Reader Mail – 08/11/2013 To 08/17/2013

I should try to get back into blogging again. I've been distracted for awhile, but I should get back to it eventually.
Dan commented on Climategate Dismissed.
I mean what I said, not what you said I meant.

Dissenting opinions have a greater barrier to publication not because of collusion by a majority, but because it is rather difficult to find publication-quality evidence for something that is simply untrue.

Yes, there can be some degree of censorship, but this idea that science as an institution is simply one giant echo-chamber is frankly only a point of view espoused by those outside of academia (and by this I mean, those who have not practiced genuine research and had to make a proper investigation of a hypothesis for an audience of skeptics).

It is cavalier and disingenuous to simply characterize it as "majority vote".

Are you suggesting that the truth should be settled by one experiment and one paper, and whoever publishes first gets to decide reality?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>