What is Digg?Sponsored by newegg
Ready. Set. Shop view!
newegg.com - Newegg.com Black Friday Sale starting 11/25 3PM PST. No Lines, No Crowds, Click and Save.
27 Comments
- PowderedToasty, on 11/10/2009, -1/+20Note: Evolution is NOT on the fringes of science. Thank you.
- jaytek13, on 11/10/2009, -1/+17::cough::string theory::cough::
- ohmytodd, on 11/10/2009, -1/+16Dugg down. No mention of Dr. Walter Bishop.
- Asrrin29, on 11/10/2009, -0/+13Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. If a brand new, out of the gate supposedly "fringe" theory wants to be taken seriously, it must make all the predictions of the current standard model (or at least be extremely close to real world observations) and also provide new, testable, predictions that can prove or disprove it. I'm sorry, but there is a big difference between MOND (which, though flawed, is attempting to very seriously come up with alternatives to dark matter/energy) and something like Creationism. One is clearly in the realm of testable predictions, even if it may prove false, and the other is not even science, but a lame attempt by unscientific people to force their worldviews on the population at large.
- mparker21311, on 11/10/2009, -0/+8I often get upset while discussing science with politically correct ***** because they have this dogmatic belief that science is politically correct.
- doctechnical, on 11/10/2009, -1/+9Wasn't the idea that bacteria might cause stomach ulcers considered heresy until recently?
There's an old canard in science, that really revolutionary ideas never get explored until the old scientists that consider them nonsense get out of the way (retire, die, etc). Science is a fantastic system for exploring and understanding our universe, but because it's implemented by humans, it's flawed. I think that's important to keep in mind, and I think a little money thrown toward "heretical" research, if for no other reason than to be SURE it's silly, ain't a bad idea. - indyGuy, on 11/10/2009, -1/+7would've liked more examples int the article...
- Junkyarddawg, on 11/10/2009, -1/+6Yes it was, but mostly because big pharma suppressed the idea. You can't make a lot of money off of curing a patient with antibiotics, but you can off of selling gastric acid relievers to chronic sufferers.
And if someone thinks I'm being overly conspiratorical here, you need to do some reading about gastric ulcers and Helicobacter pylori. - bazzarr, on 11/10/2009, -1/+6Thumb is from the Outer Limits episode "Demon with a Glass Hand" w/ Robert Culp.
- Junkyarddawg, on 11/10/2009, -0/+4Williamson, the "butterfly & larva hybridizing" guy, has made a whole career out of publishing bizarre articles about impossible hybridizations:
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=%22w ...
He's a typical representative the tenured and completely bonkers, but not so bonkers that he can't write a coherent paper, scientist, a species almost only found in the UK. This unfortunately means that a lot of the truly bizarre and irreproducible stuff comes from the UK. Just yesterday we had the yearly recurring "ring finger length determines your personality" article here on Digg, another crank topic from the UK.
The take-home message really is that science is conservative to avoid accepting too many false theories, but theories which are true tend to survive the test of time and become mainstream, no matter how fringey they seem at first. - aecarol, on 11/10/2009, -1/+5Fringe ideas are often defended with "They laughed at Einstein". Which should be retorted, "They also laughed at Bozo The Clown".
- inajeep, on 11/10/2009, -0/+4"Ignoring reality is a remarkably frequent problem as one heads deeper into the fringes."
Tell me about it, amazingly there are a lot of organized groups of people that fall in line with that statement but I'm not going down that path right now. Fringe scientific ideas are fine and are considered and met with criticism and diligent discussion. If you are expecting people to agree with you with little or no disagreement then your crazy. No discussion is needed. It's those really weird proclamations with zero evidence or supporting data plus the shear number of theories and ideas that is daunting. The Ars article hits a few good points on the matter. Testable ideas and repeatable experiments are the bare minimum requirements. - gakboi, on 11/10/2009, -4/+7I think close mindedness in science is especially and dangerously true in social sciences where the 'science' is a closed doors boys club. Referencing has become circular between a select few academic 'experts' which closes the door on radical ideas. With the ever increasing volume of knowledge (moores law curve) social sciences are soon going to be left behind. When it takes up to 6 years for a paper to go from draft to published the practical application of the ideas within the paper will have been tried and tested and the real world will have moved beyond the scope of the paper therefore rendering the paper next to useless. This can best been seen in the practice of publishing drafts online, as people can't wait for their paper to be published. I have experienced and seen many examples of academics ridiculing work and dismissing it when a few months later said work seems almost prophetic. If we are to move forward as a global society the establishment is going to have to accept that the rules have changed and that they are no longer the only gatekeepers of knowledge
- neoquietus, on 11/10/2009, -0/+2It was considered "heresy"... until a scientist provided strong evidence (AKA: Proof). Science is all about evidence and testability, and the burden of proof is on the person who suggests an idea, not on the people he tells it to.
- doctechnical, on 11/10/2009, -0/+1@neoquietus - Agreed, but proof doesn't always come cheap, and the people who hold the purse strings aren't going to give you the money if they're convinced you're full of *****. That's my point. Let's spread a little love to the "heretical" ideas and see what happens. I like surprises :)
- gakboi, on 11/10/2009, -0/+1i was talking solely about social sciences. There is no black and white right or wrong and no one can prove their case 100% either way. John Nash is a prime example of this. His application of game theory (developed in the 60's) was and is still used by politicians in the UK and the USA to dictate policy even though he has now conceded that it is completely wrong
- kingmanic, on 11/10/2009, -0/+1The system and method itself rewards radicals. Because overturning a long held theory will make you wealthy and famous there is ample motivation to attempt new things and review old findings. The notion science is a closed doors boys club is the work of fiction.
One of the unofficial axioms of science:
"Wrong ideas will persists only so long as it's most renowned promoted lives."
PS. accumulation of scientific knowledge follows a linear path. linear in respects to the number of scientists around. The constant on the linear trajectory may change with technology but you still need people to write the papers and technology doesn't accelerate that. - getter1, on 11/10/2009, -0/+1String Theory is falsifiable, just give it a decade or two before we have the tech and people willing to fund it.
- jbmcb, on 11/10/2009, -1/+2It's the only episode of any TV show I ever bought on tape. Harlan Ellison FTW.
- mt4055, on 11/10/2009, -0/+1I had to watch it again on youtube. Great show, but I have always wondered how they managed to conquer earth in 18 days using only snub-nosed revolvers.
- bazzarr, on 11/10/2009, -0/+11: They used space bullets in those 5 shot revolvers
2:When the dopey looking Kyben (with their hung over dark circle eyes, stupid hats and silly guns) landed on Earth , the humans laughed themselves right onto that wire in Trent's chest.
3:Do not question the Kyben.
4: One thousand years in the future we will have given up the use of weapons entirely making us easy pickings for any aliens dressed in Frank Gorshin's Riddler tights. - sndream, on 11/10/2009, -0/+1I think it's important for ppl to differentiate between fringe science and (cargo) cult science. Fringe science is usually just bizarre and most likely wrong. Whereas (cargo) cult science are simply impossible without the existing of a magically space daddy or any ***** the cult believe in plus they usually sound like a skipping CD.
- hereticoftruth, on 11/10/2009, -1/+1Actually, Newtonian Dynamics applied correctly rather than modified Newtonian Dynamics yields results closer to observations. For example concerning current dark matter theories. Not enough consideration is given to how much stronger local gravitational attraction between stars is compared to the total galactic gravitational attraction. When it is taken into account one can understand why the outer disk behaves more like a solid plate than a simple application to the entire galaxy. Then there is no more need for "dark matter" to explain the observed universe. Newtonian Mechanics applied correctly also yields results similar to but different than Einstein's E=MC2 formula. At very high velocities the results diverge more rapidly from Einstein's theory which is slow at predicting the increase in the "mass effect" at higher speeds. So they should be carefully observing what is really happening when they power up CERN.
- Junkyarddawg, on 11/10/2009, -1/+1It wasn't a question of scientific conservatism at all. Big pharma spent millions of dollars on PR to convince doctors that the idea that gastric ulcers are caused by bacteria was wrong, and Astra bought and buried the genome of _H. pylori_ when it was first sequenced. They managed to delay widespread acceptance of the idea by some ten years, in which time they made billions of dollars and thousands of people suffered needlessly.
I've worked for pharmaceutical companies, and the level of cynicism is unbelievable. One really must not confuse medicine and the pharmaceutical industry with science in general; if there is such a thing as "evil" in science, you will find it in the field of medicine. All due to the enormous amounts of money in that field. Huge sums of money can corrupt anyone. - lolmax, on 11/10/2009, -3/+1the world is ruled by shape-shifting lizards
- Ferretman, on 11/10/2009, -5/+2*cough*global warming*cough*
- biogears, on 11/10/2009, -7/+2::cough::global cooling::cough::
::cough::Acid rain::cough::
::cough::Frog deformities::cough::
::cough::ozone hole::cough::
::cough::heterosexual aids::cough::
::cough::population bomb::cough::
::cough::climate change::cough::
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is