http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22029391.500-neuroscience-wrongs-will-make-a-right.html#.UmekK_K4apo

_The history of scientific discovery suggests that accepting most neuroscience is unsound is a big step towards a better understanding of the brain

THE idea of putting a dead salmon in a brain scanner would be funny if it were not so serious. When Craig Bennett of the University of California, Santa Barbara, tried it in 2009, he wasn’t expecting to find anything – he was just doing test runs on the machine. But when he looked at the data he got a shock. The fish’s brain and spinal column were showing signs of neural activity.

There was no such activity, of course. The salmon was dead. But the signal was there, and it confirmed what many had been quietly muttering for years: there’s something fishy about neuroscience._

It seems to me that they are being unduly positive about this.

The Rev Dodgson said:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22029391.500-neuroscience-wrongs-will-make-a-right.html#.UmekK_K4apo

_The history of scientific discovery suggests that accepting most neuroscience is unsound is a big step towards a better understanding of the brain

THE idea of putting a dead salmon in a brain scanner would be funny if it were not so serious. When Craig Bennett of the University of California, Santa Barbara, tried it in 2009, he wasn’t expecting to find anything – he was just doing test runs on the machine. But when he looked at the data he got a shock. The fish’s brain and spinal column were showing signs of neural activity.

There was no such activity, of course. The salmon was dead. But the signal was there, and it confirmed what many had been quietly muttering for years: there’s something fishy about neuroscience._

It seems to me that they are being unduly positive about this.

Guess they have to when rehashing old stories as something new I suppose.

poikilotherm said:

Guess they have to when rehashing old stories as something new I suppose.

Good point.

Positive in what way?

Is the Salmon of Doubt related to the Annelid of Uncertainty?

SCIENCE said:

Positive in what way?

It is being presented as science in operation being self-correcting, and therefore a good thing, whereas it seems to me that it demonstrates an appalling lack of application of proper statistical techniques by almost everyone in this field, that was only picked up when one individual pointed it out. It seems likely that similar practices continue in all areas with a lot of noise in the data, and no-one is particularly concerned about that.

Rev, have a read of this one:

http://narrative.ly/pieces-of-mind/nick-brown-smelled-bull/

sibeen said:

Rev, have a read of this one:

http://narrative.ly/pieces-of-mind/nick-brown-smelled-bull/

Nick Brown sounds like he should have been an engineer :)

It’s inevitable that as the scope of science expands, whole fields will exhibit differing degrees of scientific competency. But yes, we need to remind ourselves that it’s important to recognise the most obvious failures in real time, rather than let them fester.

Bubblecar said:

It’s inevitable that as the scope of science expands, whole fields will exhibit differing degrees of scientific competency. But yes, we need to remind ourselves that it’s important to recognise the most obvious failures in real time, rather than let them fester.

I’m letting one fester at the moment, albeit in the engineering field.

Politically it’s just not worth it for me to make a wave and try to convince people that what they’ve been specifying for the last 10 years makes no sense at all.

>Politically it’s just not worth it for me to make a wave and try to convince people that what they’ve been specifying for the last 10 years makes no sense at all.

You standing for high office?

Politics within a large company. I can’t be seen showing up a very senior someone who has mandated that things be carried out in a certain fashion. Well, realistically I could, but I very much doubt I’d be doing much work for them ever again, and as they are easily my largest client, and I like feeding my kids, I won’t be rushing in to it :)

sibeen said:

Politics within a large company. I can’t be seen showing up a very senior someone who has mandated that things be carried out in a certain fashion. Well, realistically I could, but I very much doubt I’d be doing much work for them ever again, and as they are easily my largest client, and I like feeding my kids, I won’t be rushing in to it :)

you should suck on the marrow of that company

sibeen said:

Bubblecar said:

It’s inevitable that as the scope of science expands, whole fields will exhibit differing degrees of scientific competency. But yes, we need to remind ourselves that it’s important to recognise the most obvious failures in real time, rather than let them fester.

I’m letting one fester at the moment, albeit in the engineering field.

Politically it’s just not worth it for me to make a wave and try to convince people that what they’ve been specifying for the last 10 years makes no sense at all.

Are people going to die?

dv said:

sibeen said:

Bubblecar said:

It’s inevitable that as the scope of science expands, whole fields will exhibit differing degrees of scientific competency. But yes, we need to remind ourselves that it’s important to recognise the most obvious failures in real time, rather than let them fester.

I’m letting one fester at the moment, albeit in the engineering field.

Politically it’s just not worth it for me to make a wave and try to convince people that what they’ve been specifying for the last 10 years makes no sense at all.

Are people going to die?

Yes, they generally do :)

You monster