Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Skepticism, Science & Pseudoscience

HuckleB

(35,773 posts)

8. One cannot prove a negative.

Reply to Bolo Boffin (Reply #7)

Wed Dec 28, 2011, 11:00 AM

Dec 2011

Plausibility must be a consideration in science. We are wasting money that could go to research that might actually improve health and save lives.

That's as unethical as it gets, IMO.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

12 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

$1.4 BILLION spent on woo-woo research: Your tax dollars at work. [View all] Boston_Chemist Dec 2011 OP

The real tragedy here... laconicsax Dec 2011 #1

$666000 to see if prayer can cure AIDS. Boston_Chemist Dec 2011 #2

Interesting that the prayer study resulted in a 666 FiveGoodMen Jan 2012 #12

Yes, precisely. trotsky Jan 2012 #11

It would be amusing under other circumstances EvolveOrConvolve Dec 2011 #3

NCCAM is responsible for less than one-half of 1% of the NIH budget. Bolo Boffin Dec 2011 #4

The problem isn't the center--it's the fact that it's run by believers. TheWraith Dec 2011 #5

Can you please source your numbers? HuckleB Dec 2011 #6

The OP article. Bolo Boffin Dec 2011 #7

One cannot prove a negative. HuckleB Dec 2011 #8

Of course one can. It depends on the negative being expressed. Bolo Boffin Dec 2011 #9

I dunno - all these studies have been great ammo against woo woo Taverner Jan 2012 #10