Conservatives get a lot of heat for their skepticism of global warming. But science depends on trust and honesty, and it’s apparent from the demeanor of the global warming fantatics and their exclusion of contrary evidence from their models that the global warming crowd are mostly results-focused and lack the appropriately skeptical scientific disposition.
What is more disturbing is that this phenomenon seems widespread across other sciences according to a report in Nature from an Amgen scientist who actually had to put his company’s money where the university researchers’ mouths were and realized many of their headline-making studies had no merit:
A former researcher at Amgen Inc has found that many basic studies on cancer — a high proportion of them from university labs — are unreliable, with grim consequences for producing new medicines in the future.
During a decade as head of global cancer research at Amgen, C. Glenn Begley identified 53 “landmark” publications — papers in top journals, from reputable labs — for his team to reproduce. Begley sought to double-check the findings before trying to build on them for drug development.
Result: 47 of the 53 could not be replicated. He described his findings in a commentary piece published on Wednesday in the journal Nature.