Dan Dugan, (Mon, 16 Mar 2009), wrote:
> Exactly, but still quantitative! Good science is measuring what's
> significant, not what's convenient.
Sits well with the advice of two very famous scientists:
Darwin in "Origin of the Species" (1859):
A fair result can be obtained only by fully stating and balancing the facts
and arguments on both sides of each question.
Richard Feynman in "Surely You're Joking, Mr Feynman" (1985):
... if you're doing an experiment, you should report everything that you
think might make it invalid - not only what you think is right about it ...
Details that could throw doubt on your interpretation must be given, if you
know them. ... In summary, the idea is to try to give all of the
information to help others judge the value of your contribution; not just
the information that leads to judgement in one direction or another.
An admirable precept indeed, worthy of adoption by Nat/rec researchers.
But anathema to politicians!, says -
Syd Curtis
(in Brisbane, Australia, with a State Government election on Saturday)
|