as 10%)

Comment Re:Which is why (Score 1) 255

Except that these projects have not made any signification effect on psychology. It took a sampling of the results and found most of them were shit, what it did not do go through the entire field and filter out all the bad studies. Most psychology papers are still non-reproducible, and the ones currently being written will still be 50% wrong. This is just a status update telling us how the entire field has failed and is continuing to fail. There is no way to interpret this as Science behaving as it should. When science proves a results, you expect the result to have 95% certainty, not less that 50%. And Science is suppose to be self correcting, bus like I said becaue this is just a status update and have corrected nothing, this is just evidence that science is not self-correcting.

Comment Re:why that is (Score 1) 255

But if science can be corrupted, how is it safe? Say you are transported a thousand years into the future. You no longer know the people and establishments doing science. Do you trust the scientific facts and results, or not? If you need to respect, trust, and know the scientists conducting the research to trust the results, that means that scientific findings are irrelevant. Are just as useless as someones hunch or theory. Science is setup specifically so that the science stands on its own, so that if we find out years latter that Einstein was an adulterer it does not invalidate half of science. But these results specifically mean the exact opposite. Scientific results really do depend completely on the integrity of the one making them, important pillars of scientific research that many more studies are based on can and are easily disproved. Proven research is proven to be incorrect. So no, I disagree, Science itself it broken.

Comment Science has disproved itself (Score 1) 255

Science has disproved itself. It is not even internally consistent. Actual hard sciences get the same results. If you have no reason to trust the a result returned from science is more likely to be true that 50-50, then the entire system is just worthless. I think we need to rethink the whole process.

Comment Re:Not a slew. Not even statistically significant. (Score 1) 186

I don't think this article implies that 64 is the total number of articles that used this method of feud. Just that a single publisher spent tiny amount of effort and found 64 articles. What is this publisher 1% of the industry? .00001%? It does not say. It states 10 journals, what does a single journal publish per year? I imagine these 64 are out of a pool in the thousands, possible a little less or a little more. But we have no reason to assume that they caught any big percentage of the fraudsters.

Comment Consequences? (Score 2) 186

So now what? We always hear of fraud, bad practices, and papers disproved/invalidated. But what happens then? Are hundreds/thousands of scientist fired and rendered un-hire-able every single year? Or do things like this not have repercussions? When a peer review journal has absolute proof of fraud is there any chance the scientists will lose their job? Will be ostracized and forever more be ineligible for grants and no community college would touch him? Or does he continue working and researching? What about lesser offences, what if it just turns out that your ground breaking research that got you a job turns out to be false. It is not proof of fraud, but it invalidates your results at the very least.

Comment How??????? (Score 1) 122

5,000 people is more people then you could even know by name. That is probably more scientists than are in your entire field of study. You could not have even of has small conversations with all of these people during the course of the research project. That is just too many people for it to ever make sense for most of them to have had an impact on the paper. If I were to credit every single historic scientists who enabled me to finally conduct my research it probably would not even equal 5K people.

Comment Re:What happened to Common Sense? (Score 1) 363

In my opinion, every individual bears the brunt of responsibility for themselves. It does not matter if we are talking about crimes, acts of god, or accidents. Crime happens, it is a statistical fact. If it was not the person who did it, it would of been someone else. It is not the fault of a individual criminal that crime exists or the fault of a single bad driver that if you are not being extremely vigilant and are ready for fast action while anywhere near a road you might get killed. Look at it this way. We have a car collide with a pedestrian crossing the road. If we had the ability to go back in time to educate a single individual, for the purpose of saving that single pedestrian, how best to use this power? We could teach the motorist to be a better driver, but there is nothing particularly out of the ordinary about this driver, they are probably not any worse than a significant percentage of other drivers, so we have not increased the victims changes of survival much. Alternatively, if we went back and taught the victim to be vigilant while crossing the road, we would have greatly increased their chances of surviving traffic. You bear the ultimate responsibility over your own life. No one else. It is not that fault of the lightning that strikes just because you are the victim of that strike, it is not the fault of the home robber, he just did what home robbers do, pick the easiest house to rob. If he did not exist another robber would of made that same assessment. Yes, criminals are also responsible, they are responsible for their actions and for the harm they cause, but if you want to prevent crime from happening you blame the victim, because it is they who had the power to prevent it, and failed to do so.

"The identical is equal to itself, since it is different." -- Franco Spisani

Working...