Page 15 of 15 FirstFirst ... 5131415
Results 211 to 220 of 220
  1. #211
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Virginia, U.S.A.
    Posts
    14,996
    Thanks (Given)
    4882
    Thanks (Received)
    5015
    Likes (Given)
    3259
    Likes (Received)
    1864
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    4
    Mentioned
    135 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14250995

    Default

    Nature magazine:

    "Let’s make peer review scientific"
    http://www.nature.com/news/how-scien...n-stop-1.18517

    Thirty years on from the first congress on peer review, Drummond Rennie reflects on the improvements brought about by research into the process — and calls for more.
    Peer review is touted as a demonstration of the self-critical nature of science. But it is a human system. Everybody involved brings prejudices, misunderstandings and gaps in knowledge, so no one should be surprised that peer review is often biased and inefficient. It is occasionally corrupt, sometimes a charade, an open temptation to plagiarists. Even with the best of intentions, how and whether peer review identifies high-quality science is unknown. It is, in short, unscientific....
    ...To announce that first Peer Review Congress, I wrote: “There are scarcely any bars to eventual publication. There seems to be no study too fragmented, no hypothesis too trivial, no literature citation too biased or too egotistical, no design too warped, no methodology too bungled, no presentation of results too inaccurate, too obscure, and too contradictory, no analysis too self-serving, no argument too circular, no conclusions too trifling or too unjustified, and no grammar and syntax too offensive for a paper to end up in print”10.

    Unfortunately, that statement is still true today, and I'm not just talking about predatory journals. That said, I am confident that the Peer Review Congress scheduled for 2017 will be asking more incisive, actionable questions than ever before.


    How scientists fool themselves – and how they can stop
    http://www.nature.com/news/how-scien...n-stop-1.18517

    Humans are remarkably good at self-deception. But growing concern about reproducibility is driving many researchers to seek ways to fight their own worst instincts.
    .....
    Failure to understand our own biases has helped to create a crisis of confidence about the reproducibility of published results, says statistician John Ioannidis, co-director of the Meta-Research Innovation Center at Stanford University in Palo Alto, California. The issue goes well beyond cases of fraud. Earlier this year, a large project that attempted to replicate 100 psychology studies managed to reproduce only slightly more than one-third2. In 2012, researchers at biotechnology firm Amgen in Thousand Oaks, California, reported that they could replicate only 6 out of 53 landmark studies in oncology and haematology3. And in 2009, Ioannidis and his colleagues described how they had been able to fully reproduce only 2 out of 18 microarray-based gene-expression studies4.

    Although it is impossible to document how often researchers fool themselves in data analysis, says Ioannidis, findings of irreproducibility beg for an explanation. The study of 100 psychology papers is a case in point: if one assumes that the vast majority of the original researchers were honest and diligent, then a large proportion of the problems can be explained only by unconscious biases. “This is a great time for research on research,” he says. “The massive growth of science allows for a massive number of results, and a massive number of errors and biases to study. So there's good reason to hope we can find better ways to deal with these problems.”

    “When crises like this issue of reproducibility come along, it's a good opportunity to advance our scientific tools,” says Robert MacCoun, a social scientist at Stanford. That has happened before, when scientists in the mid-twentieth century realized that experimenters and subjects often unconsciously changed their behaviour to match expectations. From that insight, the double-blind standard was born.

    People forget that when we talk about the scientific method, we don't mean a finished product,” says Saul Perlmutter, an astrophysicist at the University of California, Berkeley. “Science is an ongoing race between our inventing ways to fool ourselves, and our inventing ways to avoid fooling ourselves.” So researchers are trying a variety of creative ways to debias data analysis — strategies that involve collaborating with academic rivals, getting papers accepted before the study has even been started and working with strategically faked data.

    The problem
    Although the human brain and its cognitive biases have been the same for as long as we have been doing science, some important things have changed, says psychologist Brian Nosek, executive director of the non-profit Center for Open Science in Charlottesville, Virginia, which works to increase the transparency and reproducibility of scientific research. Today's academic environment is more competitive than ever. There is an emphasis on piling up publications with statistically significant results — that is, with data relationships in which a commonly used measure of statistical certainty, the p-value, is 0.05 or less. “As a researcher, I'm not trying to produce misleading results,” says Nosek. “But I do have a stake in the outcome.” And that gives the mind excellent motivation to find what it is primed to find......
    It is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties. The freeman of America did not wait till usurped power had strengthened itself by exercise, and entangled the question in precedents. James Madison
    Live as free people, yet without employing your freedom as a pretext for wickedness; but live at all times as servants of God.
    1 Peter 2:16

  2. #212
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Virginia, U.S.A.
    Posts
    14,996
    Thanks (Given)
    4882
    Thanks (Received)
    5015
    Likes (Given)
    3259
    Likes (Received)
    1864
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    4
    Mentioned
    135 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14250995

    Default

    Quotes of Philosophers of Science and Scientist about the work of science.


    Thoms Kuhn
    July 18, 1922 – June 17, 1996, was an American physicist, historian and philosopher of science



    The man who is striving to solve a problem defined by existing knowledge and technique is not, however, just looking around. He knows what he wants to achieve, and he designs his instruments and directs his thoughts accordingly. Unanticipated novelty, the new discovery, can emerge only to the extent that his anticipations about nature and his instruments prove wrong... There is no other effective way in which discoveries might be generated.

    .........

    Philosophers of science have repeatedly demonstrated that more than one theoretical construction can always be placed upon a given collection of data.

    ......

    Normal science, the activity in which most scientists inevitably spend most all their time, is predicated on the assumption that the scientific community knows what the world is like. Normal science, often suppresses fundamental novelties because they are necessarily subversive of its basic commitments. As a puzzle-solving activity, normal science does not aim at novelties of fact or theory and, when successful, finds none.

    ......

    Under normal conditions the research scientist is not an innovator but a solver of puzzles, and the puzzles upon which he concentrates are just those which he believes can be both stated and solved within the existing scientific tradition.

    ......

    The transition between competing paradigms cannot be made a step at a time, forced by logic and neutral experience. Like the gestalt switch, it must occur all at once (though not necessarily in an instant) or not at all.

    .......

    Later scientific theories are better than earlier ones for solving puzzles in the often quite different environments to which they are applied. That is not a relativist's position, and it displays the sense in which I am a convinced believer in scientific progress.

    ......

    In science novelty emerges only with difficulty, manifested by resistance, against a background provided by expectation.

    ......




    Karl Popper
    was an Austrian-British philosopher and professor.He is generally regarded as one of the greatest philosophers of science of the 20th century.



    In so far as a scientific statement speaks about reality, it must be falsifiable;
    and in so far as it is not falsifiable, it does not speak about reality.

    ......
    Last edited by revelarts; 09-04-2016 at 10:39 AM.
    It is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties. The freeman of America did not wait till usurped power had strengthened itself by exercise, and entangled the question in precedents. James Madison
    Live as free people, yet without employing your freedom as a pretext for wickedness; but live at all times as servants of God.
    1 Peter 2:16

  3. #213
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Virginia, U.S.A.
    Posts
    14,996
    Thanks (Given)
    4882
    Thanks (Received)
    5015
    Likes (Given)
    3259
    Likes (Received)
    1864
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    4
    Mentioned
    135 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14250995

    Default



    Imre Lakatos
    November 9, 1922 – February 2, 1974
    was a Hungarian philosopher of mathematics and science







    think about that for a minute.

    this is exactly what evolutionary theory and the big bang theory does.
    the view called "neo-darwianism", (the accepted version of evolution at this point) is a demonstration of this.
    Since "darwinism" as originally presented has been shown ... and accepted.... as being severely flawed.
    adjunct "auxiliary hypothesis" and various reinterpretations of term have come in. but the "counter instances" continue to pile up as they do MORE reinterpretation goes on to try and maintain that the OVERALL theory is true.

    rather than allowing the scientifically ascertained "counter instances" to falsify
    the whole theory. The research shows the overall theory is flawed and not capable of producing the effects it claims to produce.

    Similarly with the big bang, there are more and more nearly Ad Hoc "auxiliary hypothesis" added to save it as more data comes in that does not fit the predictions.

    there is of course room for editing theories as new data brings more clarity but as some point it goes beyond clarification, it becomes falsification.

    In a murder case if the 1st bits of evidence point to one suspect and some of the rest does as well. But some is a bit outside of it, well, people can live with it . But if more and more evidence begins to come in that shows that it was practically impossible for the original suspect to to commit the crime then at some point you have to say, 'He didn't do it'. Rather than continuing with unswerving commitment to make up new ways that he could have.

    A one armed man paralyzed from the waist down wheelchair bound probably didn't use elaborate pulleys to climb up the side of 4 story building. Crawl down 2 flights of stairs, Inject himself with special hormones that gave him temporary super strength and lift the 350 pd sumo wrestle victim over his head and throw him out of the window across the street though a brick wall. then descend the wall back to his wheelchair at ground floor.

    It's fine that when investigators 1st came on the scene he was only one in the area of the murder, and he'd hated Sumos.
    so he was thought a viable suspect.
    The rest of the evidence doesn't jibe.
    the evidence when rationally examined shows that he could NOT do it.
    elaborate speculations don't make it true.

    Last edited by revelarts; 09-04-2016 at 12:54 PM.
    It is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties. The freeman of America did not wait till usurped power had strengthened itself by exercise, and entangled the question in precedents. James Madison
    Live as free people, yet without employing your freedom as a pretext for wickedness; but live at all times as servants of God.
    1 Peter 2:16

  4. #214
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Virginia, U.S.A.
    Posts
    14,996
    Thanks (Given)
    4882
    Thanks (Received)
    5015
    Likes (Given)
    3259
    Likes (Received)
    1864
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    4
    Mentioned
    135 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14250995

    Default

    It is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties. The freeman of America did not wait till usurped power had strengthened itself by exercise, and entangled the question in precedents. James Madison
    Live as free people, yet without employing your freedom as a pretext for wickedness; but live at all times as servants of God.
    1 Peter 2:16

  5. #215
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Virginia, U.S.A.
    Posts
    14,996
    Thanks (Given)
    4882
    Thanks (Received)
    5015
    Likes (Given)
    3259
    Likes (Received)
    1864
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    4
    Mentioned
    135 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14250995

    Default

    It is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties. The freeman of America did not wait till usurped power had strengthened itself by exercise, and entangled the question in precedents. James Madison
    Live as free people, yet without employing your freedom as a pretext for wickedness; but live at all times as servants of God.
    1 Peter 2:16

  6. Thanks Kathianne thanked this post
  7. #216
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Virginia, U.S.A.
    Posts
    14,996
    Thanks (Given)
    4882
    Thanks (Received)
    5015
    Likes (Given)
    3259
    Likes (Received)
    1864
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    4
    Mentioned
    135 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14250995

    Default

    It is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties. The freeman of America did not wait till usurped power had strengthened itself by exercise, and entangled the question in precedents. James Madison
    Live as free people, yet without employing your freedom as a pretext for wickedness; but live at all times as servants of God.
    1 Peter 2:16

  8. #217
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    5,206
    Thanks (Given)
    5230
    Thanks (Received)
    5014
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    5
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    49 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Those guys must be smart. They are all nerds.

  9. #218
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Virginia, U.S.A.
    Posts
    14,996
    Thanks (Given)
    4882
    Thanks (Received)
    5015
    Likes (Given)
    3259
    Likes (Received)
    1864
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    4
    Mentioned
    135 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14250995

    Default

    It is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties. The freeman of America did not wait till usurped power had strengthened itself by exercise, and entangled the question in precedents. James Madison
    Live as free people, yet without employing your freedom as a pretext for wickedness; but live at all times as servants of God.
    1 Peter 2:16

  10. Thanks Kathianne, fj1200 thanked this post
  11. #219
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    In your head
    Posts
    24,660
    Thanks (Given)
    4779
    Thanks (Received)
    5272
    Likes (Given)
    1617
    Likes (Received)
    1430
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    40
    Mentioned
    56 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    9173703

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by revelarts View Post
    Those do not just pertain to science. Any POV should be subject to the same tests.
    "when socialism fails, blame capitalism and demand more socialism." - A friend
    "You know the difference between libs and right-wingers? Libs STFU when evidence refutes their false beliefs." - Another friend
    “Don't waste your time with explanations: people only hear what they want to hear.” - Paulo Coelho


  12. Thanks revelarts thanked this post
  13. #220
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Virginia, U.S.A.
    Posts
    14,996
    Thanks (Given)
    4882
    Thanks (Received)
    5015
    Likes (Given)
    3259
    Likes (Received)
    1864
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    4
    Mentioned
    135 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    14250995

    Default

    "Science" of an Archeological theory changes again.
    For decades, the standard explanation of how we went from our prehistoric society to our modern one was with the development of agriculture. Once we started figuring out how to farm, we no longer needed to move with migrating herds of animals. We could build permanent homes and villages and we could turn our attention to things like writing and culture.
    Discoveries of stone tools and animal bones at Gobekli Tepe suggest that we have that all completely backwards.
    At the heart of Gobekli Tepe are a series of carved stone megaliths dated to around 11,000 years ago. The stones were carved and installed while the civilization was still relying on its hunting and gathering ways. It was only about 500 years later that they established a nearby village where they domesticated sheep, pigs, and cattle and started to farm the world’s oldest strains of wheat.
    The need to build a massive complex, carve sacred images into stone, and to create a sociological center forced mankind to develop farming and herding as a way to feed the builders and stoneworkers. Farming provided the fuel necessary to allow our prehistoric ancestors to make their vision a reality.



    This still assumes a fair amount. It's fine to debate it, but when we've been told for decades now that "civilization rose BECAUSE..." and ONLY NOW can we acceptable challenge that ASSERTION then there's a problem.

    If they just say that it seems that this or that MIGHT be the case GREAT. But to not allow the discussion and questions to allowed on the table because it's the mainstream MADE UP STORY of what MIGHT have happened at the moment is not good science. it's dogma.


    the same goes even MORESO for practically ALL evolutionary explanations.
    they are MADE UP to fit the current theory.
    When scientist say, "...XYZ developed THIS or THAT trait because..." it's always a guess... at best and thin inference... not something based on evidence, or scientific observation or experiment. But just based assumed relationships and creating or picking the best of all thinly plausible options.
    Last edited by revelarts; 09-10-2016 at 11:07 AM.
    It is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties. The freeman of America did not wait till usurped power had strengthened itself by exercise, and entangled the question in precedents. James Madison
    Live as free people, yet without employing your freedom as a pretext for wickedness; but live at all times as servants of God.
    1 Peter 2:16

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Debate Policy - Political Forums