US scientists significantly more likely to publish fake research

Originally posted by dolphinfan
reply to post by Aquarius1

 

That does not garner you much media attention, not a tenured spot at a top university or a large grant. "Data suggests that increases in CO2 can cause warming. The limitations of the study are XXXX and thus the outcome is by no means certain". That does not get you a spot on some news program. "The oceans are going to rise an inch a year for the next 100 years and we will have a global disaster" does get attention.

That's basically what the studies say, but they are written in such a way that only the PhDs who've been stationed in the same corner of research realize it. Reading through the "climategate" e-mails was enlightening because, while there were a few questionable bits, everyone seemed quite open and forthright among themselves about the uncertainties and weaknesses of their data, methods, and conclusions.

The big problem is that politicians and journalists want the results to be dumbed down to a single number (or worse - just skip the facts and give me a worst-case scenario), which discards a lot of important information long before the general public sees it. I think most people studying the climate and related fields are doing good, honest science, while only a few have thrown ethics out the window in exchange for fame, political clout, and blog hits.