Letters to the Editor
-
To Sam, Xrandadu, and everyone else (part 3)
When I read a scientific article in a journal, here’s my scientific process: First, I read the title, which ought to tell me, in just a couple words, what their big claim is. Then, I skip over the abstract and everything else and I go straight to the figures and tables, which is how all their raw findings (data) are presented, along with the results of their statistical tests. I spend a good ten minutes or more poring over the data. I’m not interested in the authors’ interpretation of the data yet; screw them – I want my impressions to be fresh. When I’ve generated my impressions of what the data seem to be saying, I look at the Methods section, which describes exactly what they did in generating their data; it includes the models they used, the assumptions they made, the computer programs they used, the statistical tests they used, and everything about how their samples were gathered and processed and what all equipment they used, right down to the brand and model number of the important analytic equipment. As I look through their methods, I’m being as creative as I can, thinking of ways that Mama Nature might have screwed them up in ways they didn’t anticipate. Only after I’ve done all that do I go back and actually read the rest of the text of the paper.
Reading a scientific paper is an exercise in extreme pessimism. You’re not supposed to give the authors the benefit of the doubt on anything! You’re supposed to assume every bad thing you possibly can about them and their study, and if they don’t prove you wrong on every single point in their data, methods, analysis, and discussion, then damn, that’s a paper I respect. However, just because I read one good paper on a subject that reaches a particular conclusion doesn’t mean I’d stake my life on that conclusion. For important findings, the same basic question gets asked over and over and over again, in slightly different ways each time, by different teams of scientists around the world, and they all publish their data and interpretations. And if their data and interpretations all agree over time, well, that’s how scientific consensus eventually gets formed.
Sam – Given that process, which, I admit, is about the most anally retentively thorough thing humanity has ever come up with, I hope that you can understand how goddamn frustrating and infuriating it is to Xrandadu and I when you or anyone casually and ignorantly dismisses scientific consensus. I understand why you’d do it, and I’m (paradoxically) totally sympathetic with you and your perspective, but I’m still pissed at you and Cap’nGroove and Camille Paglia-the-arts-and-fashion-and-politics pundit and everyone else who thinks that, , with a wave of their magical rhetorical wand, they can make it all disappear! Because Piss Shit Fuck, NO, you can’t! The data are still there! You can’t make it go away by closing your eyes and pretending it’s not there! Scientific consensus was not arrived at following a leisurely stroll in the park! Not everyone on the planet is a scientist – humanity wouldn’t have any food or factories or mines if they were – but the scientists ARE DOING SOMETHING IMPORTANT! Scientists ask big questions, they have the statistical tools to know whether they’re right (or, more precisely, with the exact percentage of their certainty!), and when scientific consensus tells the world it has something Very Important to report, the world would do well to Shut The Fuck Up And Listen!
Scientific consensus is not the same thing as a newspaper headline reporting on the latest fad “scientific study” on a new miracle weight loss cure. There are thousands of things about which no scientific consensus exists – just a lot of ideas and theories with mild to moderate evidence in their favor.
Now that I’ve written this, it’s worth noting that there are people out there who are still going to think I’m an ass. What nasty but exceedingly effective one-liners would Karl Rove use to describe and discredit me? Am I out of the Ivory Tower yet? Y’all tell me what you think, and if this approach and these ideas are all right, then hold them close.