![]() Diversity in the methodology employed in research is also a safeguard against bias and mistakes. The positive results were due to the fact that all the scientists were using the same methodology and making the same mistake! When all the positive results come from scientists using the same methodology, and these results can’t be supported by any other methods, there may be a problem. Nonetheless, polywater was eventually demonstrated to be false. Many scientists set to work on polywater and they were able to obtain the same results reported by other scientists (the results were reproducible). In another post I have also mentioned the case of polywater, a seemingly new form of water with many potential applications. Diversity in the scientists that practice science is a safeguard against bias and mistakes. When all the positive results originate from one state, or organization, or lab, we should be concerned. During the course of the investigation of N-Rays, at one point it became evident that almost all of the positive results were coming out of French labs. I have mentioned in a previous post the famous case of N-rays, the mysterious radiation discovered by the French scientist René Blondlot, and confirmed by other French scientists, that turned out to be nothing but a case of self-delusion. The answer is diversity: diversity in scientists, and diversity in methodology. How do we know they are not doing it in these cases? But from their rhetoric, I think we can draw one valid question that is worth addressing: How do we know there is no conspiracy? The government has been shown to have lied in the past, as well as have many other institutions and organizations. You could even say that they are at the fringe of antiscience groups such as climate change deniers, antivaxers, or creationists. Admittedly, the case of Flat Earthers is an extreme example.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |