Peer Review: HISTORY

U27111 at U27111 at
Mon Jan 22 05:24:56 EST 1996

"David J. States" <states at> wrote on Sun, 21 Jan 1996
21:14:14 -0600:

>Cutting back on the number of scientists trying to solve these
>very real problems is, in my view, not the solution.

I disagree.  Cutting back on those who produce garbage would really
help.  It would result in more money to go around to those who are
good scientists, and not producing garbage.

>Acquiring the skills needed to appropriately check scientists in
>their work is essentially the same as being trained to be a

???  What's wrong with this statement?

Sounds like circular logic to me?  No?

>and the work of validating scientific findings is the essence of
>science itself.

Wrong.  Relentless pursuit of truth is the essence of science.

Having to sit and validate 'supposed' scientific findings is a
waste of time in a rapidly moving field.

Or validating our own work (whether it be right or wrong) instead
of pursing truths is also a waste of time.

If we were validating our own work as we were doing it... then
that's another story.  But that would mean self-interest would have
to be put to the side and people would actually have to care if
what they were doing was valid or not in the first place?  Which is
something we don't generally have within our community.

>So it seems that we agree that the solution is adequately
>supporting more scientist really doing good science.

No we don't.  Because we need to do more then 'adequately' support
these scientists doing good work.  Much more.


More information about the Bioforum mailing list