Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online Now
0 members (), 139 guests, and 0 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Top Posters(30 Days)
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
#23496 09/18/07 07:03 PM
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 174
J
Senior Member
OP Offline
Senior Member
J
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 174
The Wall Street Journal has an article titled, "Most Science Studies Appear to Be Tainted By Sloppy Analysis."
Quote:
We all make mistakes and, if you believe medical scholar John Ioannidis, scientists make more than their fair share. By his calculations, most published research findings are wrong.
...
The hotter the field of research the more likely its published findings should be viewed skeptically, he determined.
...
"We need to pay more attention to the replication of published scientific results."

It seems like the peer review process is not all that it is made out to be. Then again, since it took 6 years for the 2000 temps to be audited even partially, this does not surprise me.

.
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 203
Senior Member
Offline
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 203
Hi John,
This article was already posted up in the General Science forum
http://www.scienceagogo.com/forum/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=23461#Post23461

But I agree with you - I think most people would be shocked if they knew what "peer review" really entailed to get many papers published.
Review of papers are largely focussed on the logic behind the papers, it isn't focussed on the application of the logic (the actual calculations). This is how we get Hanson's 2000 mistake being carried forward for almost 7 years. Or the "hockey stick" mistake.

Have you been reading Climate Audit lately? It seems Hanson is going back and adjusting the 1930's temps downwards (after all, we have to keep 98 as the hottest year).....it really is laughable.


Link Copied to Clipboard
Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact UsokW
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5