Here is a handy quote that I have long been meaning to transcribe.
This is from Asimov's "Foundation" in which Lord Dorwin discusses his
"research" into finding the original planet of mankind, which turns
out to be reading speculation piled upon speculation in tertiary
sources, instead of actually examining the physical evidence or at
least reading original sources:
Hardin remained silent for a short while. Then he said, 'When did
Lameth write his book?'
'Oh -- I should say about eight hundwed yeahs ago. Of cohse, he
has based it lahgely on the pwevious wuhk of Gleen.'
'Then why rely on him? Why not go to Arcturus and study the
remains for yourself?'
Lord Dorwin raised his eyebrows and took a pinch of snuff
hurriedly. 'Why, whatevah foah, my deah fellow?'
'To get the information firsthand, of course.'
'But wheah's the necessity? It seems an uncommonly woundabout and
hopelessly wigmawolish method of getting anywheahs. Look heah now,
I've got the wuhks of the mastahs -- the gweat ahchaeologists of the
past. I wigh them against each othah -- balance of the disagweements
-- analyze the conflicting statements -- decide which is pwobably
cowwect- and come to a conclusion. That is the scientific method. At
least' -- patronizingly -- 'as I see it. How insuffewably cwude it
would be to go to Ahctuwus, oah to Sol, foah instance, and blundah
about, when the old mastahs have covahed the gwound so much moah
effectually than we could possibly hope to.'
Readers here have all encountered this version of the scientific
method. This is how most scientists nowadays try to judge cold fusion
and many other topics. This also describes the methodology used to
write Wikipedia, in which authors eschew "original research" and
depend mainly on books and news articles which (at least in the case
of cold fusion) are usually written by twits who are as ignorant as
the authors themselves. The blind leading the blind!
Along the same lines, Ed Storms has remarked on the peculiar modern
habit of entrusting peer-reviewed journal editors to do your thinking
for you. Journals were originally intended as a convenience: as a
pragmatic way to filter out substandard articles that are badly
written and likely wrong. Some people have gone far beyond this to
the point where they will not believe a claim unless it is printed in
Science or Nature. That's treating journals as Holy Scripture, and
editors such as Maddox as High Priests.
- Jed
