Steven-- I agree with your assessment. The action seems to be like a violation of Jed’s 10 sins of scientific ethics. I have seen what I consider al lot worse sins by groups of scientists, including those at MIT, and those people were not considered crazy.
Bob Cook From: Orionworks - Steven Vincent Johnson Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2015 2:10 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:Parkhomov doctored his data psspp I have to agree in principle with a lot of what Jed and Dave have to say on the matter. It baffles me that anyone would insert clippings of previously recorded data over missing gaps. I’m assuming Parkhomov performed this action because he didn’t think it was that big of a deal, but that’s just a guess on my part. It’s my understanding that Parkhomov inserted previously recorded data that he believed would more or less represent with what the actual data readings would have revealed if he had been able to record data during the missing moments. Unfortunately performing such an action pretty much violates one of the most fundamental principles of collecting data scientifically & objectively, without personal bias involved. Inserting token data serves no useful purpose. The lessor evil of performing such an action is that it obfuscates the accuracy of the real data. The greater evil is that it immediately calls into deep question the integrity of the individual as well as his data. Parkhomov does appear to understand the fact that what he did was not a smart thing to have done. He states ""...It, of course a great sin and I sincerely repent." https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bz7lTfqkED9WWEtKZHVvczhsakk/view Parkhomov further states: > I send you the Excel file with the data obtained during experiment on which > pauses > in registration of temperature are designated by admissions of rows. > Once again I admire your sharp observation and high professionalism. > I hope that this incident won't make the attitude towards me and my > researches hostile. > > Alexander Parkhomovr I think we should not lose site of the fact that Parkhomov seems to want to make amends. Offering to send the unedited Excel file was the right thing to do. A charlatan or quack would have initiated evasive maneuvers. I certainly don’t get the impression Parkhomov attempted to dodge the confrontation once the duplicated artifacts were brought to his attention. Nor do I get the impression Parkhomov was at any time deliberately trying to manipulate the outcome of his results. The whole affair strikes me as an innocent action. Stupid, but an innocent action nevertheless. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson svjart.orionworks.com zazzle.com/orionworks
