Letters

One of your special features in The Scientist of July25 entitled “Good Scientists, Bad Science?” (page 1) has touched me such that I must respond. Granted there are scientists who give dissent a bad name, but that category would in my opinion include only those who falsify data in order to push an opposing hypothesis. These people should be made to feel the discontent of the scientific society to the fullest, but both cases cited in your articles seem not to fall into that cate

Christian Schwabe
Sep 4, 1988

One of your special features in The Scientist of July25 entitled “Good Scientists, Bad Science?” (page 1) has touched me such that I must respond.

Granted there are scientists who give dissent a bad name, but that category would in my opinion include only those who falsify data in order to push an opposing hypothesis. These people should be made to feel the discontent of the scientific society to the fullest, but both cases cited in your articles seem not to fall into that category. First of all, science is adversary in nature, and as there are at least two opposing views on every important issue in science, we can safely say that half of all scientists are continuously wrong. This is a part of the scientific endeavor that cannot and should not be changed. Peter Duesberg maybe wrong, but is he irresponsible and dangerous as Robert Gab of NIH...

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of

Receive full access to digital editions of The Scientist, as well as TS Digest, feature stories, more than 35 years of archives, and much more!
Already a member?