Today I'm angry about.....

[BWFC_Insane]

my point being that you suggested that lots of scientific research is laughable because it is rejected by peer review. Yet "peer review" is at the heart of how scientific research is done - the fact that it is rejected shows that the scientific method is working - not that it is laughable or ridiculous.

the problem that Bobo is angry about is more about the media not understanding science than it is about science.

Ok. You got me. Badly worded on my part. Yes, peer review works, but it also lets through lots it shouldn't. Having been a party to the process and having seen the reviewers comments on 1,000s of occasions I can assure you that lots gets published that belongs in science fiction.

I think you probably could do with stating where it gets published though......

Because publications vary in quality and rigour and given e-publishing now, I suspect, without knowing, that its far easier to get your work published, somewhere, somehow, than it was before the internet.

However, my point is that the best work is picked up by others, tested, extrapolated, improved, commented upon. And that process does tend to lead to throughly tested and accepted ideas and principles, where the vast majority of the scientific community will agree.

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

I think you probably could do with stating where it gets published though......

Because publications vary in quality and rigour and given e-publishing now, I suspect, without knowing, that its far easier to get your work published, somewhere, somehow, than it was before the internet.

However, my point is that the best work is picked up by others, tested, extrapolated, improved, commented upon. And that process does tend to lead to throughly tested and accepted ideas and principles, where the vast majority of the scientific community will agree.

The thing is, it gets published in all sorts of journals. Some of them quite prestigious. I don't think we're that far apart here, just that I have seen first hand what goes into peer review, what makes it out and what doesn't. The majority is good, some isn't. The some is sometimes taken as fact and therein lies my argument that some science is bollocks or based on prejudice or an agenda.

[Hoboh]

Aye bundles of government sponsership meaning laptops and shiney offices instead of pencil and paper in dingy cellers works wonders for band waggon jumpers and misery for taxpayers conned into paying for it!!
I still await the day I wake up to 70+ degrees outside every morning!

[BWFC_Insane]

Aye bundles of government sponsership meaning laptops and shiney offices instead of pencil and paper in dingy cellers works wonders for band waggon jumpers and misery for taxpayers conned into paying for it!!
I still await the day I wake up to 70+ degrees outside every morning!

Being ignorant about the issue isn't an excuse.

Clearly you know better than people who have studied for years and devoted their lives to climate research. Good on ya. Where are you published exactly?

And perhaps you could point me to where these shiny offices are? I'd not mind a job there.....

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Aye bundles of government sponsership meaning laptops and shiney offices instead of pencil and paper in dingy cellers works wonders for band waggon jumpers and misery for taxpayers conned into paying for it!!
I still await the day I wake up to 70+ degrees outside every morning!

That's weather which is local. Climate is averaged, long term and global weathers. Climate change, often referred to as Global Warming will not necessarily give you toasty bbq weather. Your gain (at the moment) of a few percent of a degree rise in climate change equates to lots of rain in the UK, which is the polar bears loss, because for him it is a shrinking of the summer ice to unprecedented levels.

[BWFC_Insane]

Aye bundles of government sponsership meaning laptops and shiney offices instead of pencil and paper in dingy cellers works wonders for band waggon jumpers and misery for taxpayers conned into paying for it!!
I still await the day I wake up to 70+ degrees outside every morning!

That's weather which is local. Climate is averaged, long term and global weathers. Climate change, often referred to as Global Warming will not necessarily give you toasty bbq weather. Your gain (at the moment) of a few percent of a degree rise in climate change equates to lots of rain in the UK, which is the polar bears loss, because for him it is a shrinking of the summer ice to unprecedented levels.

Oh dear. I'm not sure the "I reckons" deal in facts.

[Hoboh]

Aye bundles of government sponsership meaning laptops and shiney offices instead of pencil and paper in dingy cellers works wonders for band waggon jumpers and misery for taxpayers conned into paying for it!!
I still await the day I wake up to 70+ degrees outside every morning!

Being ignorant about the issue isn't an excuse.

Clearly you know better than people who have studied for years and devoted their lives to climate research. Good on ya. Where are you published exactly?

And perhaps you could point me to where these shiny offices are? I'd not mind a job there.....

Bit off beat but you ever seen DEFRA's york offices? I have been there a few times and they are the dogs B's So why are other government setups not the same setup byGordon the highwayman Brown and his side kick Tony 'Euro' Blair? they exist you just gotta find them!

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

Aye bundles of government sponsership meaning laptops and shiney offices instead of pencil and paper in dingy cellers works wonders for band waggon jumpers and misery for taxpayers conned into paying for it!!
I still await the day I wake up to 70+ degrees outside every morning!

That's weather which is local. Climate is averaged, long term and global weathers. Climate change, often referred to as Global Warming will not necessarily give you toasty bbq weather. Your gain (at the moment) of a few percent of a degree rise in climate change equates to lots of rain in the UK, which is the polar bears loss, because for him it is a shrinking of the summer ice to unprecedented levels.

Aye and trust me 57c is eyeball meltingly horrific. 70c and you're literally toast. Burnt toast!

[BWFC_Insane]

Aye bundles of government sponsership meaning laptops and shiney offices instead of pencil and paper in dingy cellers works wonders for band waggon jumpers and misery for taxpayers conned into paying for it!!
I still await the day I wake up to 70+ degrees outside every morning!

Being ignorant about the issue isn't an excuse.

Clearly you know better than people who have studied for years and devoted their lives to climate research. Good on ya. Where are you published exactly?

And perhaps you could point me to where these shiny offices are? I'd not mind a job there.....

Bit off beat but you ever seen DEFRA's york offices? I have been there a few times and they are the dogs B's So why are other government setups not the same setup byGordon the highwayman Brown and his side kick Tony 'Euro' Blair? they exist you just gotta find them!

DEFRA are a government department not a scientific research organisation??????

[superjohnmcginlay]

F*cking Bastards.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-20515918

More drugs it is then.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

F*cking Bastards.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-20515918

More drugs it is then.

Change over to real ale - won't make the slightest difference to real ale prices, real beer in real pubs is already way more expensive than the minimum alcohol price per unit.
You must be on Polish Buckfast or similar... in which case more drugs is an alternative, that or glue.

[superjohnmcginlay]

F*cking Bastards.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-20515918

More drugs it is then.

Change over to real ale - won't make the slightest difference to real ale prices, real beer in real pubs is already way more expensive than the minimum alcohol price per unit.
You must be on Polish Buckfast or similar... in which case more drugs is an alternative, that or glue.

I'm already on the ale and I don't believe that for a second.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

F*cking Bastards.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-20515918

More drugs it is then.

Change over to real ale - won't make the slightest difference to real ale prices, real beer in real pubs is already way more expensive than the minimum alcohol price per unit.
You must be on Polish Buckfast or similar... in which case more drugs is an alternative, that or glue.

I'm already on the ale and I don't believe that for a second.

Ah, but that will be greedy money grabbing bastards and they'll find any excuse anyway. My understanding is that a pint of 4% ABV is someat like 2 units which would make a minimum price of 90 pence. If you're already drinking beer at 90 pence a pint or close to it I can guarantee that it's made out of rat piss.

[thebish]

F*cking Bastards.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-20515918

More drugs it is then.

Change over to real ale - won't make the slightest difference to real ale prices, real beer in real pubs is already way more expensive than the minimum alcohol price per unit.
You must be on Polish Buckfast or similar... in which case more drugs is an alternative, that or glue.

I'm already on the ale and I don't believe that for a second.

Ah, but that will be greedy money grabbing bastards and they'll find any excuse anyway. My understanding is that a pint of 4% ABV is someat like 2 units which would make a minimum price of 90 pence. If you're already drinking beer at 90 pence a pint or close to it I can guarantee that it's made out of rat piss.

André Boas-Villas??

[Lost Leopard Spot]

F*cking Bastards.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-20515918

More drugs it is then.

Change over to real ale - won't make the slightest difference to real ale prices, real beer in real pubs is already way more expensive than the minimum alcohol price per unit.
You must be on Polish Buckfast or similar... in which case more drugs is an alternative, that or glue.

I'm already on the ale and I don't believe that for a second.

Ah, but that will be greedy money grabbing bastards and they'll find any excuse anyway. My understanding is that a pint of 4% ABV is someat like 2 units which would make a minimum price of 90 pence. If you're already drinking beer at 90 pence a pint or close to it I can guarantee that it's made out of rat piss.

André Boas-Villas??

That's a fruity little white!

[superjohnmcginlay]

F*cking Bastards.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-20515918

More drugs it is then.

Change over to real ale - won't make the slightest difference to real ale prices, real beer in real pubs is already way more expensive than the minimum alcohol price per unit.
You must be on Polish Buckfast or similar... in which case more drugs is an alternative, that or glue.

I'm already on the ale and I don't believe that for a second.

Ah, but that will be greedy money grabbing bastards and they'll find any excuse anyway. My understanding is that a pint of 4% ABV is someat like 2 units which would make a minimum price of 90 pence. If you're already drinking beer at 90 pence a pint or close to it I can guarantee that it's made out of rat piss.

So lets not be giving 'em one eh?

I'm more concrened for me 24 pack offers and spirit deals.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

So lets not be giving 'em one eh?

I'm more concrened for me 24 pack offers and spirit deals.

Fair enough, you can be angry about it, I'll not interfere.

[Montreal Wanderer]

Being in a different time zone I'm jumping in a little late on the peer review question.
Peer review in both grant applications and consideration of articles for publication can, unfortunately, allow personal bias to creep in. As a result, most prestigious journal have a double blind system (author doesn't know who the reviewer is and reviewer does not know the author - although in small field it can be guessed).

Journal are rated by impact factor - some like Nature are very high while others are low. The impact factor reflects the scholarly community's view of how good the reviewing process is and how high the standards of the journal are. High impact journals would very seldom publish poor quality work in my view. However, the likelihood increases the further down the scale you go.

Rejected article are not necessarily bad. There could be many reasons that the journal it was submitted to did not want it at the time. I have published many articles in peer reviewed journals and have had two rejections - both for the same article. It was on the destruction of Smyrna, 1922, based on manuscripts of wealthy English and French residents. It was rejected by the International Journal of Turkish Studies (to be fair they said they would accept it if I incorporated the views of about 8 Turkish books on the topic) because it was too pro-Armenian. A similar Armenian journal rejected it as too pro-Turkish. I found a third journal which accepted it. Since then it has been praised and used by a popular historian in a recent book (he even stole my title!).

The North American tenure system (publish or perish) has led people to rush into print, with sloppy and sometimes falsified results. This is a concern.

Online journals can be equally rigorously reviewed as print ones. Soon all scientific journal will only be online in my opinion. At the moment my University has 6,000 subscriptions to print journals and 88,000 titles of e-journals. However, in the internet age you can publish anything. Blogs are not not refereed and many journals are not - the editor decides to accept or not. So caution has to be employed when using research found on the internet. Is it from a reputable source? I think Wikipedia is great, but it has obvious drawbacks. I use it to get an overview, but then go to reputable sources when I begin writing.

Obviously scientific advance involves to some extent the corrections of past erroneous assumptions. For fifteen hundred years they thought Galen had written the last word on medicine, but now he is constantly updated. He, Harvey, Copernicus, Newton, Galileo and even Einstein - all brilliant scientists - have all been shown to be wrong in some particular. We stand on the shoulders of those giants, but we correct their misconceptions. That's what advance is all about.

[Bruce Rioja]

TomCuntingTom. Took me off of the main road into Tayport and put me on a single track country lane, post floods. After wheel-spinning in mud for most of the way along it the car is now absolutely caked in clay/mud/shit all up both sides, windows and the lot. And guess what? This country lane lead me back onto the main road that I'd just come off!

[thebish]

UKIP were (rightly in my opinion) concerned that one of their members was barred from fostering because of their membership of UKIP..

in the light of that outrage, isn't this a tiny bit hypocritical??

http://www.thisiscroydontoday.co.uk/Exc ... story.html