Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 76 (8908 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 05-20-2019 9:19 PM
29 online now:
dwise1 (1 member, 28 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WeloTemo
Happy Birthday: Percy
Post Volume:
Total: 851,666 Year: 6,703/19,786 Month: 1,244/1,581 Week: 66/393 Day: 49/17 Hour: 0/3


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Harvard Researcher May Have Fabricated Data
Taz
Member (Idle past 1427 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 9 of 65 (577562)
08-29-2010 4:05 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Percy
08-29-2010 9:35 AM


First of all, Percy, that avatar creeps me out everytime I look at it. Could you please use something else less horrifying?

Any idea who blew the whistle on this one?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Percy, posted 08-29-2010 9:35 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by Modulous, posted 08-29-2010 4:46 PM Taz has not yet responded

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 1427 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 17 of 65 (577654)
08-29-2010 11:03 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by Bolder-dash
08-29-2010 7:23 PM


Bolderdash writes:

Surely you are not also going to claim that because a guy lie and cheated, and was caught by a major university, and they actually did something about it, that this is a great badge of honor for the scientific community are you?
The Catholic church also punished a few priests you know?


(1) Did the scientific community spend hundreds of millions of dollars to cover these up like the catholic church?

(2) His own students turned him in. Can you say the same about those priests and the catholic church?

(3) What about all those miracle healers like Peter Popoff?

That's right, it took a gay atheist skeptic to expose this fraud instead of you hollier than thou religionists. How do you explain that?

(4) This is a classic example of science's self-correcting nature. It is impossible for any researcher to commit fraud without somebody blowing the whistle. In this case, his own students did before any other researchers tried to replicate his experiments. And even if they hadn't, eventually people who couldn't replicate the results of his experiments would have called him on it.

Can the same thing be said about the faith healers?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Bolder-dash, posted 08-29-2010 7:23 PM Bolder-dash has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by archaeologist, posted 08-30-2010 7:24 AM Taz has not yet responded

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 1427 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 44 of 65 (577890)
08-30-2010 10:35 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by archaeologist
08-30-2010 5:19 PM


archaeologist writes:

yes someone did say it or it wouldn't have been quoted. i am going to have to change my quoting habits to make sure editing doesn't take place after i quote theperson.


Oh, please do tell us who this person was.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by archaeologist, posted 08-30-2010 5:19 PM archaeologist has not yet responded

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 1427 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 56 of 65 (577975)
08-31-2010 9:21 AM
Reply to: Message 47 by archaeologist
08-31-2010 4:25 AM


I don't mean to say this right after he's suspended, but I really need to bring this to people's attention.

In message 23, archaeologist said...

quote:
no it is not impossible for any researcher to commit fraud.

Huntard in response said

quote:
Nobody ever said it was.

Archaeologist replied in message 36

quote:
yes someone did say it or it wouldn't have been quoted. i am going to have to change my quoting habits to make sure editing doesn't take place after i quote theperson.

He was referring to my message 17, which I said

quote:
This is a classic example of science's self-correcting nature. It is impossible for any researcher to commit fraud without somebody blowing the whistle.

I never edited that message. So, archaeologist is saying outright that I tried to lie, which I did not.

This is dishonesty on archaeologist's part.

Edited by Taz, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by archaeologist, posted 08-31-2010 4:25 AM archaeologist has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by Admin, posted 08-31-2010 9:47 AM Taz has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019