Harvard University Psychology Professors Question Study Questioning Psychology Studies

Why does the system of correcting each other not apply to the science, "religion?" of global warming?

[From article]
Psychology professor Daniel Gilbert and University professor Gary King criticized a 2015 study claiming that more than half of all psychology studies cannot be replicated, finding that the study itself contains replication flaws.
More than 250 authors contributed to the original “Science” magazine study, which was named by the magazine as one of the top 10 most important scientific breakthroughs of 2015 and garnered significant media attention, King said.
“I do think the original article had such incredibly far reach, having been published in the world’s premier scientific journal, and having leveled a charge against the entire field that really shook everyone up, so I think it really did quite a lot of damage to the reputation of psychology,” Gilbert said.

[. . .]
“The beauty of science is that we keep correcting each other and that helps us move forward.” Gilbert said. “So we’re glad that they published the article, and we’re glad that we were able to publish the critique and engage in a productive conversation with our critics.”

http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2016/3/11/psych-study-criticisms/

Professors Criticize Landmark Study Undermining Psychology Research
By MIA C. KARR,
Harvard CRIMSON STAFF WRITER
March 11, 2016

Science Seldom Remains Settled

Seldom mentioned about the earth and its climate is the shape of entire continents has changed over time. So what is now desert was once mountain and vice versa. The entire fantasy about global warming nee climate change is pure nonsense when viewed through the prism of history. Difficulty is so many bright omniscient young people have no idea what history is. Another element is that political propaganda called climate change is one method of pushing one world government, called globalism on the human population in order to eliminate individual freedom as enjoyed in the United States and Israel.



[From article]

The favorite cudgel of leftist climate change fear mongers is the appeal to authority, as in that there is “a scientific consensus” that the earth is warming and that changes over the last century are due to human activity. The problem with appeals to authority on extremely broad scientific topics is that they are not subject to easy proof by experimentation, and are quite often wrong. Here’s a list of ten popular theories ultimately proven false, and it omits some major howlers, like therapeutically bleeding people or the geocentric theory of the solar system. Now we can add to that list the “scientific consensus” that diets rich in processed foods and fats lead to heart disease.

[link to list]

http://www.toptenz.net/top-10-most-famous-scientific-theories-that-turned-out-to-be-wrong.php



[. . .]

New studies of pre-modern humans, dating back many millennia, demonstrate that arteriosclerosis (the hardening of the arterial blood vessels that causes blockages and heart attacks) afflicted people who (by necessity and not choice) followed that most rigid of diet and exercise regimens -- hunting and gathering. The mummified remains of Neolithic era humans from around the globe demonstrate that arterial disease was about as commonplace in those ancient populations as it is today. Despite the fact that these people had diets low on saturated fats, high in proteins, vegetables and fruits, and engaged in regular and strenuous exercise, they still suffered from heart disease as they aged at about the same rates as modern humans.
[. . .]
one thing that is certain is that the earth’s climate has obviously undergone dramatic change in both historic and prehistoric time frames. In historic time (that is in the last 5000 years or so) there has been massive desiccation in northern Africa and the Middle East (probably due to long term warming) interspersed with mini-ice ages (countervailing periods of cooling especially in northern latitudes.) On balance, at least for people in the northern hemisphere (which is where most of the human population resides) warming has been a good thing, while cooling (with associated famines) a bad thing.

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/01/another_scientific_consensus_bites_the_dust.html

January 3, 2016
Another 'Scientific Consensus' Bites the Dust
By Jonathan F. Keiler

Improved Methods of Teaching Reading Holds Children Back

[From article]
Marva Collins said that she could teach all children, no matter their age, to read by Christmas of their first year of schooling. A mere four months.
Conversely, in most public schools, by Christmas of their first year, most children have learned next to nothing. What's gone wrong? Why do we have an illiteracy crisis in our country, with more than 40 million functional illiterates?
Here we get to the great bait-and-switch of the 20th century. The Education Establishment changed the set of items to be memorized from 26 individual letters to several thousand large, complex designs known as words.
[. . .]
Starting circa 1931, this country's official reading theory stated that children could memorize the entire English language with automaticity, or at least 100,000 words of that language. (This nonsense is comparable to saying that all children can fly.)
So if you want to understand why reading is difficult, it's because the commissars who took over the field of education changed the game. They moved the goalposts, oh, about a mile. They changed the very nature of the activity from something that is as basic as walking, which everyone can do, to a much more elaborate activity, much like dancing in a Broadway show, which very few can do.
[. . .]
The bottom line is this: if you let your local schools teach sight-words – that is, kids must memorize words as graphic designs – you are contributing to a sophisticated kind of child abuse.
The biggest challenge we have in education is to make people take responsibility for what they are allowing. Every local newspaper and TV station should be held accountable for what it lets its public schools get away with. Ditto the Chamber of Commerce, religious organizations, local and Ivy League colleges, and community leaders. Parents need help in understanding what is being done to their children; otherwise, how can they fight back?
[. . .]
Here is the first thing parents need to know: reading starts with the alphabet, memorized with automaticity.

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/11/why_kids_cant_read.html

November 25, 2015
Why Kids Can't Read
By Bruce Deitrick Price

Desperate Attempt To Connect Science With Psychiatry

"Mental illnesses are only accessible to researchers through new understandings of genetics." Gasp! Decades of using human subjects for psychiatric research were simply all exercises in sadistic criminal abuses? "progress in the study of mental illnesses seems more attainable than ever, those involved with the center say." $650 million will fund more researchers to look for progress in studying mental illnesses? Much cheaper to simply continue consensus definition of mental illnesses, and pizza parties to study progress? “'Human genomics has begun to reveal the causes of these disorders,' said Stanley, the founder and chairman of MBI, a company that sells collectibles," The founder of a collectibles company founded the psychiatric research center? Yikes! Prior to discovery of the human genome, causes of mental illnesses were unknown? "The topic of mental health is personal for Stanley. His son, Jonathan, suffered from severe bipolar disorder," There is an national lobbyist entity for drug companies which promotes drug treatment founded by parents of mental patients. Why are persons with disabilities prevented from speaking for themselves? Do homosexuals, black people and women need their mentors to speak for them, to tell others what they need? These alleged illnesses, created by consensus, are symptoms, protected behavior and speech, which are treated with drugs. How will these drugs affect the human genome? Will future treatment be genetically enhanced humans to "cure" mental illnesses, i.e., to curb undesirable speech and behavior? The goal of connecting psychiatry to science, without evidence, is getting exponentially obtuse and absurd. More, more money is needed. Is obsession with fund raising a possible new mental disorder? 
[From article]
Mental illnesses are only accessible to researchers through new understandings of genetics.
[. . .]
progress in the study of mental illnesses seems more attainable than ever, those involved with the center say.
[. . .]
“Human genomics has begun to reveal the causes of these disorders,” said Stanley, the founder and chairman of MBI, a company that sells collectibles,
[. . .]
“This kind of commitment makes it possible to take risks...to design projects that are high-risk but would be transformational if they succeed,” McCarroll said.
The topic of mental health is personal for Stanley. His son, Jonathan, suffered from severe bipolar disorder,

http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2014/7/27/broad-record-psychiatric-gift/

Record-Setting $650M Donation Paves Way for Psychiatric Research at Broad
By TYLER S. OLKOWSKI

Harvard CRIMSON STAFF WRITER
July 26, 2014

Believing in Science

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=42477

Liberals: They Blinded Us With Science
by Ann Coulter
Human Events
March 23, 2011

Harvard and Big Pharma


Not mentioned are the many abuses of a too-close relationship between universities and the drug industry. In recent years many academic professors take money to sign their names on drug company research studies, which were manipulated for the benefit of drug companies and to deceive the public. The research is published in academic journals signed by prominent professors which further misleads medical professionals and the public. This is a corruption of the scientific process and undermines science and academic research.

http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=526839&disqus_reply=6868480#comment-6868480

Harvard as Big Pharma
Published On Sunday, March 01, 2009 10:55 PM
By SARAH E. SORSCHER, KAROLINA MACIAG, and SHAMSHER S. SAMRA