Motives To Fudge Experimental Data

[kowalskil]

Motives to fudge experimental data

 

I have read accusations that scientist are not always honest; that they produce reports to impress bosses, for example, in tobaco laboratories, drug companies, etc. In such institutions scientists “have a strong motive to fudge data;” they are payed to please. Commenting to this I wrote:

 

This observation calls for a clarification of the concept "scientist." Most often this term is used to describe a person preoccupied with an investigation in the physical world. Perhaps this is too broad. I suggest the following definition: "a scientist is a person who is not only preoccupied with physical matters but is also trustworthy." By "trustworthy" I mean "does not hide anything."

 

Here is one real situation. A claim was made, about a year ago, that a desirable energy-producing device was invented in Italy. About a mounth ago a prototype was actually demonstrated at Bolognia University.

 

(see http://pesn.com/2011/01/19/9501747_cold-fusion-journals_warming_to_Rossi_breakthrough/)

 

Heat was generated as hydrogen gas was flowing through a niclel powder mixed with a catalyst. The inventor, Andrea Rossi, did not answer the question about the nature of the catalyst. One of my colleagues was present at the demonstration, standing next to it. He brought a portable instrument able to analyze nuclear radiation escaping from the device. But the demonstrator did not allow him to turn the instrument on. Because of this, I no longer think that Rossi is a scientist.

 

How would secrecy be justified by him? He would probably refer to undesirable competition, and to possible future difficulties with patenting the device. This is understandable. Secrecy is OK, but only up to the time at which the invention is publicly announced. A true scientist would not prevent my colleague from turning the instrument on; a true scientist would provide information about the chemical composition of the powder. Rossi certainly knows what is expected from a scientist. But he also needs money from potential investors. The demo at the university was probably designed to impress them. Ethically standards in business are not the saame as in science.

 

Ludwik Kowalski (see Wikipedia)

.

Edited March 11, 2011 by CraigD
Added link supplied by Ludwik

[Kriminal99]

Ok so how does anyone differentiate between a scientist and non-scientist being responsible for producing any given paper? You can't. That is the whole point. I don't understand people who think that everyone is just super trust worthy until proven otherwise. The human mind doesn't work like that at all. Whatever people think they can get away with, they will. The less you check them, the more they will do whatever it is. They experience moral decay and justify whatever behavior it is they want to do.