In contemporary society, scientists are having difficulties in doing free and honest researches and presenting truthful and factual publications. When seeking truth for science and money for a living, modern scientists would often need to ask themselves whether they should do this for the truth in public science or, for the security of their personal career. Unfortunately, with the difficult economy nowadays, many scientists tend to save their career over saving truth. In another words, many professional scientists today are doing research, since it affords them some respectful careers and a comfortable living. It is also undeniable that many scientists today work for publication rather than for truth. One major case of fraud in science can be seen through Eric Poehlman. Poehlman is now known as the first academic in America to be sentenced to prison for falsifying data in a grant application.
Up until 2005, Poehlman was an internationally recognised, full-time professor at the University of Vermont. His research fell within a wide range, which included: affects of exercise on obesity, obesity, metabolism, the physiological changes associated with menopause and the human aging process. Poehlman was in extremely good standing within his research fields, ultimately publishing over two hundred journal articles.
Unfortunately, soon enough, with developing suspicions from one of his research team member, Poehlman was accused of scientific fraud by a former lab technician, Walter DeNino, at the University of Vermont. As maintained by The New York Times, Poehlman has been presenting fraudulent data in lectures and in published papers, and has been using this data to obtain millions of dollars in federal grants from the National Instit...
... middle of paper ...
...lts and publishing fraudulent data. One major case of fraud in science was seen through Eric Poehlman, who was known as the first academic in America to be sentenced to prison for falsifying data in a grant application. And as a result of this, Poehlman was prohibited from receiving any future federal grants, and was told to write various corrections to his published journal articles. Furthermore, Poehlman’s scientific fraud case affected studies related to disease prevention, including research on the health of older men and women, the effect of diet, exercise, menopause status, hormone replacement, and disease status. Therefore, in order to prevent scientific fraud from happening again, the only way to stop this is to return to a system in which success depends not only on stacking piles of "good publications", but on whether their results stand the test of time.
Denno, D. W. (2006). The Scientific Shortcomings of Roper v. Simmons. Retrieved from : http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/faculty_scholarship/116
Scientific research is constantly being battled in politics. The point of communication in science is to try and get across a proven theory to the public. Under the scrutiny of political agendas, these efforts face many hurdles. Informing the public of climate changes has had a positive impact on the acceptance of science. There are several techniques the scientific community communicates their findings to the public.
In the early 1950’s, prior to Project MKUltra, the groundwork for underhanded scientific research was being laid. Immediately after World War II, the United States’ Office of Strategic Services - the predecessor to the Central Intelligence Agency - launched Operation Paperclip, a mission to prevent the Soviet Union from obtaining any wartime German scientific research or expertise, while exploiting those sources of information to directly benefit American programs. Over 700 German scientists were recruited by the US, both voluntarily and by force . These scientists were employed in various government programs depending on the focus of their research, but the OSS took special interest in the men who had pursued brainwashing and other controversial interrog...
Many people are inclined to say why would science even wish to peruse this method of research? Lewis Thomas says in his essay "The Hazards of Science" It would seem to me a more unnatural thing and more of an offense against nature for us to come on the same scene endowed... ... middle of paper ... ... J. Michael Bishop states that "The price of science seems large, but to reject science is to deny the future.
This discussion focuses on two issues: the relationship between evidence and hypotheses; and, the role of "contextual" values in inquiry. Longino contrasts contextual values with constitutive values. The latter, the "values generated from an understanding of the goals of scientific inquiry," "are the source of the rules determining what constitutes acceptable scientific practice or scientific method" (L1990, 4). That these values influence inquiry is not a problem. But the former, "personal, social, and cultural values," are thought to threaten the integrity of scientific inquiry (L1990, 4-5).
Taubes, G. (1995) Plagiarism suit wins: experts hope it won't set a trend. Science. 268
Most scientists want to be able to share their data. Scientists are autonomous by nature. Begelman (1968) refutes an argument made by I. L. Horowitz, a scientist who believes that the government is in “gross violations of the autonomous nature of science”. Begelman believes, however, that there is a system of checks and balances in the government regulation system, and that this system is in place to protect citizens.... ...
Although the scientific use of anthropometrics in not abused in modern day society, scientists still incorrectly draw conclusions from data and statistics. Many statically fallacies occur where scientists will try and bend the statistics to prove their own personal opinion. For example, a scientist may deem his new invention or product to be 100% successful, but it could have only been tested 5 times. Even though the abuse of anthropometrics has been abandoned, scientific data abuse is still apparent in modern day
Overall, John M. Barry was able to define and characterize scientific research. Using rhetorical strategies such as, comparison, specific diction, and contrast Barry is able to show how scientific research is uncertainty
There are many companies and individuals that make pseudoscientific claims. A pseudoscientific claim is when a company or individual makes a claim, belief, or practice and presents it as scientific, but which does not adhere to the scientific method. A good example of a pseudoscientific claim is when a company states that taking their product results in rapid weight loss or rapid muscle gain.
Embezzlement has become more common in the last few years. No one knows for sure whether the problem has increased due to the bad economy, less ethical behavior among employees or other attitudes toward the government or businesses in general. Charleston, South Carolina is no exception to the rising number of fraud cases. Every year more cases are being discovered and exposed to the public. One such case is the embezzlement of cash from a county owned garage. The embezzlement case of Martina Moultrie Richardson will be discussed as well as types of evidence desired in this case, methods/procedures for gathering the evidence and procedures for cataloging and maintaining the evidence.
Dr. Michael Shermer is a Professor, Founder of skeptic magazine, and a distinguished and brilliant American science writer to say the least. In His book The Moral Arc: How Science Makes Us Better People he sets out to embark on the daunting task of convincing and informing the reader on sciences’ ability to drives the expansion of humanity and the growth of the moral sphere. Although such a broad and general topic could be hard to explain, Shermer does so in a way that is concise, easy to understand, and refreshing for the reader. This novel is riddled with scientific facts, data, and pictures to back up shermers claims about the history of science, humanity and how the two interact with one another.
Deception is sometimes used by researchers when they conduct psychological experiments. Deception occurs when the participant is misled about the purpose, design, of the experiment, or when the researcher uses deliberate misleading to persuade the subject into believing a certain view (McLeod). Many people believe deception is ethically wrong, and psychologists should not use it to obtain important information. I believe psychologists should be able to use deception if the participant is not psychologically harmed. It is believed that deception is the only way we can obtain true information (Connolly). The knowledge we are able to obtain about psychological tendencies outweighs the temporary effects of deception.
In the natural sciences there are always ethical norms that limit how knowledge can be produced. In the natural sciences, experimentation is an important method of producing knowledge but ethical judgments can limit the use of this method. There are areas that are considered unethical ...
However on the other hand, for all advantages; there are disadvantages. In some instances when people utilize and manipulate data, they may knowingly falsify data so that it may adhere to ones beliefs or theories. In addition there are people who may deliberately tamper with information as well. When collecting information, there must be neutrality when assessing and collecting data. In addition, professional competence and integrity must be superior and finally, all research subjects or respondents must be safeguarded from potential harm and sabotage.