The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness.
Richard Horton
Editor-in-Chief
The Lancet
Evilutionary stand is the cause … If nothing worth nothing and if every thing is matter in movement including minds then who cares about truth if truth for them is the dance of quarktrons ?!?!
This is especially true in the health and medicine fields. The health industries and related government agencies and academic research organizations are cesspools of corruption and malfeasance. Organized crime comes to mind.
It is good to see this openly discussed. It is important for a specific age/medical patient group: The people who outlive a typical human life span or beat cancer death diagnoses.
Yer News hack knows many people who have beat the life expectancy tables by decades, also a retired cop whose cancer prognosis went backward (from stage 4 to stage 2*).
The problem is, many treatment plans may or may not be well founded. A local physician who treats people in their nineties, says to me that all he is interested in is evidence-based medicine. That is why legitimacy in studies is so important.
*All the retired cop wanted was for every last cancer cell to die before he did, so he told the doctors, go ahead and blast them good. Seems to have worked, so far. 😉
I don’t think it affects the evolutionary sciences all that much because experimentation is so difficult in these sciences since we are dealing with history. Contrary to giving a boost to evolutionary sciences, it points out an even greater problem – the inability to test their “explanations/hypotheses” much of the time.
Using computer modeling to put ankles and toes on snake ancestor:
http://m.livescience.com/50902.....-toes.html
“Computational Evolutionary Biology” the epitome of Cargo Cult Science?
“Computational Evolutionary Biology” the epitome of GIGO?
PPolish ……
See what I mean ? Science gone crazy …..complete madness !!!
Did you see the artist,s rendering with those tiny legs where no sane person can see any function for them AS legs ?
Did you compute how many times they say “” such and such sheds light on evilution “”? ………did you notice that this sentence repeated zillions times proves that evilutionists ARE really in the dark ……….disgusting… Indeed .
In the article the 5 sigma level of certainty in experimental physics is mentioned
5 sigma can also be stated 5 standard deviations:
In regards to ID, it was noted that a 500 flips of a fair coin, all landing heads, would be a 22 sigma event:
I mention all this because, in regards to falsifying local realism, quantum non-locality was confirmed to 70 standard deviations in the following test:
And Leggett’s Inequality achieved a stunning 120 standard deviation:
Leggett’s Inequality, the mathematics behind it, and the Theistic implications of it, are discussed beginning at the 24:15 minute mark of the following video:
Here is the article by Dr. Richard Conn Henry that Dr. Paul Giem discussed at the 32:28 minute mark of the preceding video
Here are a few more quotes and articles of related interest:
Preceding quote taken from this following video;
Many times materialists try to write off quantum mechanics as only applying to the sub-atomic scale. That it applies to the large, ‘macro’, scale of the universe is established here:
Perhaps someone else knows of some other aspect of physics that has been confirmed to a greater level of certainty than 120 standard deviations, but I have not heard of anything greater.
I am certainly amazed that such a magnitude (120 sigma) was achieved on a test that so directly implicates Theism in its conclusion as Leggett’s Inequality does!
Verse and Music:
I think this is an excellent and apparently much-needed initiative. As was mentioned before, scientists are just human beings in white coats. However much we might hope otherwise, some of them are seduced by the Dark Side that offers recognition and money if they will just sacrifice foolish notions of integrity and standards.
And why not? They see a world around them, as we all do, where people with far fewer scruples make huge sums in all fields, including journalism and religion. Here on UD, News is applauded for continually excoriating “government-funded” this and that, especially science. We hear rather less about the scientists who are bought and paid for by the likes of Big Pharma, agribusinesses, huge corporations with almost bottomless pockets. Are you saying that they can get away with most anything as long it’s good ol’ libertarian free enterprise?
The point is that it’s irrelevant whether it’s government or private-sector funding behind it. Bad work can have bad consequences. Andrew Wakefield’s now discredited study into the possibility if a link between autism and the MMR vaccine had a sample size of just 12 children. Yet that tiny group had a huge influence on the anti-vaccination movement. The sad thing is that a lot more than 12 children have fallen ill – and some even died – from preventable illnesses as an indirect consequence of this study.
Whether the symposium that Horton wrote about will produce more concrete results than pious hopes and well -intentioned platitudes only time will tell. But I’m not holding my breath.
Seversky at 9: Government forces us to pay taxes, to fund science stuff, including stuff we consider misguided or contrary to the public interest, under threat.
That is not some kind of libertarianism; it is a plain fact, accessible to anyone.
By contrast, no one forces me to invest personally in Big Pharma or agribusiness. No one can take my property or my personal freedom if I don’t.
Far from who funds a study being irrelevant, it is crucial – IF one believes people should have any choices in life at all.
If you look deeply you will find that all our off track problems are caused by the materialistic philosophy ….. If there are no right or wrong …. If there are no god , then every thing is permitted .. Remember Ivan Karamazov…….there are no shame , no truth , no honesty , no just , no good , no bad …….just nothing , they worship the false god of scientism and in the temple of scientism the guru is darwin then all sanity collapses ..period .
The rate of small-scale fraud in scientific publication, combined with the large-scale fraud of global warming, makes a strong case that the methodology has reached the natural limits of its usefulness.
News
Interesting point. I agree with Seversky that the fight for good science not about a political platform or party.
But at the same time, consumers can boycott various businesses and create pressure that way. It’s almost impossible to boycott the government without going to jail.
In many cases, the same amoral ideology is active in government and business – and in science.