Insights from Quadrant

Science, fast and loose

Dave Pellowe, whose blog is always worth a visit, has put up an interesting post on peer review, scientific fraud and papers whose findings defy replication.  A sample:

…People who consider “peer-reviewed science” alone or give it disproportionate weight when considering public policy are unhelpfully naive about the dynamic nature of science. They pour scorn on anyone questioning “peer-reviewed science” as a solid foundation for public policies with far-reaching social and economic ramifications.

How reliable is ‘peer-reviewed’ science?

Research suggests more than 70% of scientists have tried and failed to reproduce another scientist’s experiments, which are supposed to be replicable.

Professor Frances Arnold may be one of the honest scientists. She was awarded the Nobel Prize for chemistry in 2018 but three days ago announced she and her co-authors have retracted their subsequent paper as the ‘peer-reviewed (necessary for publication let alone a Nobel Prize) science’ has not been reproducible. Good on them…

Dave’s thoughts can be read in full here

Post a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.