more lying "scientists" - Nature retracts article on stem cells

[Spike]

NEW YORK (AP) — Scientists who reported that they'd found a startlingly simple way to make stem cells withdrew that claim Wednesday, admitting to "extensive" errors in the research

In two papers published in January in the journal Nature, the researchers said that they'd been able to transform ordinary mouse cells into versatile stem cells by exposing them to a mildly acidic environment. Scientists hope to harness stem cells to grow replacement tissue for treating a variety of diseases.

While scientists have long been able to perform such transformations with a different method, the newly reported technique was far simpler, and the paper gained wide notice — and some skepticism — in the research community. It was also widely reported in the media, including by The Associated Press.

But before long, the government-funded Riken Center for Developmental Biology in Japan accused one of its scientists, Haruko Obokata, of falsifying data in the research. She was key author of the papers.

Dr. Charles Vacanti of Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston, another main author, issued a separate statement in which he said he believes the further studies will vindicate the method, which produced what the authors called STAP cells.

But another author, Yoshiki Sasai, deputy director of the Riken center, said the errors in the papers meant "it has become increasingly difficult to call the STAP phenomenon even a promising hypothesis." In a statement issued by Riken, he said he was "deeply ashamed" of the problems in the papers.

http://www.nature.com/nature/index.html

----------------

another "peer reviewed" pile of worthless falsified data

 

[Spike]

US Govt funded climate science NOT peer reviewed?


shocking


Why Should Congress Continue to Fund the U.S. Global Change Research Program (“USGCRP”) and Federal Agency Climate Science-related Research Producing HISAs Not Peer Reviewed in Conformance With U.S. Law (The Information Quality Act)?

The U.S. Government’s funding of USGCRP climate research and assessment report development activities has hardly been transparent, and appears to have engendered and utilized flawed peer review science process practices at the agency and interagency levels.

Indeed, detailed addenda accompanying ITSSD FOIA requests filed with EPA and DOC-NOAA during March – May 2014 strongly suggest that the peer review science processes EPA and DOC-NOAA had employed in vetting the USGCRP and other federal and IPCC agency assessments supporting the EPA’s Endangerment Findings did not comply with U.S. law.

In other words, such peer review processes did not satisfy Information Quality Act and relevant OMB, EPA and DOC-NOAA implementing IQA guidelines standards applicable to highly influential scientific assessments (“HISAs”)

“On June 25, 2013, President Obama laid out a comprehensive plan for steady action to reduce greenhouse gas pollution in America, prepare our country for the impacts of climate change, and lead global efforts to fight it. OSTP is responsible for ensuring that the best science, research, data, tools, and technologies are brought to bear to implement the President’s Climate Action Plan, including by overseeing the activities of the US Global Change Research Program (USGCRP)…”.

Consequently, ITSSD poses the following question: Why should Congress continue to fund with U.S. taxpayer dollars interagency USGCRP program and federal agency-specific (especially DOC-NOAA, NASA, and NSF) climate science-related research and grant-award programs that ultimately produce and/or fund development of U.S. and international climate science-related assessments and findings that are not properly and robustly peer reviewed in accordance with U.S. law?

http://nebula.wsimg.com/0baa4f08132...2DC689E4CA87C906D&disposition=0&alloworigin=1

 

[Hineswardkickedurpanzyass]

These are scientists and they are not to be questioned. Anyways the science is settled, Bomma told me so.

 

[PoloMalo43]

NEW YORK (AP) — Scientists who reported that they'd found a startlingly simple way to make stem cells withdrew that claim Wednesday, admitting to "extensive" errors in the research

In two papers published in January in the journal Nature, the researchers said that they'd been able to transform ordinary mouse cells into versatile stem cells by exposing them to a mildly acidic environment. Scientists hope to harness stem cells to grow replacement tissue for treating a variety of diseases.

While scientists have long been able to perform such transformations with a different method, the newly reported technique was far simpler, and the paper gained wide notice — and some skepticism — in the research community. It was also widely reported in the media, including by The Associated Press.

But before long, the government-funded Riken Center for Developmental Biology in Japan accused one of its scientists, Haruko Obokata, of falsifying data in the research. She was key author of the papers.

Dr. Charles Vacanti of Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston, another main author, issued a separate statement in which he said he believes the further studies will vindicate the method, which produced what the authors called STAP cells.

But another author, Yoshiki Sasai, deputy director of the Riken center, said the errors in the papers meant "it has become increasingly difficult to call the STAP phenomenon even a promising hypothesis." In a statement issued by Riken, he said he was "deeply ashamed" of the problems in the papers.

http://www.nature.com/nature/index.html

----------------

another "peer reviewed" pile of worthless falsified data

I'm glad Anthony Watts caught that...oh wait....their own employer called them out on their errors! Did you notice that?

We see how science checks itself to make sure screwed up claims are weeded out, unlike the deniers and their 'science' that is published usually in an Exxon funded 'scientific journal'.

I followed that link but the page must have changed or I'm blind because I couldn't find the story.
Here it is from the AP and with the whole text you can see the real picture.

The claim of falsified data was made because images that were included in the paper were the incorrect ones.

Studies that claimed simple way to make stem cells withdrawn after 'extensive' errors found

FILE - In this Jan. 28, 2014 file photo, researcher Haruko Obokata, the lead author of a widely heralded stem-cell research paper by the Japanese government-funded laboratory Riken Center for Development Biology, speaks about research results during a news conference in Kobe, western Japan. The scientists who reported in January that they'd found a startlingly simple way to make stem cells have withdrawn that claim, following accusations of falsified data. On Wednesday, July 2, 2014, the journal Nature released a statement from the scientists who acknowledged "extensive" errors and said they couldn't say "without a doubt" that their method works. (AP Photo/Kyodo News) JAPAN OUT, MANDATORY CREDIT: KYODO NEWS



By MALCOLM RITTER, AP Science Writer

NEW YORK (AP) — Scientists who reported that they'd found a startlingly simple way to make stem cells withdrew that claim Wednesday, admitting to "extensive" errors in the research.

In two papers published in January in the journal Nature, the Japanese and American researchers said that they'd been able to transform ordinary mouse cells into versatile stem cells by exposing them to a mildly acidic environment. Scientists hope to harness stem cells to grow replacement tissue for treating a variety of diseases.

While scientists have long been able to perform such transformations with a different method, the newly reported technique was far simpler, and the paper gained wide notice — and some skepticism — in the research community. It was also widely reported in the media, including by The Associated Press.

But before long, the government-funded Riken Center for Developmental Biology in Japan accused one of its scientists, Haruko Obokata, of falsifying data in the research. Obokata, the key author of the papers, defended the results during a televised news conference in April while apologizing for using wrong images in the published reports.

On Wednesday, Nature released a statement from Obokata and the other authors of the papers that withdrew the papers. The scientists acknowledged "extensive" errors that meant "we are unable to say without a doubt" that the method works. They noted that studies of the simpler method are still going on by other researchers.

Dr. Charles Vacanti of Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston, another main author, issued a separate statement in which he said he believes the further studies will vindicate the method, which produced what the authors called STAP cells.

But another author, Yoshiki Sasai, deputy director of the Riken center, said the errors in the papers meant "it has become increasingly difficult to call the STAP phenomenon even a promising hypothesis." In a statement issued by Riken, he said he was "deeply ashamed" of the problems in the papers.

Retractions of papers in major scientific journals like Nature are rare. They can come about because of fraud or the discovery of honest mistakes that undercut the conclusions of research. Publications like Nature routinely have experts review papers submitted by scientists to look for problems. But in an editorial released Wednesday, Nature concluded that its editors and reviewers "could not have detected the fatal faults in this work."

Still, the journal said it is reviewing its practices.

Now you are trying to equate this to AGW of course, the difference being that there are thousand upon thousands of people going over AGW material so no one would dare put out something that would humiliate them in this way.

Here are two guys that share your view of scientists. Look at the intellectual company you keep.

 

[Spike]

Your True Believer view is no different than the Catholic Church during the Inquisition - call everyone a heretic that doesn't follow your state dogma

Too hot - Global Warming!
Too cold - Global Warming!
Too wet - Global Warming!
Too dry - Global Warming!

You want a climate controlled 72 degree world everywhere - that's the stupidest thing I've ever heard of.