Eric Brown ([info]outotoro) wrote,
@ 2009-03-31 08:20:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend  Next Entry
The Dogmatism of Science
This NY Times Article deals with well respected Scientist Freeman Dyson, including the negative response to his opposition to a popular scientific idea.

Again, I submit that the scientific community isn't as free as bias as it's ideals would claim - just as the religious community isn't as lily-white and pure as they like to claim they are.

(Read 4 comments) - (Post a new comment)


[info]tsarren
2009-03-31 06:56 pm UTC (link)
The data set has very definitely been lost in the quagmire... I can't even *find* it. Anything I do find is suspect. I keep seeing people cherry-pick data. "Sea ice is the same as it was in 1970!" "But that's just for one year, if you look at the last 5 years, it's way less!" "But if you look at the last 30 years, it's obvious that it cycles and we're just in X part of the cycle!" And so on and so forth, with some people saying it's just regular old long-term climate change and that we have nothing to do with it. I've refrained from drawing any sort of conclusion because I simply don't have enough data that I know is good.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]mercutio_bgq
2009-03-31 11:24 pm UTC (link)
I've been unable to find a source I feel is unbiased.

(When I say unbiased, I don't mean in the absolute way that no human can attain. I simply mean not funded by an organization that has a stake in the result and doesn't make their opinions on the subject known from the outset.)

The primary problem with studying this issue is that when you have something that is politically charged, self-selection bias hits record levels. The signal to noise ratio goes to pot.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

(Read 4 comments) - (Post a new comment)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…