Did you know that scientific studies have shown that scientific studies are not reliable sources of information?

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 06 Nov 2015 08:24:02 -0500

Yes, while this may sound like a Kent Brockman news story, it is in fact the fruit of a study made by 270 researchers who meticulously reproduced past psychology studies. 60% of the results refuted those of their original studies. Sources have yet to confirm whether the re-results of this study will re-re-refute those found in this one.

Response by SSgt Alex Robinson made Nov 6 at 2015 8:32 AM

SSgt Alex Robinson — Fri, 06 Nov 2015 08:32:41 -0500

Interesting. Thanks for sharing.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 6 at 2015 8:40 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 06 Nov 2015 08:40:02 -0500

So, is that to say we don't know what we really know OR we know what we don't know BUT we don't know it?

Response by SPC Anne Miller made Nov 6 at 2015 8:48 AM

SPC Anne Miller — Fri, 06 Nov 2015 08:48:41 -0500

Thus proven, this study is not a reliable source of information

Response by LTC Matthew Tieszen made Nov 6 at 2015 9:02 AM

LTC Matthew Tieszen — Fri, 06 Nov 2015 09:02:38 -0500

Wasn't aware of that but I had heard that 76.53% of all statistics are made up on-the-spot.

Response by PO2 Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 6 at 2015 9:03 AM

PO2 Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 06 Nov 2015 09:03:11 -0500

I my head just did a couple spins. One of the reasons I don't delve too deep into science is because it's such a large grey area. I'll stick with what I know; Family, military and video games.

Response by SrA Edward Vong made Nov 6 at 2015 9:07 AM

SrA Edward Vong — Fri, 06 Nov 2015 09:07:48 -0500

So that must mean, that the scientific study that studied scientific studies is also not reliable.

Scientific studies to me are not always true 100%, however it's evidence that leads to. Some studies can be pretty obvious, others are theoretical. Many that cannot be proven yet but are proven on paper I like to call "proven theory".

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made Nov 6 at 2015 9:30 AM

SFC Michael Hasbun — Fri, 06 Nov 2015 09:30:19 -0500

LOL...

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 6 at 2015 9:46 AM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 06 Nov 2015 09:46:55 -0500

Studies show that most people will believe anything they are told when the phrase starts "And studies show"

Response by SGT Patrick Reno made Nov 6 at 2015 9:47 AM

SGT Patrick Reno — Fri, 06 Nov 2015 09:47:52 -0500

Maybe Congress should set aside several million dollars to study this.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 6 at 2015 9:48 AM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 06 Nov 2015 09:48:44 -0500

When the researchers are incentivized in the form of research grants to reach a conclusion, they will make sure their data supports that conclusion.
Money is the great corrupter of science. I could go on about "climate change" or the food du jour that is good/bad for you, but I'll take a less controversial example.
For decades, the tobacco industry conducted "studies" refuting mounting evidence that smoking caused a myriad of health issues in tobacco users. There was ample evidence that lung cancer and emphazema were directly attributable to tobacco use, yet there was no shortage of scientists at Duke, UNC, and other institutions in tobacco-friendly states that would come up with a study periodically saying that no connection between smoking and maladies could be found.

Response by LTC Stephen F. made Nov 6 at 2015 11:49 AM

LTC Stephen F. — Fri, 06 Nov 2015 11:49:54 -0500

This is fairly obvious for studies conducted for the soft sciences including psychology MAJ Private RallyPoint Member. I would expect scientific studies for chemistry, physics, geology and biology to be more reliable if they are conducted according to established study principle.

Response by SCPO David Lockwood made Nov 6 at 2015 12:18 PM

SCPO David Lockwood — Fri, 06 Nov 2015 12:18:09 -0500

That all depends on who you talk to. In a recent poll taken 34.67% said that this information is untrue while 25.76% would agree. The remaining 39.57% had no thought on this matter!

Response by PO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 6 at 2015 12:53 PM

PO3 Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 06 Nov 2015 12:53:12 -0500

scientific studies itself is just a study .... it is not a proof. It is people themselves that jump the connection between studies and "proof".

Response by Sgt Kelli Mays made Nov 6 at 2015 12:56 PM

Sgt Kelli Mays — Fri, 06 Nov 2015 12:56:05 -0500

A lot of wasted money goes into a lot of scientific studies....and scientific studies can be fudged...so we should not always automatically take the word of a scientific study

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 6 at 2015 7:44 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 06 Nov 2015 19:44:06 -0500

According to applied mathematics... 98% of all statistics are made up!

Response by SMSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 6 at 2015 7:56 PM

SMSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 06 Nov 2015 19:56:30 -0500

According to a stat that I just made up, 65% of all studies are inaccurate by an average of 4% point.