The Naked Scientists
Toggle navigation
Login
Register
Podcasts
The Naked Scientists
eLife
Naked Genetics
Naked Astronomy
In short
Naked Neuroscience
Ask! The Naked Scientists
Question of the Week
Archive
Video
SUBSCRIBE to our Podcasts
Articles
Science News
Features
Interviews
Answers to Science Questions
Get Naked
Donate
Do an Experiment
Science Forum
Ask a Question
About
Meet the team
Our Sponsors
Site Map
Contact us
User menu
Login
Register
Search
Home
Help
Search
Tags
Recent Topics
Login
Register
Naked Science Forum
General Science
General Science
Why publish data you know is probobly wrong?
« previous
next »
Print
Pages: [
1
]
Go Down
Why publish data you know is probobly wrong?
2 Replies
4237 Views
0 Tags
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
krool1969
(OP)
Full Member
53
Activity:
0%
Why publish data you know is probobly wrong?
«
on:
26/03/2012 06:03:20 »
When I first heard of faster than light neutrinos, the first thing I thought was, "OK what did they do wrong."
This same thought MUST have occurred to the researchers who found and then published the data. Why didn't they go back and check their data again?
Logged
Geezer
Naked Science Forum King!
8314
Activity:
0%
Thanked: 8 times
"Vive la résistance!"
Re: Why publish data you know is probobly wrong?
«
Reply #1 on:
26/03/2012 07:04:34 »
They did. Lots of times, but they could not find a problem, so they published it to see if anyone else could.
I'm pretty sure they were just as skeptical as you are, but data is data, and data should not be suppressed even if there is a good chance the conclusions might be suspect.
Logged
There ain'ta no sanity clause, and there ain'ta no centrifugal force æther.
imatfaal
Naked Science Forum King!
2782
Activity:
0%
Thanked: 1 times
rouge moderator
Re: Why publish data you know is probobly wrong?
«
Reply #2 on:
26/03/2012 09:48:28 »
You must always publish wrong data! That's the whole point of experimentation; in some fields the results are so smeared out that if you do enough runs of an experiment and only publish the stuff that is "right" you gain false credence for a theory that is completely incorrect. Medical testing by the pharmacological companies is a prime example of this problem - Ben Goldacre has written extensively on it.
For data where you believe the methodology is correct but you have a unknown bug - then you publish as Geezer mentioned to get thousands of extra minds on the case. Additionally - it also stops others making similar mistakes
Tevatron: My dog has got fleas - wish I knew how to get rid of them
LHC: when my dog got fleas I gave him arsenic
Tevatron: arsenic...hmmm
.....a few days later
Tevatron: I gave my dog arsenic and it just died
LHC: yep - that's what happened to mine
Logged
There’s no sense in being precise when you don’t even know what you’re talking about. John Von Neumann
At the surface, we may appear as intellects, helpful people, friendly staff or protectors of the interwebs. Deep down inside, we're all trolls. CaptainPanic @ sf.n
Print
Pages: [
1
]
Go Up
« previous
next »
Tags:
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...