Stan Young saw and sent me this article by Freedman in PLOS Biology on the consequences of unreproducible (bad) biological research.
Stan’s note (Stan is a PhD in Stats and Genetics):
Where experiments are run and the researcher can control everything,
well over 50% of claims fail to replicate. Environmental epidemiology
has to be much worse as nothing is controlled and the researcher usually
has an agenda and an eye on funding. They get the answer they want, they
publish. They don’t get the answer they want, they simply don’t publish.
It has a name, publication bias. In the medical world researchers have
to register their trials. You can count failed studies. In the epi world
you just move on.
Freedman et al. say bad science is very expensive. Well bad epi is much
worse as it is not the cost of the research, but the cost of the
corrective action that is so expensive.
I would agree.
This is a shocking story, a rural town council imposing shame and then rape as a punishment for the sisters of a man who ran off with a woman of a higher caste? That’s a crime, deserving of such a punishment to be meted out on two innocent sisters of the man? Of course multiculturalists would say–who are you, or we, to judge. Different culture different values, yada yada.
It reminds one of mulsim honor killings and Bacha Bazi or child sex slavery in other cultures, or rape as a form of courtship. Yuuuuuk, it is a crime here and will remain so, I hope. Except in no go sharia zones, like Dearborne MI>
The important thing to consider in a world of leftist bullshitters, is they don’t really care if they are right or wrong, truthful or not–they are posing as concerned and superior, so evidence and truth is not important.
Discussing the future of domestic use of nuclear fusion technology–a jump up for sure.
The reason that social science studies are so junky is obvious–they are often loaded up with political agendas, driven by intellectual passion and the beneficiaries of journal editor publication bias and a desire to be covered by the mainstream press.
Psych and other social science journals are easy on authors and accepting of their papers if they are writing about what the lefty psych community wants to promote as reality.
Methodology and scientific integrity give way in the social sciences research community to consensus political agendas and confirmation/tunnel vision bias in the service of the “consensus.”