Wed, Apr-21-10, 21:44
|
Registered Member
Posts: 6,639
|
|
Plan: Wingin' it.
Stats: 257/240.0/130
BF:yes!
Progress: 13%
Location: U.S.A.
|
|
'If it’s consensus, it isn’t science. If it's science, it isn't consensus. Period.'
Consensus doesn't stop science from being done.
'Responding to generalized concerns, the NIH has recently produced new rules for grant writing and reviews, mainly with the intent to stimulate formulation of new ideas, but in the end it is us who must forcefully strive for the honest debate of truthful facts for the benefit of all. It is our responsibility as scientists, physicians, reviewers, and/or editors to be alert and always remember that “...consensus is invoked only in situations where the science is not solid enough.'
I don't think the last sentence in accurate. ONLY in situations where the science is not solid enough? I don't believe that at all.
Michael Crichton died recently,didn't he? He is better known as an author than as a scientist, although he was very skilled at using science in his books. His impassioned plea to disregard consensus might be the imaginative author in him speaking, not the working scientist.
Last edited by mathmaniac : Wed, Apr-21-10 at 21:50.
|