Laymens Lament or Who to Believe
Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Scott county, Arkansas, Usa
    Posts
    1,444

    Default Laymens Lament or Who to Believe

    Just about the time I start trusting science again, I read something like this. https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt...ns-for-science

    They do a lot of bee research too.

    I wonder if this going to e like the beginning of the financial crisis. The proverbial tip of the iceberg or tempest in a teapot.

    Alex
    Ten years of Beekeeping before varroa. Started again spring of 2014.

  2. Remove Advertisements
    BeeSource.com
    Advertisements
     

  3. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Lambton Shores, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    275

    Default Re: Laymens Lament or Who to Believe

    Unfortunately, these things occur with some regularity in science. The good news is that on the scale of science as a whole (e.g. over a hundred thousand published articles each year) these cases of fraud are very rare. The bad news is that their existence undercuts confidence in the work of those not engaged in fraud.

    The best news is that we (scientists/journals) are getting much better at detecting fraud. Many journals now use machine-learning algorithms to check all submitted works for evidence of data manipulation, and there is a large movement towards open data (i.e. you don't just publish the paper, but also release all of the raw data to the public) which makes it near-impossible to get away with fraud.

    It sucks, but it is a limited issue.

  4. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Scott county, Arkansas, Usa
    Posts
    1,444

    Default Re: Laymens Lament or Who to Believe

    Thanks for your reply.

    I agree with all of your points.

    I don't understand the people that perpetrate these frauds. They are not idiots that somehow were allowed to run amuck in a lab. They are very intelligent people and I assume well paid. I wonder if it they are responding to pressure from above. If so, then I am suspect of a lot of what I have read on their bee research. When I do an internet search and someone from a respected University is the author I tend to choose those.

    We all benefit overall from science. I don't want to go back to the good old days.

    I believe it is probably limited in scale, but dang it sure does cause a lot of doubt.

    Alex
    Ten years of Beekeeping before varroa. Started again spring of 2014.

  5. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Lambton Shores, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    275

    Default Re: Laymens Lament or Who to Believe

    There are two main reasons that seem to drive most of this:

    1) Science is extremely competitive - the first person to publish a discovery gets all the credit; anyone who follows (even by days) looses the credit. Careers and made (and lost) in single studies. That puts a lot of pressure on us, and to some, drives them to cheat in order to get an 'edge' on their competition. I'm fortunate enough to be in a tenured position, so I have a bit of a safety net - but for many it is literally publish (and publish well) or perish.

    2) Fossilisation. We are still human, and some scientists have trouble accepting that the pet hypothesis/model they've been working on for decades may be incorrect. So results are reported incorrectly, to keep their treasured ideas alive. That appears to be what occurred with the researcher whose mentioned in your article.

  6. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Scott county, Arkansas, Usa
    Posts
    1,444

    Default Re: Laymens Lament or Who to Believe

    Thank you for your candor and patience.

    I know very little about the world of academia.

    Thanks again,
    Alex
    Ten years of Beekeeping before varroa. Started again spring of 2014.

  7. #6
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Algoma District Northern Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    4,741

    Default Re: Laymens Lament or Who to Believe

    Here is an explanation that may explain one aspect sometimes seen in latter parts of a career.

    "I know that most men, including those at ease with problems of the greatest complexity, can seldom accept even the simplest and most obvious truth if it be such as would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions which they have delighted in explaining to colleagues, which they have proudly taught to others, and which they have woven, thread by thread, into the fabric of their lives." - Tolstoy."
    Frank

  8. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    England, UK
    Posts
    1,442

    Default Re: Laymens Lament or Who to Believe

    Suggest you look-up Sir Peter Medawar's 1964 BBC talk entitled, " Is the Scientific Paper a Fraud ? " - in which he concludes that it is, albeit not fraudulent in the conventional sense as used in this thread.

    With regard to biological experiments I would take his criticism one stage further, and point out that a) biological experiments are invariably based on the manipulation of a single variable, whereas biological systems themselves are multi-variable and infinitely more complex as a result of this, and b) biological experiments are frequently conducted as Tabula Rasa experiments, even when the subjects under examination are known to have memory.

    Not so much 'fraud' perhaps, but a massive self-deception regarding the validity of findings ...
    LJ
    A Heretics Guide to Beekeeping http://heretics-guide.atwebpages.com/

  9. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Lambton Shores, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    275

    Default Re: Laymens Lament or Who to Believe

    little_john, I work in the biological sciences and you're not really correct. Some experiments are setup to manipulate single variables - in many cases that is the only way you can be certain that the response you observe is due to that manipulation - but it is rare in the extreme to find a study which only investigates/manipulates a single variable across all experiments in the study. That era died in the 1980's.

    Moreover, most studies these days (at least in biomedical-orientated work) incorporate methodologies which are explicitly designed to provide multivariate outputs that give you a broad sense of the changes occurring in your system. As one example, in my lab we routinely use methods which tell us how every single gene in the human genome changes in our patient samples or in our model systems. We also use approaches such as mass spectometry and CHiP to get unbiased data on how the protein and gene-regulatory networks change in our patients and models.

    And my lab is far from special in our use of those approaches - those are the modern standard.

  10. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Scott county, Arkansas, Usa
    Posts
    1,444

    Default Re: Laymens Lament or Who to Believe

    LittleJohn,

    Thanks for the link.

    I will have to read that at least one more time as it is over my head.

    Alex
    Ten years of Beekeeping before varroa. Started again spring of 2014.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •