alxian Posted August 21, 2005 Report Share Posted August 21, 2005 also its not like science is always forthcoming with unexpected results. they could exists but its not in mans best interest to know about it. the public can wait several months to years to hear about earth shatering scientific discoveries. stuff that they'd have to issue new school books for. if we ever hear about the 'weird' stuff at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eclogite Posted August 21, 2005 Report Share Posted August 21, 2005 Anyone:Help! I've googled this to death and I cannot find in which Volume of Proceedings of the Royal Society B the paper was published. Does anyone have this information? AlxianYou say also its not like science is always forthcoming with unexpected results. Very true. That's where part of its magic lies.they could exists but its not in mans best interest to know about it.You've quite lost me here. Can you clarify?the public can wait several months to years to hear about earth shatering scientific discoveries. stuff that they'd have to issue new school books for. if we ever hear about the 'weird' stuff at all.It is part of the scientific method that new findings should be critically assessed. This does not happen in an instant. It is reasonable and necessary that there should be a delay between the discovery and its publication. The more 'earth shattering' the discovery the more important that the proper checks and critiques be carried out. Think on what happened when the 'discoverers' of cold fusion short circuited this process by announcing their 'find' via a press conference. Which raises another point: it is not generally the responsibility of scientists to announce their findings to the general public. They publish their work in a public forum that you or any member of the public may access. The more general kind of public announcement is left in the hands of the media.Would you give an example of a discovery that required text books be re-written, yet whose revelation was delayed?I am also perplexed by why you think the 'weird' stuff would be supressed completely. Do you have any examples in mind. I mean you must have some reason for suspecting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MortenS Posted August 21, 2005 Report Share Posted August 21, 2005 Here is a link to the abstract, Eclogite http://www.journals.royalsoc.ac.uk/link.asp?id=8tnblxqlq7ef5f7b It might help you in tracking it down, but from what I can see, it is to be published in an upcoming issue, as the issue is listed as FirstCite Early Online Publishing, 18 Aug. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C1ay Posted August 21, 2005 Author Report Share Posted August 21, 2005 Anyone:Help! I've googled this to death and I cannot find in which Volume of Proceedings of the Royal Society B the paper was published. Does anyone have this information?Try here.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eclogite Posted August 22, 2005 Report Share Posted August 22, 2005 Many thanks C1ay. I see on the of my problems was that I was searching the Royal Society site for a paper by Todd, who is mentioned in the BBC article. However, I now see he was not one of the authors. Thanks again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alxian Posted August 22, 2005 Report Share Posted August 22, 2005 Quote: methey could exists but its not in mans best interest to know about it. You've quite lost me here. Can you clarify? in that some scientific breakfthroughs shouldn't be fully divulged to the public either in terms of containing mass hysteria and in terms of intellectual property. IMO some advances should be kept private for the gain of the patent holder or in the case where a patent isn't ever filed but products are brought to market by a manufacturer sure that the technology can't be reverse engineered. governments for matters of national security have to keep their advancements private as well. stuff that will destroy whole industries are often suppressed, the human factor of displacing thousands, who'll retrain them if their industry is phased out? sometimes it happens but if it can be helped transition periods must be slow enough to accomodate industries. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eclogite Posted August 22, 2005 Report Share Posted August 22, 2005 Well that makes more sense, if I substitute "the general public" for "man" in your statement. I may not entirely agree with you, but I see where you are coming from now. Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.