It seems to me that everyone lately has a study trumpetting their cause du-jour. This person has statistics that prove x-y-z. This group has a study that disproves x-y-z. This college has been paid to do a study on the effects of X. This organization has been funded to prove their are no effects from X.
There's so much ego out there. There's so much competition and so much phallus waiving (yes even among the women). It's just sickening.
I've seen five studies and related articles in the last few weeks that attempted to argue some ideaological premise using weak scientific data or worse purposefully tainted data. It's like that old saying - a little knowledge is a dangerous thing - or originally - A little learning is a dangerous thing; drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring: there shallow draughts intoxicate the brain, and drinking largely sobers us again.
Little bits of information get gleaned and reported on. Other little bits get ignored and left out. The public get's an purposefully incomplete picture of the world. Of course they then use the excuse - "well they know more than me so who am I to say..." We're not drinking largely as we should. We're glossing over, dipping our hands in and taking small sips from a very large well. Then when we're challenged on what we think we know we simply give up.
I want to see pure science become the norm again. Instead of grabbing for data that supports what we want to see let's grab all the data we can and see what presents itself.
For instance I saw a great special about Archeoraptor. For those who don't know the archeoraptor fossil was "the" proof of transitional forms from dinosaur to bird. The problem was that the fossil was actually several fossils combined to create a whole. There were two arguments made for why the deception occurred 1) Monitary gain for a whole fossil vs. two incomplete fossils 2) To "proof" the transitional form theory.
Of course in the aftermath of the discovery of the fossils dubious origins many used the issue that it was a "fake" to further their own ideaological beliefs. The truth however was that each segment was a true fossil just not from the same animal. In the end, despite it's fallacious origins, scientists continue to study the multiple fossils which are from animals never before cataloged. The discussions thus far show that each separate fossil in it's own right exhibit signs consistent with the transitional forms other scientists are seeking. Skeptics will of course continue to look upon the whole as a hoax refusing to look deeper into the matter. So instead of jumping to conclusions about what something is or is not we should be focusing on the science and process so at the end we can state irrefutable fact not assumption.
Posted by nhavar at February 21, 2004 11:16 PM