CCD Editor: Though the three disgraced researchers weren’t in the climate science community, the theme remains the same: sloppy methods, poor ethics, lack of data disclosure, and an unwillingness to have their results challenged. From AFP:
Three prominent US scientists have been pushed to resign over the past 10 days after damning revelations about their methods, a sign of greater vigilance and decreasing tolerance for misconduct within the research community.
The most spectacular fall concerned Jose Baselga, the chief medical officer at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York. He authored hundreds of articles on cancer research.
Investigative journalism group ProPublica and The New York Times revealed on September 8 that Baselga failed to disclose in dozens of research articles that he had received millions of dollars from pharmaceutical and medical companies.
Such declarations are generally required by scientific journals.
Links between a doctor leading a clinical trial and manufacturers of drugs or medical equipment used in the study can influence the methodology and ultimately the results.
But journals don’t themselves verify the thoroughness of an author’s declarations.
Caught up in the scandal, Baselga resigned on September 13.
Next came the case of Brian Wansink, director of the Food and Brand Lab at the prestigious Cornell University.
He made his name thanks to studies that garnered plenty of media attention, including on pizza, and the appetites of children.
His troubles began last year when scientific sleuths discovered anomalies and surprisingly positive results in dozens of his articles.
…snip…
In the final case, Gilbert Welch, a professor of public health at Dartmouth College, resigned last week.
The university accused him of plagiarism in an article published in The New England Journal of Medicine, the most respected American medical journal.
…snip…
Oransky told AFP that what has emerged so far is only the tip of the iceberg.
The problem, he said, is that scientists, and supporters of science, have often been unwilling to raise such controversies “because they’re afraid that talking about them will decrease trust in science and that it will aid and abet anti-science forces.”
But silence only encourages bad behavior, he argued. According to Oransky, more transparency will in fact only help the public to better comprehend the scientific process.
Read more at AFP
The Greens blame everything on Trump Climate Change and Americans who wont go totaly green use solar power go vegan or ride bicycles and use plastic soda straws because Greens Are Waco and loco
Very often
What was science is now
Institutionalized ignorance.
This is what can happen when
Huge grants become available for
” Independent Research ”
Same thing as when a ” consulting ” physician
is contacted by a lawyer.
The doctor first asks which side the lawyer represents !
Same to with what has become
Result Oriented Research.
The grant money keeps flowing as long as the
” Right ” results keep issuing forth.
The only solution is to stop the
Research Grant Racket.
Any scientific field that has been infiltrated by the likes of the Goracle
is a criminal organization of exaggerating liars .
The scientific community needs to stick to principles of science rather than being used as a propaganda tool for self dealing con-men with zero scientific credentials .
The white coats are dropping to lot lizard status .
“help the public to better comprehend the scientific process”.
Disclaimer: I was born several months before Pearl Harbor.
In conversations with a number of youngsters over the past few years, I’m not sure that they are interested in ‘comprehending’ much of anything, if they can’t find it on their tablet / phone. There doesn’t seem to be much emphasis on science in schools these days. (Just how old? Mental arithmetic only, no calculators permitted.)
This article tells of one of the causes of poor science, “researchers” receiving money that influences their results. This was clearly happening as the EPA under Obama was funding research in order to justify its political agenda.
There are other cases where the “researcher” is seeking to further his own political agenda.
Another cause of bad science is the “publish or perish” policy of many universities. This is where professors are fired if they don’t publish research articles in the journals covering their field. My wife’s first husband lost his job as a professor for this reason. Fortunately he was able to find a job at a community college that didn’t have these requirements. The professors in the microbiology department that I was enrolled in sometimes published some articles that were sloppy science. They were motivated to do what was necessary to keep their jobs or advance in the department.