Friday, October 12, 2018


How do you get people to understand, imperfection in the scientific process, does not negate it?

People put together experiments and study existing literature.  Still others follow populations and make observations on the reactions of the population to different conditions all in an effort to understand how things have become the way they are.  Even more important, figuring out how things will be in the future.  It is how we are going to save a place on the planet for ourselves, or not, if people continue to ignore good science because they've heard some science is poorly done, or the result is not in their best, short term, interest.

Good science can have a lot of pitfalls and bad leads. The bad leads can't be ignored, have to be explained and looked at with appropriate weight.  It does not make something a bad lead if the only issue is that it does not support the hypothesis (What the designer of the experiment expected the result to be, or prove).  All the same, if you have one experiment that gives a contrary result, it does not obliterate the hypothesis - unless it does.  Yes, it's complicated sometimes.

If you find an issue with a study, on any topic, it does not mean you have killed the validity of the result.  It has to be weighed and looked at with the whole of the study.  If it does kill it then so be it, we have learned.  If the result holds up, so be it, we have learned. Learning is after all the goal of real science.

Hopefully the thrill of getting it right is better than the rush of being right.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Anything worth saying is worth putting your name to, Aliased comments will be removed no matter how correct or agreeable they are. We stay civil and FACTUAL. Comments containing misinformation will be removed at our discretion.