I happened upon this by accident the other day. It was written in 2003 but I think it applies equally now:
1. The discoverer pitches the claim directly to the media. The integrity of science rests on the willingness of scientists to expose new ideas and findings to the scrutiny of other scientists. Thus, scientists expect their colleagues to reveal new findings to them initially. An attempt to bypass peer review by taking a new result directly to the media, and thence to the public, suggests that the work is unlikely to stand up to close examination by other scientists.
He wasn't speaking about climate change but these are all salient points when considering it. David Suzuki, call your office.
Comments (2)
Geez... Can't you make the difference between someone who presents the results of a scientific research and someone who's role is to popularize issues?
When Suzuki was doing scientific research, as a geneticist, he was following the peer-reviewed process.
But his current role, either on his show or through the work of his foundation, is to bring awareness and popularize scientific issues. He hasn't "researched" the issue of climate change, he's reporting back and commenting on the scientific consensus on the issue.
Posted by Lasker | July 27, 2007 8:19 AM
Posted on July 27, 2007 08:19
While there is some truth in what previous commenter sez, the Wiki entry on Mr. Suzuki is quite revealing:
"To be able to use his initials in naming any new genes he found, he studied Drosophila temperature-sensitive phenotypes (DTS)."
Should one look for more?
Posted by SnoopyTheGoon | July 29, 2007 5:25 AM
Posted on July 29, 2007 05:25