Re: [asa] Expelled and ID

From: David Opderbeck <>
Date: Wed Apr 23 2008 - 22:05:31 EDT

No, it isn't a question of individual bias. The point is that at a broader
level, institutional science is not truly objective. Research priorities
are decided based on many factors that involve very fallible, subjective
human judgment.

On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 8:26 PM, Dennis Venema <> wrote:

> Hmm. I still don't see your point. Yes, funding, etc can direct research
> for example, I do work on diabetes / insulin signaling because I am funded
> to do so but does that mean you think that I introduce a bias into my
> results because of my funding source? Yes, funding can direct the *types *of
> experiments that are done, but the data is still the data if it can be
> reproduced the *quality *of the experiments should not be affected. In
> cases where things were skewed/faked for an agenda the deception comes to
> light when someone tries to repeat the experiments.
> dennis
> On 4/23/08 5:16 PM, "David Opderbeck" <> wrote:
> At the risk of sounding anti-science, which I don't think I am, I don't
> see how you can gainsay that institutional science is skewed by agendas and
> viewpoints that aren't always objectively scientific. Institutional science
> is driven by funding. Funding is allocated by a relatively small,
> relatively non-diverse segment of both the general public and the scientific
> community, and the mechanisms and procedures of funding are truly accessible
> only to an equally small and non-diverse population.
> Moreover, in some areas, particularly public health and pharmaceuticals,
> funding mechanisms are heavily influenced by intellectual property rights,
> markets, and multinational corporate interests. The data is the data, but
> the question of which data gets developed -- which research programs get
> funded -- is heavily influenced by social, cultural and economic factors
> that may have little to do with scientific merit or the broader pursuit of
> truth.
> (I am not here suggesting that claims of peer review bias against ID
> advocates have merit. That in particular isn't my bailiwick, but I do
> believe that peer review is not as objective as it is often made out to be).

David W. Opderbeck
Associate Professor of Law
Seton Hall University Law School
Gibbons Institute of Law, Science & Technology
To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Wed Apr 23 22:06:40 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Apr 23 2008 - 22:06:40 EDT