It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is Most Published Research Wrong?

page: 2
14
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 09:31 AM
link   
a reply to: BO XIAN

This doesn't surprise me one bit.

I couldn't watch the video, but I hope that it mentions the fight for funding as also being a problem (along with the need to be published in order to get jobs).

But, don't you dare question the results of published work around some people, especially here on ATS, or prepare for a tongue lashing...




posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 09:34 AM
link   
a reply to: CrapAsUsual

Well, that, and it's going back to the way it was when the church mandated what "science" was and what "science" the average citizen was to be privy to. Just replace "church" with "government" in that preceding sentence and you have the current situation.

I'm not certain that this story has found the correct or biggest variable/catalysts to this problem.



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 09:46 AM
link   
a reply to: CrapAsUsual

Naturally, people will be gaming the system. There will always be people who try to get ahead through dishonest means, but that doesn't mean that everyone does. While there are people cheating to get ahead, there are also people who have integrity and DON'T cheat but let their work stand for them instead.



posted on Aug, 16 2016 @ 10:09 AM
link   
I have known for quite some time that this was an issue, but lately I have come to realize it's a pretty big issue. In order to get a job, one has to develop a reputation. The easiest way to do this is to publish a paper. The easiest way to publish a paper is to work with people who get papers published regularly. To work with them, you have to generally agree with them.

It can take decades, literally, to get research grants if you do not already have research grants. Most foundations look at publications to determine who gets the grants. So if you want to do research, it is almost imperative that you research what other scientists are researching and get results they like. Otherwise, you're running quantum equations in your head while flipping hamburgers for Wendy's.

As political funding has wormed its way into funding, the necessity of agreement has shifted. Now you need to agree with other scientists and the political ideology of the day. Some older scientists using private grant money, already established, are still trying to do good research, but they are retiring daily, and younger scientists are unable financially to take their place. Overall, we are seeing a slow shift toward populist-driven and politically-driven science. I fear for the industry should this trend not be reversed.

Perhaps it is a part of the human experience to observe these cycles... we have just come out of one of the greatest technological periods in history. Perhaps now it is time for us as a society to re-enter a new 'Dark Ages' for a time. I really hope not. Hiding in the shadows unable to speak the truth doesn't appeal to me any more than I believe it appealed to Galileo Galilee or Leonardo DaVinci.

Perhaps I should just be thankful we're not there again... yet...

TheRedneck



new topics

top topics
 
14
<< 1   >>

log in

join