You are right. When I said, the sample size must be atleat 10, I only meant a highly controlled group with very little variables. For example adult male rats weighing 90 to 100 grams body weight.If you are studying a human population, the sample size must run into thousands.
You are right on. Learning the theory and applying them in practise are two different issues. It takes along time to achieve this. Unfortunately many engineers have to complete the degree program and get employed. Too many of them lack this ability to read between lines and find the solution. Our schools do not focus on multidiciplinary approach and even problem solving.Electronic components are too sensitive with static electtricity. Component failure is an issue. From the practical point of view component testing is very rarely done nowadays.The technology has also changed. We have microcircuits and modules for every function. From component level, now we have to go to the level of modules. Therefore, it must be lot easier for the engineers to do troubleshooting now.
This was never meant to insult anyone. We are not in ideal institutions. There are the best schools where they are highly disciplined with high morals. Not all the faculty follow such self imposed discipline. If every one followed this, we do not have to ahave this discussion at all.
When you described how you work, I have to salute you for upholding ethics in your work. I am wishing you all the best. My observations were made at a medical school where I was a Post Doc. My grant was cut off becaue I refused to extrapolate the data from 1 experiment to 8 for an abstract for a conference.This is unbelievable yet, true. A graduate student of my boss did not even know the difference between a poly peptide and aprotein. Paper mills exist. you cannot deny this. Pursuing science in simple terms is nothing but, mental discipline. The most important issue underlying everything is the motive. If the motive is to publish papers, then ethics are out of the window. I am yet to find someone to ask me what did I accomplish. This ought to be the measure of the competency of a scientist. I have only been asked "HOW MANY PAPERS DO YOU HAVE"? I am really irritated with this question. I am not against publishing papers. Papers are important. The question is what should be published? You can have a gas chromatograph and analyse the lipid profile of the adipose tissue of an african elephant. Is it worthy of publication? Does it help the society in any way? These are the question every scientist must ask.
I am sure most of those in science want to do their best. However, pressures over tenures, grants etc do not allow them to do the best. Yes, when you become hte faculty, you will find out.
Re: still waiting for randman's answers to questions raised earlier in the thread
I do not think so. In unpublished materials, you only find the quote. There is no inforamtion on the objective, experimental design, experimental data, results and discussion. Without these, it is hard to critique.
I believe there are many great biologist, scientist of all fields that are doing a marvelous work under great pressure. I also believe there are scientist that have an agenda and will twist anything to say what they want. Just as I believe there are so called Christians that do the same thing. All having their minds seared with a hot iron just like you. That they are blinded and cannot and will not see the truth.
The above quoted relates to message there both up and down thread. I thought it merited bumping this topic.
IMO, the discussion at the beginning of this topic is very good. What happens later, I don't know.
New Members should start HERE to get an understanding of what makes great posts.