Science, Creation & EvolutionThe dangers of EvolutionThat is patently false. Funding of science is a complex process and, at the National Science Foundation, is based on external reviews of the proposal, in-house panels and the director. Funding is based on innovation and the opportunity to learn something new. BY definition, one cannot make new breakthroughs if you are not willing to take a chance and challenge the current paradigms and hypotheses. The simple truth is that science would be stalled if no work was done challenging the paradigm. The second thought (faked results) does not follow the first. In fact, the most often cited research is breakthrough research. As a reviewer for several scientific journals (including Nature) one of the most important questions asked of a reviewer is "Does this research present something new and innovative". Faked evidence and lies are not exclusive to science. One can look to religious (Jim and Tammy), politics (Ms. Lewinski), sports (steroids, corked bats) and just about anywhere else you care to look. Most papers I read discuss data that did not fit and most of the exciting research conclusions come from studies where the results were odd. THere most certainly is. I've been funded for re-checking some earlier results and I've found errors in the previous results that arose from applying the improper techniques on the samples. Whenever those strange new ideas crop up, you can bet that every scientist who is interested makes some attempt to test the new idea by repeating the experiment (does anyone remember cold fusion)? I don't think it puts a realistic spin on his words, but I do agree that you did spin them as best you could. E- |
🌈Pride🌈 goeth before Destruction
When 🌈Pride🌈 cometh, then cometh Shame