Federally Funded Fishing Expeditions

As a biochemist by training, I grow increasingly tired at claims that scientific media “proves” environmental decay, a genetic basis for deviant behavior, evolution, or that medication causes disease states. What most people, including sadly many scientists, don’t realize is that much of science is no longer hypothesis-driven, leading to false presumptions and inconclusive conclusions from the data we collect. Rather, in order to maximize publications and fame, scientists sacrifice the quest to solve problems and embark on federally funded fishing expeditions in hopes of collecting mass amounts of data and finding something there from with which to wow the public. Nobody seems interested in following through on a project that has end user application, because those quests take a lifetime without promise of any return on the investment. Worse, nobody will fund those who maintain this ethical problem-solving strategy because society demands results.

Science doesn’t prove anything. Science disproves all other possibilities until only the truth presumably remains. In a hypothesis-driven endeavor, one collects data and tries to refute the hypothesis. Evidence either refutes the belief or proves insufficient to disprove the hypothesis. In this way, no matter how overwhelming the data, the truth is never really proved, we are merely unable to disprove it. This phenomenon is easily illustrated by physics, which is highly content-specific: all that we know about resistance, gravity and acceleration forces and “constants” applies only in the context of the earth. Although the principles remain the same, all the parameters change when we leave the planet, and some forces change depending on our latitude on this one.

Non-scientists refuse to accept this fundamental truth of science- that we cannot “prove” much by experimentation. Data at best provides evidence that A and B are related or that A and B may be causative agents of C. Alec Guinness had a good line in “The Empire Strikes Back”, when he said that much of what we hold to be true depends on our point of view. This is especially important to consider in light of rogue scientists who will obscure or fabricate data, ignore variables, or withhold information to prevent others from subverting their personal agendas. They cannot prove what they believe, so they fit the data to their preconceived notions.

Despite the deception and delusions, the truth is not offended. Some day, we may come to know it, and then those who sowed lies will be refuted and lose whatever glory they thought they had.