science - Thu Dec 29 2005

• Dec_29_2005
  
  A favorite Tolstoy quote of mine is "One of the most obtuse superstitions
  is the superstition of the scientists who say that man can exist without
  faith"
  
  http://apnews.myway.com//article/20051229/D8EQ47CG0.html
  
  As Hwang's frauds are disclosed, I wonder how they ever got past the
  editors at Science (and Nature? We'll see...). What will this fraud do
  to the faith of the scientist? If Hwang's article(s) is(are) fraudulent,
  how many others are too?
  
  I think back to a recent PLOS medicine article. Here it is... I put it in
  my weblog on Aug 29
  (http://home.ccil.org/~remlaps/weblog/science_index.html#FalseResearch-082905),
  "Why Most Published Research Findings Are False"...
  http://medicine.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10%2E1371%2Fjournal%2Epmed%2E0020124
  (John P. A. Ioannidis)
  
  Instead of just scoring articles based on the prestige of the journal
  where they're published, maybe someone could also start tracking
  confidence estimates for how likely the published finding is to be valid.
  
  Link for this entry: http://home.ccil.org/~remlaps/weblog/science_index.html#Hwang-122905
  

  ---

• Dec_28_2005
  
  Another -What Scientists Believe but Can't Prove- from UK's Times Online
  this time (linked by http://www.edge.org, that's how I found it).
  
  http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,8123-1957199,00.html
  
  I liked Blackmore, Leroi, Dover and Greenfield.
  
  Link for this entry: http://home.ccil.org/~remlaps/weblog/science_index.html#Believe-Proove=122805
  

  ---

• Dec_27_2005
  
  Have you heard? The bird flu is coming... Be quick. Raise taxes!
  
  > One of the USA's most important medical stories of the year is a disease
  > no American has.
  
  http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2005-12-27-bird-flu_x.htm?csp=15
  
  I kind of like this article too-
  http://www.newscientist.com/channel/health/bird-flu/mg18625023.100
  
  > Recent cases of H5N1 in northern Vietnam have caused concern because of
  > signs that the virus is changing. It has become less lethal and is
  > occurring in larger clusters than past cases.
  
  Did I read that right? "...cases ... have caused concern because ... It
  has become less lethal..."
  
  I see. Less lethal. Yes. That is quite concerning.
  
  And one more...
  http://www.newscientist.com/channel/health/bird-flu/dn3418
  
  No wonder scientists can't get funding for real science. This thing's
  been around since 1997 or earlier but the press is still ringing the bell
  for a call to arms against the bird flu. Hard to pay for cutting-edge
  science when you've got this imminent bird-flu thing beating down your
  door. It's a story of the year you know. I wonder how many years they'll
  be able to keep re-selling the same story of the year.
  
  Oh. And of course we must close with a little bit of obligatory
  sensationalism...
  
  > Major pandemics of influenza in 1918, 1957 and 1968 and left many
  > millions of people dead.
  
  (not my grammar)
  
  [For context, 1,000,000 people per year are dying from malaria. (http://www.scidev.net/Opinions/index.cfm?fuseaction=readOpinions&itemid=227&language=1)
  
  For context, Less then 600,000 Americans died in all 3 flu pandemics,
  combined. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandemic#Pandemics_through_history)
  
  For context, 3,000,000 people per year are dying from tobacco use.
  (http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat8.htm#Smoking)]
  Link for this entry: http://home.ccil.org/~remlaps/weblog/science_index.html#BirdFluAgain-122705
  

  ---