- Joined
- Jul 24, 2011
- Messages
- 59,624
- Reaction score
- 51,654
- Location
- Georgia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Liberal
This is more on the reproducibility crisis in science.
In brief, scientists are rewarded with more publications and grant money the faster they turn out "novel" and exciting results. The puts downward pressure on the quality of the science since rigorous work takes more time. More and more false results are published. The bad scientists are rewarded, and their labs produce more bad scientists.
A corollary might be that the higher a lab's output, the more novel and exciting their results the more likely that they are bad and their results unreliable.
One can envision an entire field of science being taken over by bad scientists.
And, in my opinion, that is what has happened to climate science. And it's especially bad because it takes many years to prove that their predictions and discoveries are false. And, when they are proven false, they've got their advocates, political allies, and scientism noodnicks to cover for them.
What is your experience, if any, with scientific research?