|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, October 02 2012 @ 08:03 PM EDT |
Frankly lawyers probably should not be trusted with it
anyway, as they will take any nuanced statement from work in
progress that doesn't specifically prove their client wrong
and use it to throw doubt on the report's outcome, where
reasonable doubt does not exist.
Scientific investigation is not based on two sides in
conflict, and the work product should be shared and
repeated, but perhaps not into a legal system where
combatants will cherry pick whatever tiny parts might
support their argument, and possibly win even when the vast
overwhelming majority of evidence is against them.
Even investigation into subjects we regard as essentially
akin to proven fact will contain some nuanced wording and
data in the records. I could well imagine a good lawyer
getting a guilty client off on the basis that there may be
some doubt over whether gravity works (for example).
Good science has no agenda. Good lawyers have an agenda.
Important not to mix up the idea hat science should be
published and repeatable with the idea that people ill-
equipped to understand it, and with a strong agenda to
distort it should be given access to complex and nuanced
work in progress, and allowed to convince other ill-equipped
people to make important decisions based on their distorted
view of it.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Wol on Wednesday, October 03 2012 @ 04:33 AM EDT |
the scientists WANT their work to be repeatable.
As the other poster points out, it's the "work in progress" comments
they want to be able to keep secret. ESPECIALLY the initial hypotheses - you
know - what we computer people call "the first one that gets thrown
away" precisely because it DOESN'T work.
How can you do good science (where the whole point is to come up with outlandish
ideas that MIGHT be right) in a legal world where everything you say WILL be
used against you?
As the scientists say - "if it ain't repeatable, it ain't science".
That's all the lawyers need - a reproducible, scientific, result.
Cheers,
Wol[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
