Re: Why Most Published Research Findings Are False

From: Michael Roberts <michael.andrea.r@ukonline.co.uk>
Date: Tue Sep 06 2005 - 01:55:31 EDT

Wow! What utter nonsense
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: janice matchett
  To: Pim van Meurs
  Cc: asa@calvin.edu
  Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2005 12:45 AM
  Subject: Re: Why Most Published Research Findings Are False

  At 04:33 PM 9/4/2005, Pim van Meurs wrote:

    It pays off to read the paper in question as it presents a much better understanding as to why this is the case.

    The paper itself states " However, this should not be surprising. It can be proven that most claimed research findings are false."

    Interesting study which shows why science is such a challenging endeavor.

    *dila813 on http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1473915/posts explained it quite well*

    Pim

    What's your conclusion Janice?

  ## My conclusion? Follow the money. Money, power, and approval from their peers is what motivates those who engage in junk science and the religion of scientism. They outnumber serious scientists 99 to 1. Many of them teach their religion of scientism in science classes in the public schools.

  If children come out of the tax-payer funded schools believing that man will "destroy the planet" unless the USA signs the Kyoto "treaty", they have not learned "science" in science class.

  That is going to stop.

  Janice

    janice matchett wrote:

      Interesting article in case some haven't seen it. ~ Janice

      *Why Most Published Research Findings Are False
      *Published online 2005 August 30. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124.
      http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pubmed&pubmedid=16060722
      <http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?tool=pubmed&pubmedid=16060722>Copyright <http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/about/copyright.html>: 2005 John P. A. Ioannidis.

      The above was posted by me here in the thread below:
      http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1473915/posts?page=34#34

      *Most scientific papers are probably wrong
      <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1473915/posts>**newscientist.com ^ <http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1473915//%5Ehttp://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7915> *| 02:00 30 August 2005 | Kurt Kleiner
      Posted on *08/31/2005 3:09:18 AM EDT* by *dila813
      *http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1473915/posts
Received on Tue Sep 6 03:04:57 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Sep 06 2005 - 03:04:58 EDT