Oh look, more "science" falls by the wayside..unethical study

Discussion in 'Religion and Ethics' started by koshergrl, Jan 13, 2012.

  1. koshergrl
    Offline

    koshergrl Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2011
    Messages:
    61,324
    Thanks Received:
    9,141
    Trophy Points:
    2,040
    Ratings:
    +21,063
    Where are all the idiots who jump all over these studies when they come out and immediately proclaim that we must all acknowledge the superiority of "science" over "common sense" or "faith".

    "A University of Connecticut researcher who studied the link between aging and a substance found in red wine has committed more than 100 acts of data fabrication and falsification, the university said Wednesday, throwing much of his work into doubt.
    Dipak K. Das, who directed the university's Cardiovascular Research Center, studied resveratrol, touted by a number of scientists and companies as a way to slow aging or remain healthy as people get older. Among his findings, according to a work promoted by the University of Connecticut in 2007, was that "the pulp of grapes is as heart-healthy as the skin, even though the antioxidant properties differ."
    "We have a responsibility to correct the scientific record and inform peer researchers across the country," Philip Austin, the university's interim vice president for health affairs, said in a statement."

    Red wine-heart research slammed with fraud charges | Reuters
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  2. PredFan
    Offline

    PredFan Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2011
    Messages:
    29,190
    Thanks Received:
    4,422
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    In Liberal minds, rent free.
    Ratings:
    +11,615
    Unfortunately, science has been bought and paid for for a long time.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  3. koshergrl
    Offline

    koshergrl Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2011
    Messages:
    61,324
    Thanks Received:
    9,141
    Trophy Points:
    2,040
    Ratings:
    +21,063
    Absolutely.

    Not that it means that we should discard the pursuit of knowledge and understanding. But what I'm trying to get across is that just because somebody SAYS something has been "scientifically proven" doesn't mean it has, or that there isn't more to learn, or that it won't be disproven later down the road.
     
  4. Steelplate
    Offline

    Steelplate Bluesman

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2011
    Messages:
    7,773
    Thanks Received:
    931
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Central PA
    Ratings:
    +932
    I don't understand what this has to do with religion vs. science....
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  5. PoliticalChic
    Online

    PoliticalChic Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    Messages:
    55,663
    Thanks Received:
    15,567
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Ratings:
    +24,777
    What it does is weaken the argument that when scientists speaketh, it is only truth, facts, that passeth their lips.


    There are scientists who lie for money and career, some who will construct bizarre scenarios in the name of science, some who toil lifelong in attempts to benefit humanity.

    Some, all three, as in a Venn Diagram.
     
  6. Steelplate
    Offline

    Steelplate Bluesman

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2011
    Messages:
    7,773
    Thanks Received:
    931
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Central PA
    Ratings:
    +932
    There are people who lie for money and career everywhere... even people of the cloth.... Human nature is human nature. Remember Jimmy Swaggart who cried "Lord, I have sinned against you"(after he was caught)... How about Jim Baker?

    I mean, I understand... we must take things with a grain of salt when we hear them. To blindly believe in things without questioning them is folly.

    In fact, Thomas Jefferson once wrote this to his Nephew about religion..."Question with boldness even the existence of a god; because, if there be one, he must more approve the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear."

    Good words... Question everything...even the existence of a God.

    Now personally, I believe there is a God.... what I question is his intolerance. I have doubts about him being the boogeyman who wants to send us hopelessly flawed humans to hell for making our mistakes and never seeming to truly repent.... because repenting means not to sin again. I know I am unable to do that. I can and do easily confess my failings and ask for forgiveness... but I always fall short in the "not sinning again" part.
     
  7. Woyzeck
    Offline

    Woyzeck Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2010
    Messages:
    1,501
    Thanks Received:
    221
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    A-Io
    Ratings:
    +222
    This is funny, because you say in your first post people who think science is more trustworthy than "common sense" and "faith" to be idiots. Considering how broad the definition of those terms can be, and how susceptible they are to cognitive and logical fallacies as opposed to the scientific method, it's not looking good in terms of a low irony score for this post:

    Suffice to say, yes, there are bad scientists. This is not news. This is not a surprise to anyone who supports science as a whole such as myself. This is why papers in academic journals are supposed to be peer-reviewed. This is why when you conduct an experiment, you write as much detail as you can when you perform the experiment so other scientists can replicate the results, and double-check for it themselves if they so wish.

    Generally, a single experiment will not convince any good scientist that something should be considered a fact. Replication is vital. Take the news about neutrinos from a couple of months ago. No good scientist will accept that at fact, instead there is a suspicion of instrument error somewhere along the line, and repeated replication is needed, possibly by different scientists and with different equipment. Rest assured, scientists are very well aware how much they could be wrong, and the scientific method and science as a whole holds very little facts sacred and taboo to touch, if any at all. Modern theories are built on the failures of older theories to accurately describe the universe.

    I find it extremely amusing at the notion that people who place trust in science must believe everything that comes out of a scientist's mouth. You know, accusing science supporters as placing the blind trust that religious people often place in religious texts or figures. Irony abounds, because most of us know how the science process works, and it's nothing like the blind faith the religious like to equate it with.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  8. PoliticalChic
    Online

    PoliticalChic Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    Messages:
    55,663
    Thanks Received:
    15,567
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Ratings:
    +24,777
    A reasonable and well-tempered post....

    ....but I don't believe that it hits the mark.
    If I can presume to speak for koshergrl and the OP, it seems to me that it is geared toward those who use 'science' and 'scientists' as some sort of cudgel against religious folk, and theology.

    The point is, as you suggest, scientists are merely people. Further, science itself uses faith and belief at its hightest levels to advance theories and hypotheses.

    This, from chapter five of David Berlinski's "The Devil's Delusion,"
    "As a general explanation, arguments follow from assumptions, and assumptions follow from beliefs, and very rarely- perhaps never- do beliefs reflect an agenda determined entirely by the facts. No less than the doctrines of religious belief, the doctrines of quantum cosmology are what they seem: biased, partial, inconclusive, and largely in the service of passionate but unexamined conviction."

    It seems, unfortunately, that there are those who are chagrined that others believe, have faith, but mistakenly attribute an undeserved greatness to science.
    Thus the OP.

    Most of us who are religious are not offended by those who are not...but there are those on the other side who never miss an opportunity to insult the community of faith.

    Since you mention Jefferson, I find this quote germane:
    But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods, or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.
     
  9. Woyzeck
    Offline

    Woyzeck Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2010
    Messages:
    1,501
    Thanks Received:
    221
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    A-Io
    Ratings:
    +222
    I've yet to see an actual explanation or reasoning for this, besides stretching the definition of faith to mean several words it does not.

    Ah yes, you chose one of the most speculative parts of theoretical physics and apply it to all of science. It's hardly representative of theoretical physics, let alone the rest of science. So his point, and you're larger point about science being built on the same belief as religion falls flat.

    Why is the greatness attributed to science undeserved? No one views their findings as being set in stone, any scientist or even a mere look into the history of science will show you that.

    Such generalized statements are retarded. It is very easily just as true that religious people never miss an opportunity to insult atheists and/or science.
     
    Last edited: Jan 15, 2012
  10. kiwiman127
    Offline

    kiwiman127 Comfortably Moderate Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2010
    Messages:
    8,403
    Thanks Received:
    2,580
    Trophy Points:
    315
    Location:
    4th Cleanest City in the World-Minneapolis
    Ratings:
    +3,833
    Science is a revolving. New science yields new science. An example is with the new science that has brought us more sophisticated technology, that new technology provides science a new tool for research that leads to new scientific discoveries.
    Also, science in continuously researching itself and confirming or disproving theories or studies. It's science's "natural of the beast".
     

Share This Page