G'afternoon Ted, EE, it was originally posted --> How about a peer reviewed group of scientists, qualified to do their thingie?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
It was answered -->No. He can't. Like a 4-rotor German Enigma machine, he spits out nothing but cryptograms. That's why I have him on ignore.
**********
Interesting, since you can't outguess my 'Enigma' machine, no wonder you cannot grasp the basics of Lrl theories.
What I suggested in the original post was "would a group of peer reviewed scientists revising the LRL theories be acceptable"? Simple enough.
However, I feel that this an impossible goal since even peer accepted scientists are guilty of multiple frauds causting untold no.s of deaths.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Example --> Fraud is an ongoing problem
Research fraud has been occurring for decades. One popular example from the past is that of Sloan-Kettering Cancer Institute researcher Dr. William Summerlin, who, in 1974, colored patches of fur on white mice with a black marker in an attempt to prove that his new skin graft treatment was working. Methods of cheating and misleading the public have certainly evolved in complicacy since then, but the same basic idea still applies: Fraud is fraud, and medical fraud is acceptable under no circumstances.
The fact that the number of complaints of misconduct by researchers is on the rise is disturbing, especially when you consider how many instances of falsification, fabrication, plagiarism and other scientific misconduct likely go unreported. This trend points to a colossal problem for the system of modern medicine.
David Wright, a Michigan State University professor who has done his own research on why scientists cheat, told the Associated Press in July 2005 that there are usually four basic reasons for cheating: Some sort of mental disorder; foreign nationals who learned somewhat different scientific standards; inadequate mentoring; or powerful and increasing professional pressure to publish studies. The final reason is also the most common, according to Wright. However, any scientist who caves under the pressure by falsifying data certainly has low scientific, as well as ethical, standards.
When it comes to fraud in medicine, unethical researchers stand to gain money and prestige while misleading and
'possibly endangering the lives of untold numbers of people.'
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Second--> I found an article in the Wall Street Journal that shows that the rate of retractions of scientific studies in scientific journals has proliferated over the last decade. Data compiled for the WSJ by Thompson-Reuters shows that the number of research articles published since 2001 increased by 44%, while during the same period the number of articles retracted increased 15 times.
This has an effect on all scientific research, even cancer research and treatment. In one instance, research at the Mayo Clinic was set back about a decade. They found that some experiments that were related to the use of the body’s own immune system to fight cancer had been fabricated. This incidence of fraud ended up leading to the retraction of 17 research papers that were published in nine scientific journals.
Another analysis published by the Journal of Medical Ethics found that article retractions due to fraud had increase over 17 times between 2004 and 2009. This is much more than the twofold increase in article retractions related to researcher error. The analyst, Grant Steen, said that 73.5% of the articles were retracted for error, and 26.6% were retracted for fraud.
I can understand how researchers can make errors. It’s a human thing. Nobody’s perfect, not even scientists. It would be unfair to attempt to hold scientists to an impossible standard. Honest, trailblazing, original research is not easy. It’s never easy to be a pioneer.
But by the same token, we must realize that there are incredible pressures on researchers to publish papers in scientific journals. One scientific paper published in a prestigious journal like the Lancet or the New England Journal of Medicine can launch a researcher’s career. There is a lot of money and prestige at stake. This creates a powerful tendency to motivate researchers into getting their articles published ‘by any means’. Financial and career elements can have more influence on a researcher if being honest will kill opportunity to make money and get tenure.
This isn’t to say that all researchers and physicians are less than ethical. But it would be naive of us to blindly believe all scientific papers that are published in research journals. It may sound ‘unscientific’ to suggest this, but we need to learn to use our powers of discernment when receiving information. As I have discussed before, mainstream scientists have been used to falsify experiments on orthodox cancer treatments to make it appear that they are more effective than they really are. And they have also ran experiments on alternative cancer treatments that appear to suggest that they aren’t effective by failing to follow the treatment protocol that makes it work. I have seen a lot of scientists and scientific minded people who have been lulled into believing false information with reference to cancer treatments that work, and those that do not work. It is very important for people interested in the results of scientific research to make sure they understand the conflicts of interest and financial ties and incentives that researchers and physicians may have before accepting the validity of their articles and recommendations.
This is something that must stop. It is profoundly frightening to live in a world where even the most reputable of medical publications are so easily fooled by false research.
Learn more:
http://www.naturalnews.com/019353.html#ixzz1azOEzixq
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Don Jose de La Mancha
p.s. so who has scammed or killed the most people ?
you mean peer reviewed data, or The bell you mentioned is that the one allegely found near the Sonoran border in 1896? That had Tayopa Guaynopa Guaynopita Sonora. Tres Minerales Del Mundo written on it?
?
