Article

2006-01-15 -Short Attention Span Theater-

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by lotp 2006-01-15 00:00|| || Front Page|| [4 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Don't forget it was the Lancet that printed the phony 100,000 death toll figure for Iraq in 2004 when the actual death toll was more like about 20,000. The phony figure was seized on by the BBC of course who beat it up in anti-US style:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3962969.stm

The report was discredited but of course it still pops up everywhere as people just LOVE to quote discredited figures when they agree with it.

You have to go a fair few pages in on Google before you find a result that exposes this phony figure as you'll be snowed under with search results repeating it as if it were fact.

Here's one debunking:
http://reclusiveantiquarian.blogspot.com/2006/01/fabricating-iraqs-death-toll.html

Here's the Washington Times debunking:
http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20060104-085709-7440r.htm

Here's the Andrew Bolt debunking (now removed from the herald sun but reprinted here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1366322/posts

Posted by anon1 2006-01-15 08:37|| 2006-01-15 08:37|| Front Page Top

#2 Happens much more often than you think. I've seen two instances of forged data in my career

I don't know how often you have the chance to observe researchers in your career, Dr. White, but I suspect often enough that two instances isn't a lot. We're talking about human beings who are relatively unsupervised with substantial egos.

When you consider the lies the management of Enron, Tyco and Adelphia were able to perpetrate in the face of outside auditors, legal, SEC and analyst review it is surprising only that there is not more fraud in science and academics in general given the rather less stringent vetting.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2006-01-15 09:00|| 2006-01-15 09:00|| Front Page Top

#3 Maybe soon they will start to refer to it as the "influential" Lancet, like the "influential" Association of Muslim Scholars. You know, those lying loser guys.

Posted by Anonymoose 2006-01-15 09:56|| 2006-01-15 09:56|| Front Page Top

#4 it is surprising only that there is not more fraud in science and academics

Science is a process and not a system of beliefs. It relies on reproducible experiments and testable theories. You can get away with scams and fraud, but eventually, you will get found out.

In the academic world in general, where the testing and checking is lacking, the situation is a little different.

Posted by SteveS 2006-01-15 09:57|| 2006-01-15 09:57|| Front Page Top

00:33 C-Low
23:49 49 Pan
23:38 Fred
23:36 macofromoc
23:35 49 Pan
23:34 2b
23:32 Cheper Unavise7761
23:30 49 Pan
22:52 trailing wife
22:47 2b
22:46 Skidmark
22:42 trailing wife
22:37 Anonymoose
22:19 ed
22:15 Penguin
22:10 ed
21:56 ed
21:54 bigjim-ky
21:54 wxjames
21:47 ed
21:41 Pappy
21:40 wxjames
21:40 Rafael
21:37 DMFD