“Walloper” commented about CFACT’s money source and why from that one should be skeptical of CFACT’s activities. However, from Captain Ed we learn that a full third of scientists are unethical in their research, many of them (15%) adjust their data and methods from pressure from their monetary source.
A third of the scientists in a nationwide survey admitted to violating some of the bedrock rules of scientific research, according to a report by a team of Minnesota researchers.
The survey, of more than 3,200 U.S. scientists, found that hardly anyone admitted to falsifying data outright.
But a surprising 33 percent confessed to other kinds of misconduct — such as claiming credit for someone else’s work, or changing results because of pressure from a study’s sponsor.
Well, go figure.
Just keep saying to yourself “Crichton only writes fiction”
Filed under: Numbers and Studies, Science |
Marty Andrade 
Actually, if you read the article, you’ll see that only three-tenths of 1 percent of scientists said they falsified data outright.
Most of that 1/3 is made up of other sorts of unethical practices, including improper relationships with subjects. Those practices aren’t good, either, but it’s not accurate to say that “a full third of scientists fudge data.”
But a very large percentage changed their methods, and did other things to change the results of their data.
Very similiar to what the EPA did in their 1993 2nd hand smoke study, where they changed the alpha score to get a result (from .05 to .10)
“A significant number –15 percent — said they had changed the design, methods or results of a study in response to pressure from a financial sponsor.
In addition, 7 percent admitted ignoring “minor” rules for protecting human subjects. And 6 percent said that they failed to report data that contradicted their previous work.”
Are you going to change your original post so that it no longer says “a full third of scientists fudge data”?