Bad science?

To suggest that scientists funded by oil companies are doing "bad science" is nothing more than an ad hominem attack. If research is funded by an organization with a stake in the matter such that it would like to see the research come out a certain way, that might be sufficient reason to question the work more closely, but at bottom, the validity of science is not based in any way on the motives of those doing the research, but the ability of others to verify the results produced.The fact of the matter is that a great deal of research is conducted by someone who wants to see the results come out a certain way. I would venture to guess that most research is conducted by someone who has proposed a theory after observing a perceived regularity with a purpose to the research of gathering data to support the theory. Obviously, such a researcher hopes that the research will support the theory. That's precisely why it's important that results be repeatable.It's my impression that the biggest threat, generally, to the reliability of scientific research is not the person who willfully skews results for neferious purposes, but the well-intentioned researcher who is unconsciously influenced by a desire to prove a proposed theory.

---

Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin

I agree with this much. I do not agree with the rest. To me, being a scientist merely requires following the scientific method. It's an approach one takes in observing the world, making hypotheses about one's observations, and testing those hypotheses. More training and more education certainly improves one's ability to do those things, but it's not necessary. Follow the right approach and you are a scientist.

---

Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin

Maybe we'll just have to agree to disagree, because I stand by my definition.Certainly the things that you talk about make one a better scientist. And publication in peer review journals and discovery of new information are things that one can point to as evidence to prove to a third person that one is a scientist. However, I still maintain that the sine qua non of being a scientist is following the scientific method. That is both necessary and sufficient.

---

Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin

Yes.

---

Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin

Hey, if the used ones you are selling are the old wooden kind, I'm all over that! Much better than the new, plastic ones.

---

Those who would sacrifice an essential liberty for a temporary security will lose both, and deserve neither. -- Benjamin Franklin