Science as it is practiced today relies on a fair measure of trust. Part of the reason is that the culture of science values openness, hypothesis testing, and vigorous debate. The general assumption is that most scientists are honest and, although we all generally try to present our data in the most favorable light possible, we do not blatantly lie about it or make it up. Of course, we are also all human, and none of us is immune to the temptation to leave out that inconvenient bit of data that doesn’t fit with our hypothesis or to cherry pick the absolutely best-looking blot for use in our grant applications or scientific manuscripts. However, scientists value their reputation among other scientists, and there’s no quicker way to seriously damage one’s reputation than to engage in dodgy behavior with data, and there’s no quicker way to destroy it utterly than to “make shit up.”
OK, Orac was writing with particular reference to the ‘treason’ ofScott S Reuben MD.
A Traitor can be defined Outside legal spheres, as a person who betrays (or is accused of betraying) their own political party, nation, family, friends, ethnic group, team, religion, social class, or other group to which they may belong. Scott S Reuben certainly did all of that. He is accused of fudging scientific test results, and stands accused by his peers of perhaps perpetrating the most massive scientific fraud ever.
Oracs paragraph above points out that scientists do not lie about data or make it up, and that my friends, is what I was taught way back when I was but a kid at school. I was also taught to respect the sciences because of the amount of work, checking, cross checking and peer review, that went into getting a paper published and an hypothesis accepted as ‘normal practise’.
So what changed? went wrong? Or would it be more to the point to ask if there are different rules for different branches of the sciences?
You would need to have been living on Pluto recently to have missed the scandals that have been coming, almost weekly with regards to the THEORY of Man Made Climate Change (AGW). Climategate (the hacked emails from the Climate Research Unit UEA)Glaciergate, other revelations of possible data fixing used in the preparation of the IPCC’s reports, and now today we have more errors in temperature data being revealed in the Washington Times.
So I ask you, why have honest, credible climate scientists not been up in arms about what is unfolding before their very eyes? Or has the press simply ignored their protests?
We have heard that the peer review process has become corrupt, more a case of the ‘in crowd’ only gets published these days, so perhaps the honest, credible scientists need to find a different venue for publication of their differing opinions and data sets.
But I am deeply saddened to find there seems to be different horses for different courses. Instead of doing everything in their power to protect these data manipulating scientists, I would be much happier if some, came out in strong words of protest and even anger, as did Orac when he wrote:
What most angers me about this case is the massive betrayal of trust. The public expects that its scientists, at the very least, will be honest about their results. Too much depends on it ….
Well Dear Friends, I agree that much depends on it, and we all would like to see plainly answered:
Where is the proof of Man Made Climate Change, that is affecting the entire planet to such a a degree you want to tax us all to kingdom come? And after the taxation begins, the legislation will follow. The UN, a non elected organisation will impose rules and regulations affecting the entire world, and all when there is NO PROOF that human kind is affecting the world climate one little bit.
Are you happy to sit quietly whilst all this takes place? Are you prepared to challenge your politicians and leaders as to WHY they are allowing this to take place, actually they are complicit in this charade!
This is exactly as Orac stated a massive betrayal of trust.