Psychology is not a science, it is an idle pastime constructed of conjectures, assumptions, gigantic leaps of logic, and personal desire for a specific pre-determined outcome designed solely to inflate the psychologist's feeling of importance among his/her peers.
http://www.nature.com/news/us-vaccine-researcher-sentenced-to-prison-for-fraud-1.17660 US vaccine researcher sentenced to prison for fraud http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...s-bullied-keeping-quiet-claim-colleagues.html 'Scientists falsify data to get research published and whistleblowers are bullied into keeping quiet,' claim their own colleagues http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-science-behind-the-volkswagen-emissions-scandal/ The Science behind the Volkswagen Emissions Scandal etc. etc. etc.
Sanders plan would also reduce the amount of money available for scientific research. Reduced research equals reduced progress for our country. When corporate taxes get raised to the point the incentive is reduced too far, companies will stop spending what little money they have left on R&D. Or they will move to Canada or Mexico where corporate taxes are already much less. You and Bernie just killed the future for our grandkids. On the bright side, Bernie’s plan will pay for our grandkids to learn how to communicate in Chinese, who will eventually own the USA under Bernie’s plan. The only way for our country to stay ahead of the rest of the world and China is to increase the incentive to do more scientific research, not reduce the incentive to conduct research. Yes, the politics involved in funding research can cause corruption; also much of the funding from sources with agendas often results in less than optimum results due to restrictions placed on the researcher to acquire the grants. The real problem is the politics within the system, not the scientists trying make a positive impact. Reducing the incentive to fund research will only cause more corruption, not less.
Okay Denny, I give up. I'm ready to make a deal with you. Create regulations to ensure truth and objectivity in science...and rich people, government, religion, media, prosecutors and the legal system...I'll just have to eat my losses.
I don't think regulations are required. Throw them in jail when you catch them. And don't let the fox guard the hen house (don't let scientists review criminal actions by other scientists). I do think skepticism is required. Not of science, but of the claims of scientists. There'a a lot of shamanism involved: "I'm the scientist so I know all this voodoo better than you and I say blah blah blah." Find an accountant or realtor you can trust and give them guns.
The funny thing is they poll scientists: 1) Do you falsify data? 2% say yes. 2) Do your colleagues falsify data? 74% say yes. Huge disconnect.
74% read articles that say that 2% falsify. I see no disconnect. I think it's far less than 2%, anyway. If your God of Money wanted 74% of scientists to report that 74% falsify, why did He falsify the 2% stat?
For several decades scientific "experts" swore hair samples could be proven to come from a specific person, thus easing the conviction of thousands of people accused of rape and hundreds of people accused of murder. Some were executed primarily on the basis of hair sample evidence. Along came DNA, and suddenly "experts" admitted that comparing hair samples was about as conclusive as comparing skin color. Now, supposedly DNA is indisputable evidence, according to the same lying experts who claimed that about hair samples. We really have no reason to believe these claims, but they are being used to imprison and execute people. Only slightly more credible than drowning someone to prove they are not a witch, which is what scientists did 200 years ago. The days of Da Vinci, Plato, Darwin and Newton are long gone. All supposed modern scientific discovery is accomplished by unimaginative people of malleable intelligence who derive their financial existence from either big government, big business or big religion. They were taught by big education, which is sometimes mistakenly considered to be somehow separate from big business. They have no hope of impartiality, nor any incentive to seek it or practice it. They are told the outcome desired and it is their job to assemble facts and structure studies and experiments so they will support the predetermined outcome. To trust them is to trust oil companies, nuclear power companies, Halliburton, the Catholic church, bomb makers, fascists, racists, genocidists, socialists, communists, capitalists, mysogynists, homophobics...in other words rich narcissists with ulterior motives who would make a lampshade from your baby's skin if it made them a tad richer, and never feel they had done something wrong.
Hey Denny, My lady who is an ND does research. When they start working on their Lupus study should I advocate against it? There's a reason why HIV isn't a death sentence anymore. That reason is science. (Sorry to hit home like that but I think you understand my point. It takes science to find treatments and cures)
