Following up on a story UD News reported earlier, Retraction Watch reports:
In what can only be described as a remarkable and swift series of events, one of the authors of a much-ballyhooed Science paper claiming that short conversations could change people’s minds on same-sex marriage is retracting it following revelations that the data were faked by his co-author.
If one digs further into the story it will quickly become apparent that the data backing the paper were facially absurd. Where was the much ballyhooed peer review process?
*The phrase “advocacy science” should, of course, be an oxymoron. Sadly, it is not.
But in the age of the multiverse, why does it matter if the data was faked? In a different universe it might be true, and that universe might overlap ours, so … 😉
The problems with the original study were exposed by an attempt to replicate it. In other words, science working exactly as it is supposed to work. So what’s the problem?
What this has to do with News’s obsessive concern with multiverse speculation isn’t clear.
Seversky, way to make lemonade out of a story about a scientist falsifying data to push an agenda.
I would never defend a scientist falsifying data. I’m just pointing out that this case was uncovered by what is a standard procedure of the scientific method – attempted replication.
“I would never defend a scientist falsifying data. I’m just pointing out that this case was uncovered by what is a standard procedure of the scientific method – attempted replication.”
I think the problem is underlying unconcern over the problem. These stories should incite more than a yawn from those who believe science matters.
~Sean
Hey Kaz,
Nice to see you hear 🙂
HeKS
Ummm … *here*. Nice to see you *here*