If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Phys Org2)   Grinchy scientists have poisoned NASA's claim of discovering life that thrives on arsenic   (phys.org) divider line 10
    More: Followup, NASA, forms of life, arsenic, phosphorus, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, atomic force microscopies, ETH-Zurich, Astrobiology  
•       •       •

1079 clicks; posted to Geek » on 09 Jul 2012 at 10:20 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



10 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-07-09 10:29:48 AM
A lot of scientists were saying this the same week the announcement was made. Someone printed their findings too early
 
2012-07-09 10:49:48 AM
Well, that's a bummer.
 
2012-07-09 11:55:57 AM
So, therefore, creationism is right and we must release Kent Hovind from maximum-security prison and declare him President for Life.

/Fundamentalism: using science's strength against it since 1616,
 
2012-07-09 01:18:14 PM
I was at a conference where one of the authors on the new (refuting) paper (Rosie Redfield) presented her methods vs. NASAs. It sounds like NASA had a postdoc who didn't really know molecular biology but had an idea of how to test the arsenate theory, and, absent close scrutiny, did a pretty good experiment. However, she (and the research team) failed to account for trace amounts of phosphate in her growth media, and it turns out (from the refuting study) that these trace amounts of phosphate were sufficient to get the bacteria to grow.

The tragic thing is this woman isn't accepting that her results are false, and in the mean time all of the PIs who were co-authors on the paper are abandoning her, even though any molecular biologist worth his/her salt should have seen this mistake. Really more of a painful lesson in the groupthink of science than anything else.

//cautionary tale...
 
2012-07-09 01:23:45 PM

pivazena: I was at a conference where one of the authors on the new (refuting) paper (Rosie Redfield) presented her methods vs. NASAs. It sounds like NASA had a postdoc who didn't really know molecular biology but had an idea of how to test the arsenate theory, and, absent close scrutiny, did a pretty good experiment. However, she (and the research team) failed to account for trace amounts of phosphate in her growth media, and it turns out (from the refuting study) that these trace amounts of phosphate were sufficient to get the bacteria to grow.

The tragic thing is this woman isn't accepting that her results are false, and in the mean time all of the PIs who were co-authors on the paper are abandoning her, even though any molecular biologist worth his/her salt should have seen this mistake. Really more of a painful lesson in the groupthink of science than anything else.

//cautionary tale...


Its also a great example of how the science blogosphere is a great tool for post-publication peer-review, especially for glamour-mag publications like Science and Nature. Scientists who blog were all over this right away, including Rosie Redfield.
 
2012-07-09 01:24:15 PM

pivazena: The tragic thing is this woman isn't accepting that her results are false


I was told this did not happen in science. I am disappoint.
 
2012-07-09 02:30:54 PM

entropic_existence: including Rosie Redfield.


She's my hero :-D
 
2012-07-09 04:55:27 PM
This is how science works.
 
2012-07-09 06:19:00 PM
I know a couple of people that knew the lead scientist a few years before her "big finding".
They had a feeling it wasn't going to be 100% correct.
 
2012-07-10 01:43:30 AM

pivazena: Really more of a painful lesson in the groupthink of science than anything else.


upload.wikimedia.org

What's groupthink?
 
Displayed 10 of 10 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report