Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 2,214 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 1,196,646
Pageviews Today: 1,523,273Threads Today: 261Posts Today: 5,711
11:59 AM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!

 
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 758858
United States
10/21/2009 07:08 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Science itself cannot be held responsible for its misuse. It remains a method not a dogma. Science simply provides us with a set of mental tools for analysing and verifying data and theories. It has proven itself immensely and uniquely successful.

I disagree . . .Science has an obligation to police its misuse. Otherwise I agree with your statement.


No it doesn't. Science is a METHOD. It is not a person or organization.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 799554

Science should have no ethics or morals clause?

[link to legacy.lclark.edu]

HONESTY IN SCIENCE
We live in a world where ethical dilemmas abound, and where people with good lawyers
can get away with, well, murder. Even scientists, a group of people once regarded as
beyond reproach, are being accused of data fabrication, plagiarism, and the like. This
appendix is intended to be a guide to navigating some of the ethical dilemmas you might
encounter in this course.
Data Fabrication
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 758858
United States
10/21/2009 07:12 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
"Scientific method refers to a body of techniques for investigating phenomena, acquiring new knowledge, or correcting and integrating previous knowledge. To be termed scientific, a method of inquiry must be based on gathering observable, empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning."

[link to en.wikipedia.org]
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 799554

The data must be collected as valid observations with honesty and integrity and without bias . . . or it is worthless!
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 758858
United States
10/21/2009 07:19 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Teilhard and Piltdown Man

Time July 28, 1980

[link to www.clarku.edu]

In 1912, near Piltdown, England, an amatuer fossil hunter named Charles Dawson "found" the first of two skulls with a human-like cranium and an apelilke jaw. The find was hailed as the missing link between man and ape; for years Piltdown man occupied a prominent place in paleontology. Finally in 1953 he was unmasked: the remains were nothing more than a fabrication of modern human and ape bone doctored to give them the look of antiquity.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 758858
United States
10/21/2009 07:24 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Hwang Woo-suk (Korean: 황우석, born 29 January 1953)[1] is a South Korean veterinarian researcher. He was a professor of theriogenology and biotechnology at Seoul National University (dismissed on March 20, 2006) who became infamous for fabricating a series of experiments, which appeared in high profile journals, in the field of stem cell research. Until November 2005, he was considered one of the pioneering experts in the field of stem cell research, best known for two articles published in the journal Science in 2004 and 2005 where he fraudulently reported to have succeeded in creating human embryonic stem cells by cloning. Both papers were later editorially retracted after they were found to contain a large amount of fabricated data. He has admitted to various charges of fraud.

[link to en.wikipedia.org]
Halcyon Dayz, FCD
Contrarian's Contrarian

User ID: 434868
Netherlands
10/21/2009 07:25 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Science should have no ethics or morals clause?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 758858

SCIENTISTS (and scientific organisations) should.

Science is a method, a tool. Methods don't have ethics.
A tool like a hammer. You can use it to drive in nails or to smash skulls.
If somebody smashes a skull with a hammer, HE DOESN'T GET TO BLAME THE HAMMER.
book
Hatred is a cancer upon the world.
It rots the mind and blackens the heart.


Hi! My name is Halcyon Dayz and I'm addicted to morans.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 758858
United States
10/21/2009 07:39 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Science should have no ethics or morals clause?
SCIENTISTS (and scientific organisations) should.

Science is a method, a tool. Methods don't have ethics.
A tool like a hammer. You can use it to drive in nails or to smash skulls.
If somebody smashes a skull with a hammer, HE DOESN'T GET TO BLAME THE HAMMER.
book
 Quoting: Halcyon Dayz, FCD

Correct! However, a soldier makes the moral decision for his gun and the SCIENTIST makes the moral decisions for SCIENCE through the honesty, neutrality and accuracy of his observations and methods. You cannot separate the SCIENCE from the SCIENTIST. One does not function without the other.
KeepingItReal

User ID: 553451
Canada
10/21/2009 07:46 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Science should have no ethics or morals clause?
SCIENTISTS (and scientific organisations) should.

Science is a method, a tool. Methods don't have ethics.
A tool like a hammer. You can use it to drive in nails or to smash skulls.
If somebody smashes a skull with a hammer, HE DOESN'T GET TO BLAME THE HAMMER.
book

Correct! However, a soldier makes the moral decision for his gun and the SCIENTIST makes the moral decisions for SCIENCE through the honesty, neutrality and accuracy of his observations and methods. You cannot separate the SCIENCE from the SCIENTIST. One does not function without the other.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 758858

You are forgetting who funds scientists in their research. The people with the cash are the ones that decide what gets funded, they have an agenda and they don't spend money to advance science. They invest so that they can justify their agenda using scientific research. They have the power to use the research any way they see fit, they even suppress it or twist the results if it is in their interest to do so because they have paid for it. This is a source of frustration for a lot of scientists, but research doesn't fund itself. You are fooling yourself if you don't thing every other profession and occupation is the same. In one way or another, we are all forced to go along with things we don't agree with, because we need to feed our families.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 758858
United States
10/21/2009 07:50 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
In the case of Dr Albert Steinschneider, two decades and tens of millions of research dollars were lost trying to find the elusive link between infant sleep apnea, that Steinschneider said he had observed and recorded in his laboratory and claimed was a precursor of sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS). The cover was blown in 1994, 22 years after Steinschneider's 1972 Pediatrics paper claiming such an association,[24] when Waneta Hoyt, the mother of the patients in the paper, was arrested, indicted and convicted on 5 counts of second degree manslaughter for the smothering deaths of her five children.[25] While that in itself was bad enough, the paper, presumably written as an attempt in trying to save infants' lives, ironically was ultimately used as a defense in cases where parents were suspected in multiple deaths of their own children in cases of Munchausen syndrome by proxy. The 1972 Pediatrics' paper was cited by 404 papers in the interim and is still listed on Pubmed without comment.[26]

[link to en.wikipedia.org]
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 758858
United States
10/21/2009 07:56 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Science should have no ethics or morals clause?


You are forgetting who funds scientists in their research. The people with the cash are the ones that decide what gets funded, they have an agenda and they don't spend money to advance science. They invest so that they can justify their agenda using scientific research. They have the power to use the research any way they see fit, they even suppress it or twist the results if it is in their interest to do so because they have paid for it. This is a source of frustration for a lot of scientists, but research doesn't fund itself. You are fooling yourself if you don't thing every other profession and occupation is the same. In one way or another, we are all forced to go along with things we don't agree with, because we need to feed our families.
 Quoting: KeepingItReal

I totally and completely agree with everything you said above. My point is: inappropriate influence can and does affect SCIENCE and SCIENTISTS. Unfortunately, this may occur more than we wish to admit.
KeepingItReal

User ID: 553451
Canada
10/21/2009 08:02 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Science should have no ethics or morals clause?


You are forgetting who funds scientists in their research. The people with the cash are the ones that decide what gets funded, they have an agenda and they don't spend money to advance science. They invest so that they can justify their agenda using scientific research. They have the power to use the research any way they see fit, they even suppress it or twist the results if it is in their interest to do so because they have paid for it. This is a source of frustration for a lot of scientists, but research doesn't fund itself. You are fooling yourself if you don't thing every other profession and occupation is the same. In one way or another, we are all forced to go along with things we don't agree with, because we need to feed our families.

I totally and completely agree with everything you said above. My point is: inappropriate influence can and does affect SCIENCE and SCIENTISTS. Unfortunately, this may occur more than we wish to admit.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 758858

Which is why it is important to teach science and critical thinking in our schools. In the measure that the people are educated and capable of thinking things through, the dangers of these kinds of excesses and misuse of technology and science are reduced. The same goes for people like Nancy Lieder and the chicken little gurus and cults. Education is the answer. As long as people are more concerned about Angelina Jolie and balloon boy than about important matters that actually do affect them, we leave ourselves wide open to abuse and dishonesty.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.
Circuit Breaker

User ID: 766491
United States
10/21/2009 08:04 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
A "fake" what??? I am a non-believing fence-sitter.
 Quoting: ***ZetaMax***

There's only one thing to say to that - BS! No, wait...I guess you are a non-believer...you don't believe anything the "debunkers" say. You do, however, believe everything Nancy says.
A voice of reason in a world of woo-woos.
Circuit Breaker

User ID: 766491
United States
10/21/2009 08:06 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Your "tactics" are quite TRANSPARENT you know!!

 Quoting: ***ZetaMax***

As are yours....
bunky
A voice of reason in a world of woo-woos.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 795430
United States
10/21/2009 08:21 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
A request for assistance from the astro-physical persuaded people on this thread from a terrestrial on-looker.

I would ask that someone shed some light on these questions for me by providing some knowledgable answers.
No trick questions ;o)

I'm trying to get a handle on the reasons why the planets are in their specific locations, or the general theory thereof.

We have gas giants, large planets, and small rocks in our solar system.

What factors are in play to place them where they are now?

Is the ecliptic plane and most planets relative adherence to it caused by a gravitational or magnetic force?

Hypothetically, if we were to change the size/mass of one planet (use Earth as an example), what effect could that have on its orbit and location (distance from Sun) in the solar system?

What effects could a larger planet Earth have on the other planets in this theoretical system?

Appreciate any responses.

Kindest Regards
J.William Dell
 Quoting: J.William Dell


[link to articles.adsabs.harvard.edu]

That's a start - although new information may have superseded it.

The Harvard repository is a good collection of scientific papers.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 758858
United States
10/21/2009 08:36 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Which is why it is important to teach science and critical thinking in our schools. In the measure that the people are educated and capable of thinking things through, the dangers of these kinds of excesses and misuse of technology and science are reduced. The same goes for people like Nancy Lieder and the chicken little gurus and cults. Education is the answer. As long as people are more concerned about Angelina Jolie and balloon boy than about important matters that actually do affect them, we leave ourselves wide open to abuse and dishonesty.
 Quoting: KeepingItReal

I could not agree more.
tater
User ID: 798265
United States
10/21/2009 09:20 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
A request for assistance from the astro-physical persuaded people on this thread from a terrestrial on-looker.

I would ask that someone shed some light on these questions for me by providing some knowledgable answers.
No trick questions ;o)

I'm trying to get a handle on the reasons why the planets are in their specific locations, or the general theory thereof.

We have gas giants, large planets, and small rocks in our solar system.

What factors are in play to place them where they are now?

Is the ecliptic plane and most planets relative adherence to it caused by a gravitational or magnetic force?

Hypothetically, if we were to change the size/mass of one planet (use Earth as an example), what effect could that have on its orbit and location (distance from Sun) in the solar system?

What effects could a larger planet Earth have on the other planets in this theoretical system?

Appreciate any responses.

Kindest Regards
J.William Dell
 Quoting: J.William Dell


Now that is some good questions.

The complexity of it all is mind boggling for sure.

I'm glad to see that everything in the solar system is stable, just like clock work. Nothing halted, every celestial motion is still in perfect sync in the celestial timing.

All the seasons still work, and the debris from Haley's comet is right where it should be this time of year.

The moon still rotates and orbits, just like always.

The only ones who see it whacked out is the zeta cult.

The frumpy channeler speaks and the cult follows with their noses close behind.

Nancy's zetas are con artists. Or maybe it's just the voices in Nancy's head that are messed up.

Either way the zetas fail.
Prof_Rabbit

User ID: 780906
Australia
10/21/2009 09:22 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Is the ecliptic plane and most planets relative adherence to it caused by a gravitational or magnetic force?

Kindest Regards
J.William Dell
 Quoting: J.William Dell


To understand the incredibly small magnetic field on a planetary scale you just need to gently shake a compass, it will take time for the needle to return to a steady N point.

Magnetic fields follow the inverse square law, the attraction or repulsion has less effect the further you are away from the source, if this were not so then the raging magnetic storms on the sun would affect compasses on earth.

This also refutes Nancy's claims about the "hosing of particles" from her mythological planet, such particles would be captured by the gravitational and magnetic forces of the sun, vis.



Earth "Mass: 6,600,000,000,000,000,000,000 (6.6 sextillion) short tons (6.0 sextillion metric tons).

"The Solar System is dominated by the Sun, which has a mass of about 2 × 10 to the 30th kg. This is about 343,000 times the mass of the Earth."
"Anger is a wind that blows out the lamp of your mind"
The Commentator

User ID: 587619
United States
10/21/2009 09:26 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Is the ecliptic plane and most planets relative adherence to it caused by a gravitational or magnetic force?

Hypothetically, if we were to change the size/mass of one p
 Quoting: J.William Dell



Neglected one of your better questions out of a good batch, sorry...

Gravitation explains the fact that the major bodies in the Solar System all lie in roughly the same plane. There is no need, and no evidence for a magnetic effect. Classical Newtonian mechanics is perfectly good to explain what we see so far as your question goes.

Sorry for the delay.
non sufficit Orbis

Being a zetatard means never having to make sense.

"Nancy pays me to post on Her threads"

Free Store admits to being a paid zetadrool shill

NO max/bridget EVER!!!!!
NO luser EVER!!!
NO clunker EVER!!!!!
Reality420
User ID: 791899
United States
10/21/2009 09:36 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Teilhard and Piltdown Man
Time July 28, 1980
[link to www.clarku.edu]
In 1912, near Piltdown, England, an amatuer fossil hunter named Charles Dawson "found" the first of two skulls with a human-like cranium and an apelilke jaw. The find was hailed as the missing link between man and ape; for years Piltdown man occupied a prominent place in paleontology. Finally in 1953 he was unmasked: the remains were nothing more than a fabrication of modern human and ape bone doctored to give them the look of antiquity.
***********************************
It was SCIENCE that unmasked the hoax perpetrated by a
pseudoscientist. Archeology was in it's infancy then and
easily fooled. That hoax couldn't have happened from 1950
onwards.
*********************************************
*********************************************
I totally and completely agree with everything you said above. My point is: inappropriate influence can and does affect SCIENCE and SCIENTISTS. Unfortunately, this may occur more than we wish to admit.
***********************************
More than inappropriate influence affects pseudoscientific
claims? I don't think so.
 Quoting: DrPostman


Ah, this explains his decidedly anti-science stance.
He's a Fortean and doesn't understand science.
He thinks science should be godlike and hates it when it is not.
For this he blames science and not his own failure of understanding.
This leads to the fuzzy thinking that all theories must be considered equal.
It's an argument from ignorance popular with crackpots, pseudoscientists, and Nu-Agers.

As the comedian aptly stated, 'Just because science doesn't know everything doesn't mean you can fill in the gaps with whatever fairytale happens to suit you.'

Fort:
[link to www.skepdic.com]

Have fun.


R.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 795135
United States
10/21/2009 09:47 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Is the ecliptic plane and most planets relative adherence to it caused by a gravitational or magnetic force?

Hypothetically, if we were to change the size/mass of one p



Neglected one of your better questions out of a good batch, sorry...

Gravitation explains the fact that the major bodies in the Solar System all lie in roughly the same plane. There is no need, and no evidence for a magnetic effect. Classical Newtonian mechanics is perfectly good to explain what we see so far as your question goes.

Sorry for the delay.
 Quoting: The Commentator


The planets being in a plane comes from the fact that the primordial dust and gas cloud that each system forms from condenses into a rotating disk due to centrepetal force with a star forming at its center. Many protodisks can be seen in various stages of planetary formation in most close nebulae.
Prof_Rabbit

User ID: 780906
Australia
10/21/2009 09:49 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
As the comedian aptly stated, 'Just because science doesn't know everything doesn't mean you can fill in the gaps with whatever fairytale happens to suit you.'
 Quoting: Reality420 791899


And as we know Nancy has fairytale concepts for just about everything.
"Anger is a wind that blows out the lamp of your mind"
Reality
User ID: 791899
United States
10/21/2009 09:55 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Hypothetically, if we were to change the size/mass of one planet (use Earth as an example), what effect could that have on its orbit and location (distance from Sun) in the solar system?
 Quoting: J.William Dell


Others have addressed the other questions.

In this case, considering it as only a 2-body problem, the effects would be negligible. The earth would retain essentially the same orbit.
Remember that guy Galileo and his Pisa experiment? The mass of an object does not affect its motion in a gravitational field (ignoring miniscule GR effects).
A feather and a hammer fall at the same acceleration in a vacuum.
If the earth were to suddenly become 10x more massive, its orbit would remain essentially unchanged - The Sun-Earth center of mass about which it orbits would change very slightly.



What effects could a larger planet Earth have on the other planets in this theoretical system?

Appreciate any responses.

Kindest Regards
J.William Dell
 Quoting: J.William Dell


It depends how massive the new earth became. If it were sufficiently massive to increase the perturbations from (and to) Venus, Mars and Jupiter it may acquire a new stable orbit; it may take on a chaotic orbit leading to ejection or collision with the Sun or one of the other planets; it may cause the entire system to go chaotic as it perturbs Venus, Mars and Jupiter from their orbits.

Unlike Nan's PX, it would still be very distant from the other planets so I would think it would have to get quite massive to cause chaos.

Have fun.


R.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 758858
United States
10/21/2009 09:58 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Teilhard and Piltdown Man
Time July 28, 1980
[link to www.clarku.edu]
In 1912, near Piltdown, England, an amatuer fossil hunter named Charles Dawson "found" the first of two skulls with a human-like cranium and an apelilke jaw. The find was hailed as the missing link between man and ape; for years Piltdown man occupied a prominent place in paleontology. Finally in 1953 he was unmasked: the remains were nothing more than a fabrication of modern human and ape bone doctored to give them the look of antiquity.
***********************************
It was SCIENCE that unmasked the hoax perpetrated by a
pseudoscientist. Archeology was in it's infancy then and
easily fooled. That hoax couldn't have happened from 1950
onwards.
*********************************************
*********************************************
I totally and completely agree with everything you said above. My point is: inappropriate influence can and does affect SCIENCE and SCIENTISTS. Unfortunately, this may occur more than we wish to admit.
***********************************
More than inappropriate influence affects pseudoscientific
claims? I don't think so.


Ah, this explains his decidedly anti-science stance.
He's a Fortean and doesn't understand science.
He thinks science should be godlike and hates it when it is not.
For this he blames science and not his own failure of understanding.
This leads to the fuzzy thinking that all theories must be considered equal.
It's an argument from ignorance popular with crackpots, pseudoscientists, and Nu-Agers.

As the comedian aptly stated, 'Just because science doesn't know everything doesn't mean you can fill in the gaps with whatever fairytale happens to suit you.'

Fort:
[link to www.skepdic.com]

Have fun.


R.
 Quoting: Reality420 791899

Hardly, however one must trust the SCIENTIST before one can trust the SCIENCE.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 758858
United States
10/21/2009 10:00 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
As the comedian aptly stated, 'Just because science doesn't know everything doesn't mean you can fill in the gaps with whatever fairytale happens to suit you.'


And as we know Nancy has fairytale concepts for just about everything.
 Quoting: Prof_Rabbit

I accept that as a true statement.
The Commentator

User ID: 587619
United States
10/21/2009 10:03 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Is the ecliptic plane and most planets relative adherence to it caused by a gravitational or magnetic force?

Hypothetically, if we were to change the size/mass of one p



Neglected one of your better questions out of a good batch, sorry...

Gravitation explains the fact that the major bodies in the Solar System all lie in roughly the same plane. There is no need, and no evidence for a magnetic effect. Classical Newtonian mechanics is perfectly good to explain what we see so far as your question goes.

Sorry for the delay.


The planets being in a plane comes from the fact that the primordial dust and gas cloud that each system forms from condenses into a rotating disk due to centrepetal force with a star forming at its center. Many protodisks can be seen in various stages of planetary formation in most close nebulae.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 795135



Indeed, which is why there is no reason to call on magnetic forces for an explanation.

Good points!
non sufficit Orbis

Being a zetatard means never having to make sense.

"Nancy pays me to post on Her threads"

Free Store admits to being a paid zetadrool shill

NO max/bridget EVER!!!!!
NO luser EVER!!!
NO clunker EVER!!!!!
Reality
User ID: 791899
United States
10/21/2009 10:22 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Hardly, however one must trust the SCIENTIST before one can trust the SCIENCE.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 758858


Wrong. You've got it backwards.

One must evaluate the science before one can trust the scientist.

If the science is built on fraud an deceit, you can rightfully throw that 'scientist' in the trash bin.

Every scientist is only as good as his current work.

You've a lot to learn.
Reality
User ID: 791899
United States
10/21/2009 10:29 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Hardly, however one must trust the SCIENTIST before one can trust the SCIENCE.
 Quoting: Reality 791899


In fact, your statement sets up that horror-of-horrors:
Argument from Authority.

You're viewpoint would exclude all those unknowns and unrecognised from having a chance since they have no track record with which to build trust.

Isn't that what crackpots are always railing against?

Well, science doesn't operate the way they think in their fantasy-land. If you're unknown it may be harder to have your work recognised, but no one will reject it sight unseen.
George B
Extinct But Not Forgotten!

User ID: 758858
United States
10/21/2009 10:35 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Hardly, however one must trust the SCIENTIST before one can trust the SCIENCE.


Wrong. You've got it backwards.

One must evaluate the science before one can trust the scientist.

If the science is built on fraud an deceit, you can rightfully throw that 'scientist' in the trash bin.

Every scientist is only as good as his current work.

You've a lot to learn.
 Quoting: Reality 791899


Wrong again and right again! The method can be correct but the Scientist can lie about the data. The data can be correct and the Scientist can cook the procedure. Chicken or the Egg? It goes both ways. Also, the Scientist can be honest in both but uses erroneous data to support a flawed theory.
Martin Luther King . . . Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter!

All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them.
Galileo Galilei, Italian astronomer & physicist (1564 - 1642)

coffee4

The only thing guaranteed in life is deception. . . everything else is optional, except for death and taxes . . . George B
George B
Extinct But Not Forgotten!

User ID: 758858
United States
10/21/2009 10:42 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Hardly, however one must trust the SCIENTIST before one can trust the SCIENCE.


In fact, your statement sets up that horror-of-horrors:
Argument from Authority.

You're viewpoint would exclude all those unknowns and unrecognised from having a chance since they have no track record with which to build trust.

Isn't that what crackpots are always railing against?

Well, science doesn't operate the way they think in their fantasy-land. If you're unknown it may be harder to have your work recognised, but no one will reject it sight unseen.
 Quoting: Reality 791899

Of course scientists without a track record are viewed with a certain amount of honest skepticism before they earn their wings. That is accepted.
Martin Luther King . . . Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter!

All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them.
Galileo Galilei, Italian astronomer & physicist (1564 - 1642)

coffee4

The only thing guaranteed in life is deception. . . everything else is optional, except for death and taxes . . . George B
Reality420
User ID: 791899
United States
10/21/2009 10:59 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Wrong again and right again! The method can be correct but the Scientist can lie about the data. The data can be correct and the Scientist can cook the procedure. Chicken or the Egg? It goes both ways. Also, the Scientist can be honest in both but uses erroneous data to support a flawed theory.
 Quoting: George B


All the above was addressed:

You ignore who the scientist is, you evaluate the science.

Fraud and mistakes can and will be made. Nobody but kooks think it is a perfect method.
With review and duplication fraud and mistakes will eventually be found out. It may take a while.
Focusing on the general possibility of fraud in science does not address whether a particular theory or scientist is fraudulent. The science addresses this.

What's the alternative? Faith?

Look George, I'm not trying to be harsh but you've a lot to learn. You were doing well, too.

If you wish to become a skeptic, and I think you could become a good one, you're going to have to be a bit more logical. Fortean nay-saying is not skepticism, it is ignorance. You're just going to have to accept that some ideas have more value than others. Some things are more true than others, sometimes overwhelmingly.
George B
Extinct But Not Forgotten!

User ID: 758858
United States
10/21/2009 11:23 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Wrong again and right again! The method can be correct but the Scientist can lie about the data. The data can be correct and the Scientist can cook the procedure. Chicken or the Egg? It goes both ways. Also, the Scientist can be honest in both but uses erroneous data to support a flawed theory.


All the above was addressed:

You ignore who the scientist is, you evaluate the science.

Fraud and mistakes can and will be made. Nobody but kooks think it is a perfect method.
With review and duplication fraud and mistakes will eventually be found out. It may take a while.
Focusing on the general possibility of fraud in science does not address whether a particular theory or scientist is fraudulent. The science addresses this.

What's the alternative? Faith?

Look George, I'm not trying to be harsh but you've a lot to learn. You were doing well, too.

If you wish to become a skeptic, and I think you could become a good one, you're going to have to be a bit more logical. Fortean nay-saying is not skepticism, it is ignorance. You're just going to have to accept that some ideas have more value than others. Some things are more true than others, sometimes overwhelmingly.
 Quoting: Reality420 791899

I am not condemning all Science and I am also a solid supporter of the scientific method’s contribution to science and human progress. Without the empirical observations of our world we would still be in the dark ages. The difference lies in the influence of money, fame, ego, etc. The corporate model of research has separated many theoretical searches for the truth to how do we get the money out of our investment. I am sorry if you feel I have gone over to the dark side . . . but science ethics are now I feel, taught as a necessity rather than a proper way to round out a good education.
I do not deny that given enough time and review a fraud will be discovered; however, much damage does and can result before discovery. Fraud of a major theory, of course, would be discovered much quicker because of the interest surrounding it.

In the case of Dr Albert Steinschneider, two decades and tens of millions of research dollars were lost trying to find the elusive link between infant sleep apnea, that Steinschneider said he had observed and recorded in his laboratory and claimed was a precursor of sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS). The cover was blown in 1994, 22 years after Steinschneider's 1972 Pediatrics paper claiming such an association,[24] when Waneta Hoyt, the mother of the patients in the paper, was arrested, indicted and convicted on 5 counts of second degree manslaughter for the smothering deaths of her five children.[25] While that in itself was bad enough, the paper, presumably written as an attempt in trying to save infants' lives, ironically was ultimately used as a defense in cases where parents were suspected in multiple deaths of their own children in cases of Munchausen syndrome by proxy. The 1972 Pediatrics' paper was cited by 404 papers in the interim and is still listed on Pubmed without comment.[26]

[link to en.wikipedia.org]

How many scientists fabricate and falsify research? [link to www.physorg.com]

May 29th, 2009
It's a long-standing and crucial question that, as yet, remains unanswered: just how common is scientific misconduct? In the online, open-access journal PLoS ONE, Daniele Fanelli of the University of Edinburgh reports the first meta-analysis of surveys questioning scientists about their misbehaviours. The results suggest that altering or making up data is more frequent than previously estimated and might be particularly high in medical research.


[link to www.physorg.com]

Lessons from Schon -- the worst physics fraudster?
May 5th, 2009
How did a 31-year-old physicist working at Bell Labs in New Jersey, US, get away with possibly the worst case of physics research fraud known? From claims to have made the world's first organic electrical laser to the fictional construction of the smallest ever transistor, the repercussions of Jan Hendrik Schön's fraud are still felt today, seven years after he was found guilty of scientific misconduct and fired by his employer.

[link to esciencenews.com]

Global science community affirms its responsibilities in science and its role in society
Published: Thursday, October 23, 2008 - 10:24 in Psychology & Sociology

ICSUMaputo, Mozambique—in the light of recent high profile cases of scientific misconduct, the General Assembly of the International Council for Science (ICSU) today reaffirmed the universal values that should guide the conduct of science. The Assembly also explicitly recognised the key social responsibilities of the scientific community as laid out in a new booklet, which will be made widely available to scientists across the world. The booklet asserts that: 'all scientists have a responsibility to ensure that they conduct their work with honesty and integrity; to ensure that methods and results are reported in an accurate, orderly, timely and open fashion.'

[link to esciencenews.com]

Scientists consider new ways to prevent and spot research misconduct In a series of studies designed to assess two anti-tissue-rejection drugs, former University of Alabama–Birmingham surgeons Judith Thomas and Juan Contreras carefully detailed experiments in which they replaced one kidney in rhesus monkeys with a foreign one and, a month later, removed the remaining native kidney. The new organs took, they reported. The drugs worked. But according to a July report from the federal Office of Research Integrity, that second kidney was never removed from at least 32 of the 70 animals. The scientists denied intentional wrongdoing, but the promising drug has been deemed bogus. The experiments also cost taxpayers: The National Institutes of Health poured $23 million into the work over eight years. A recent report suggests that scientific misconduct like this is not uncommon. Daniele Fanelli, an evolutionary biologist at the University of Edinburgh in Scotland,...

[link to www.scidev.net]

China issues another crackdown on scientific misconductGina Lin


30 March 2009 | EN | 中文


The notice also ordered universities to train teachers and students in academic conduct

ARS_ScottBauer
[BEIJING] China's Ministry of Education has stipulated seven acts of academic misconduct and how they will be punished in an attempt to combat scientific misconduct in the country.

But critics doubt they can solve the long-standing issue of fraud and misconduct in Chinese academia.

Last Edited by George B on 10/22/2009 12:34 AM
Martin Luther King . . . Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter!

All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them.
Galileo Galilei, Italian astronomer & physicist (1564 - 1642)

coffee4

The only thing guaranteed in life is deception. . . everything else is optional, except for death and taxes . . . George B

News