Did “go fever” push NASA to publicly announce science to the MSM that wasn’t well peer reviewed?
WUWT readers may recall that I conjectured about the cryptic press release NASA made last week that set the blogosphere afire. See NASA’s extraterrestrial buzz where the press release announced:
NASA will hold a news conference at 2 p.m. EST on Thursday, Dec. 2, to discuss an astrobiology finding that will impact the search for evidence of extraterrestrial life.
Well newsflash there G-men, it was more terrestrial than extraterrestrial, and now it appears the science behind the press release may be seriously flawed.
It seems that in their flawed zeal to get some press coverage, NASA again has egg of their faces, reminiscent of the Mars fossil microbe fiasco. It’s more “science by press release” gone wild. Slate.com has a scathing review of the fire that is raging in the microbiology camp over this press release:
“It would be really cool if such a bug existed,” said San Diego State University’s Forest Rohwer, a microbiologist who looks for new species of bacteria and viruses in coral reefs. But, he added, “none of the arguments are very convincing on their own.” That was about as positive as the critics could get. “This paper should not have been published,” said Shelley Copley of the University of Colorado…
Of course if that was any of us saying the same thing about climate science, somebody would immediately label us “anti-science deniers”. Lets see if somebody comes up with a label for these people asking skeptical questions. Maybe “anti NASA space bug deniers”?
WUWT reader “NoAstonomer” tips us to the fray in progress saying:
The microbiology blogosphere is currently ripping this study apart:
http://rrresearch.blogspot.com/2010/12/arsenic-associated-bacteria-nasas.html
http://www.slate.com/id/2276919/
http://scienceblogs.com/webeasties/2010/12/if_you_read_alex_bradleys.php
Here’s an excerpt from Slate.com :
In fact, says Harvard microbiologist Alex Bradley, the NASA scientists unknowingly demonstrated the flaws in their own experiment. They immersed the DNA in water as they analyzed it, he points out. Arsenic compounds fall apart quickly in water, so if it really was in the microbe’s genes, it should have broken into fragments, Bradley wrote Sunday in a guest post on the blog We, Beasties. But the DNA remained in large chunks—presumably because it was made of durable phosphate. Bradley got his Ph.D. under MIT professor Roger Summons, a professor at MIT who co-authored the 2007 weird-life report. Summons backs his former student’s critique.
But how could the bacteria be using phosphate when they weren’t getting any in the lab? That was the point of the experiment, after all. It turns out the NASA scientists were feeding the bacteria salts which they freely admit were contaminated with a tiny amount of phosphate. It’s possible, the critics argue, that the bacteria eked out a living on that scarce supply. As Bradley notes, the Sargasso Sea supports plenty of microbes while containing 300 times less phosphate than was present in the lab cultures.
And “NoAstronomer” adds:
Yet some with no expertise in the field stick with the original story. Phil Plaitt at Bad Astronomy notes how he has to trust the peer review process…
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/12/07/arsenic-and-old-universe/
But what happens if/when you realize that the process is broken, at least in this case? Can people take a step back and wonder if maybe the process failed in other cases too?
Get a load of this response:
“We cannot indiscriminately wade into a media forum for debate at this time,” declared senior author Ronald Oremland of the U.S. Geological Survey. “If we are wrong, then other scientists should be motivated to reproduce our findings. If we are right (and I am strongly convinced that we are) our competitors will agree and help to advance our understanding of this phenomenon. I am eager for them to do so.”
Umm, well, sir, small point: You and colleagues at USGS and NASA created a veritable firestorm of speculation and coverage with the cryptic press release and “embargoed” story in Science Magazine. Plus a live webcast, and NASA TV live, and now you say “We cannot indiscriminately wade into a media forum for debate at this time,”?
Dude, that ship has sailed. GMAFB!
Gosh, this pattern seems familiar. NASA trumpets these news worthy pieces in a “science by press release” after they pushed the peer review process to where if failed to catch the obvious, and then when called on it, they ignore any criticism.
Yes, the question is, how did this new train wreck get past peer review? Given the urgency attached to the press release by NASA, it certainly looks to me like NASA simply threw caution to the wind again. It seems to be another case of “go fever” that doomed Apollo 1, Challenger, and made them look like fools again following the embarrassing Mars fossil microbe debacle.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
does this disprove there are aliens in california?
’cause i thought that explained why my neighbors seemed like they are from another planet!
About half the articles that appear in Science & Nature are just wrong. They are highly referenced, which gives these journals their high impact factor, and then, they’re never heard from again. The game is to increase the rating of the magazine, much like what people with negative reviews have been doing to Google (increasing their page rank score). This is pretty well known in the biz.
That being said, may I say “wow” is that paper bad. It’s bad even for Science standards. But let’s not dump on our favorite AGW rag for continuing to fail upwards. I was just reading through a defective JBC article today from 2010. Failure of peer review isn’t limited to Science.
Every large agency like NASA makes mistakes, even in their hey day, but I am astounded at what NASA has become. From debacles like this to the BS that goes on with GISS and the Hansen led “team,” this is not the NASA I knew in my youth, when they put a man on the moon. And these attention whores who do science by press release tar the scientists who still are trying to do respectable work there with a very bad and broad brush.
Ah, th’ ol’ infallable peer review process strikes again ‘eh….
What is going on in science nowadays?…. Is there no skillbase capable of scientific achievement left? Is science now, no more than a front for political activism and elitists? Just a front for grabbing government funding and social prestige?
… ’cause there sure ain’t any science bein’ done.
LOL, NASA BLEW IT AGAIN!! Maybe they will now create another blog, called “Real Arsenic” and dedicate a “scientist” to spend all his time to keep this pseudoscience alive, just like they did with the unbelievably simplistic and moronic”RealClimate.” LOL!!
Quick – somebody get a consensus. That should “settle” it.
I think some criticism needs be directed at the USGS too. Geologists should know better but then the mandate was changed to include biology. Time to go back to the old multiple working hypothesis of Chamberlin and others. Perhaps the biologists could learn a bit about it too.
It’s amazing how fast the scientific community came out to attack NASA for what they claim is plainly flawed science. Then again, NASA isn’tfunding any of the attackers.
In the Climategate mess however, we still have heard very little from an awful lot of so-called scientists who should have been saying a lot more about flawed science but are too afraid to lose their grant money.
But who can take NASA seriously when they endorse nonsense like this:
Today, children always hear stories from their parents and grandparents about how snow was always piled up to their waists as they trudged off to school. Children today in most areas of the country haven’t experienced those kinds of dreadful snow-packed winters, except for the Northeastern U.S. in January 2005. The change in recent winter snows indicate that the climate has changed since their parents were young.
According to some grandparents the journey was also uphill both ways – NASA may want to study this gravitational anomaly of the olden days as well.
I don’t see any fault in holding the press conference. The paper was “Published Online 2 December 2010.” Any funding agency will sometimes fund flawed work. You just don’t give that group any new grants! So, I think it is incorrect to focus blame on NASA.
But, if the paper is as obviously flawed as its critics claim it is the journal, Science, that really needs to answer for this. If a reporter at Slate can find so many qualified people to review the paper, then why didn’t the editors? But I’m not going to make any judgments myself about the paper just yet.
You can find it here (the abstract is free):
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/early/2010/12/01/science.1197258
Another thing – has anyone here perused the pop-science websites like Science Daily and Wired and… Popular Science.
The crap they release daily just goes to show they’ll say ANYTHING to keep the funding coming in. It’s almost like they pull stuff out of a hat and throw it into headlines.
Researchers Say Sitting On Bright Blue Furniture Increases Libido
Could The Sun Freeze Over Tomorrow?
Eating Grubs May Grant Ability To See In Infrared
The Science Of Beer Pong
Scientists Say Dolphins Able To Understand Complex Computer Algorithms
Did Neanderthals Have Rock Concerts?
I think you get the idea…
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. This one just doesn’t have the “ring of truth”.
Severian says:
December 7, 2010 at 8:18 pm
“this is not the NASA I knew in my youth, when they put a man on the moon”
Me too. This NASA appears to be a self-serving bloated research bureaucracy which is now very worried about their funding. Their Mars projects are almost ignored and their grand mega-project to go back to the moon or to Mars look unaffordable for the now bankrupt US. Thus they are on the AGW gravy train and promoting this kind of sensational science fiction for publicity. Anything to rally support.
“Arsenic and post-haste” He he – the movie and shuttles!
I knew an undergrad who wrote a paper on bacteria in the Mono Lake system.
He (this is in 1975) noted that the relatively high Arsenic in the water was dealt with due to the fragility of the Arsenic molecules,and the high Phosphate, and, as I recall
Boron dissolved in the water. Now this is all due to a very vague memory, I even
told my wife when I saw this that I heard about this back in my college years…
I will see if my old Biology Prof. is in town, he goes south in the winter. He should know what is up here….
Yes, I call BS for NASA..
Phil Plait is a smart man who turned into a tool because of fame.
He continues to bash those who question CAGW. He’s done so for years. He’s now demonstrating a poor amount of skepticism on something he should defer to others in.
“If we are wrong, then other scientists should be motivated to reproduce our findings.”
That’s quite a quote, which appears to exhibit a severe misunderstanding of science.
Other scientists should attempt to reproduce the findings or test the hypothesis whether NASA is right are wrong.
Aha Phill Plait, now there is a warmista.
I wonder when the State Science Institute, I mean NASA, will issue a press release about an amazing breakthrough in the area of cold fusion.
And there was this story out the other day about how poorly U.S. students compared academically to other countries. Gee, I wonder about the connection…
We are, collectively, “Anti-Funding deniers”.
Some of us are “Anti-science deniers”.
Some are “Anti-Social deniers”. (distribution of wealth)
Some are “Anti-Aid deniers”. (Foreign aid to 3rd world despots)
Yet others are “Anti-Sustainability deniers”. (In the pay of big oil)
Some are “Anti-Humanitarian deniers”, (refugees, border control)
Feel free to add.
As far as this “Alien life force” is concerned, it seems “the slime is settled”. (to the bottom of the lake)
But Jonathan Eisen of UC-Davis doesn’t let the scientists off so easily. “If they say they will not address the responses except in journals, that is absurd,” he said. “They carried out science by press release and press conference. Whether they were right or not in their claims, they are now hypocritical if they say that the only response should be in the scientific literature.”
Exactly . . .
Jeremy says:
December 7, 2010 at 9:58 pm
Phil Plait is a smart man…
Who turned into Phil the Tool man..
He continues to Bash….
Those who question the Cash….
For this Climate Change Scam.
A note to mods – there seems to be some hypocrisy slipping in regards to language in posts compared to language in responses. People have been getting acronyms that contain an F deleted in the posts but obviously not in the posts like in this one for example (GMAFB) sic.
You arsenic deniers will get your comeuppance. NASA scientists are right now planning to present their findings to Congress, but not until turning off the heat in the meeting room. Then in partnership with Greenpeace, NASA scientists will engage in acts of civil disobedience, such as picketing phosphate mines and painting rude graffiti on smoke stacks. The arsenic-in-DNA claim may be weak science, but the slim possibility that they are right requires implementation of the Precautionary Principle, One World Government, and economy-breaking new taxes so your wealth can be transferred to the more deserving.
Lysenkoism at its best.