Call for acid-bath stem-cell paper to be retracted

Again the people who say Philosophy is dead to science I say UGH learn from history. Philosophy and Ethics are still the heart of progress.

How many Scientific papers that were "peer reviewed" have we now learned that the science behind the scientific papers have seriously been lacking.

The cost is in the suffering and deaths of patients who didn't get help needed that research would have found if they didn't have to chase all these rabbit trails.

Biased and mad

PS Theology/Philosophy Degree holder and my son is named after my favorite Philosopher.

PSS My other son died of cancer (Bone Cancer) where there has been zero progress in mortality rate over the last 30 years.

Nothing like being given a fake cure and forcing researchers to go down the wrong rabbit hole for that cure because the original research paper had fudged the numbers to pass the test and the peer review was done by a sock puppet.

My father died of cancer in 2010, now like him I have a lump in my chest and it is really painful.

The Philosophy in science came from many different religions, so naturally skeptics just reject it because a religion came up with it. Might lead to a cure for cancer, but got to reject it because it was made by a religion?

Socrates came up with the theory of the atom, Francis Bacon helped bring about the scientific method. Yet do we reject those things because of the religion involved?

I'm uncomfortable with the sweeping-generalizations of this comment from the article, but I do think there's some insight to it concerning independent thinking and science. Science is a creative endeavor:

Steve Jackman said:

"Foreigners have an image of the Japanese as very thorough, detail-oriented, and meticulous. However, my experience in Japan over more than a decade has been just the opposite of this. Things got so bad at my Japanese company that everytime I would check my Japanese subordinates’ work, for me it was never a matter of if I would find mistakes, but how many mistakes would I eventually end up finding. Many of these were due to pure sloppiness, carelessness, an inability to think independently, critically or to ask questions, a blind allegiance to protocol and heirarchy, and a fear of being perceived as a troublemaker or someone who is not a team player.

"This helped me understand why Japanese companies place such importance on manuals, rules and doing things by the book, since the Japanese are usually very good at following rules that have been written down for them. This style may work well for manufacturing industries, but not for research, STEM fileds (Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths), or in the knowledge and service industries of the future."

Everyone gives Science, Cell and Nature way too much credit. They are flashy, but tend to have less substance than other journals. Their retraction rate is also much higher.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3187237/figure/F...

Where does religion come into play here? I'm unaware of anyone rejecting the atomic theory or the scientific method (seriously, what scientist could reject the scientific method?)