Tuesday, March 21, 2006
Published statements seem to skew the way you interpret your own results. While this seems intuitive the end result is more insiduous. Instead of independent scientific investigations we have a collective "stream of conciousness", which exacerbates the extreems. In other words if we all build on an inital wrong hypothesis we may interpret all our collective results wrongly for a very long time... This doesn't bode well for the idea of wikiscience, "Experiments involving thousands of investigators collaborating on a "paper" will commonplace. The paper is ongoing, and never finished. It becomes a trail of edits and experiments posted in real time — an ever evolving document. "
Posted by Anonymous Coward at 12:53 PM