Retracted Scientific Studies: A Growing List

"The retraction by Science of a study of changing attitudes about gay marriage is the latest prominent withdrawal of research results from scientific literature. And it very likely won't be the last. A 2011 study in Nature found a 10-fold increase in retraction notices during the preceding decade.

Many retractions barely register outside of the scientific field. But in some instances, the studies that were clawed back made major waves in societal discussions of the issues they dealt with. This list recounts some prominent retractions that have occurred since 1980."...

www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/05/28/s...-nytimesscience&_r=1

I saw a great graph yesterday where they plotted studies on what food was good for you and what wasn't. Beef? Three studies say beef is good for you, seven say bad. Wine? Thirteen good, five bad. (Guess scientists would prefer to study(sample?) wine more than red meat.)

ScienceChic wrote: The bigger issue is that with cuts means we lose our best minds when labs get shut down, and research progress itself slows.

That is only because of the behemoth statist bureaucracy that we have allowed to grow. What should happen is that the best minds stay and the drones get let go.

Sturgeon's Law: "Sturgeon's revelation, commonly referred to as Sturgeon's law, is an adage commonly cited as "ninety percent of everything is crap." It is derived from quotations by Theodore Sturgeon, an American science fiction author and critic: while Sturgeon coined another adage that he termed "Sturgeon's law", it is his "revelation" that is usually referred to by that term.

The phrase was derived from Sturgeon's observation that while science fiction was often derided for its low quality by critics, it could be noted that the majority of examples of works in other fields could equally be seen to be of low quality and that science fiction was thus no different in that regard from other art forms."...

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturgeon%27s_law

ScienceChic wrote:
Guess what hasn't been retracted? Yeah, all that research supporting human-caused climate change.

And I can give you 100,000,000,000 rea$on$ why it i$n't. Can't kill that Golden Goo$e