are scientists liars?

Question

Are scientists liars because they report on what they observe from experiments?

fyi i am making fun of many christians who claim scientists makes alot of stuff up to discredit god. like fossils and such

Answer 1

No.... it means they're observant.

Answer 2

Some are, some ain't, and some are merely mistaken; but the evidence and experimental results don't lie.

The "discoverers" of Piltdown Man lied. But fraud was suspected from the beginning, because the traits of this "ape man" contradicted previous evidence of mankind's evolution. When scientists very much belatedly got around to examining the skeleton, the fraud was confirmed.

The "discoverers" of cold fusion were mistaken. They let their belief get in the way of reality. Some red flags were that they went straight to the press instead of scientific peer review, and that they were coy about the exact particulars of their experiment. The scientific community does not tolerate this nonsense, and called their bluff with astonishing swiftness.

The "discoverer" of the chemical element ununoctium fabricated his data. After other labs could not reproduce his result, his employer investigated, discovered the fraud, fired the lying scum, and issued a public retraction. Science labs know that they cannot survive dishonesty, and are quick to purge it. [N.B., Uuo has since been discovered for real by a different lab.]

The "discovery" of Nebraska Man was misread by the press. An artist painted an entire hominid around a single tooth before scientists had completed their investigation. Scientists eventually concluded that the tooth was porcine, although for some reason, they are still blamed for the artist's illustration.

Nebraska Man type "discoveries" are routinely made of doomday asteroids. Scientists always work with error bars, and those of astronomers are notoriously broad. The press, always looking for a scoop, pounces on these discoveries, which astronomers are pressured to announce prematurely. Science is made to look stupid when the so-called "retraction" is announced, when it was the press that glossed over the fact that the scientific investigation was incomplete. (This dilemma--the desire for a scoop by both press and scientists versus the need for thoroughness--is a hot topic among scientists nowadays.)

Only by admitting the possibility of error or ignorance can one learn. The genius of science is that it actually takes advantage of error, using its own mistakes to ferret out the truth. Science thus thrives on error; yet in this it holds no pity for liars, publicity seekers, or the deluded.

Answer 3

No. But when a scientist has a personal agenda outside the laboratory that follows him to work every day, he should be singled out for ridicule and chastisement by both the "non"-scientific community as well as the scientific community. Too many fraudulent claims in research science have been made in support of some unproveable "theory" that nevertheless gets accepted as legitimate. And, of course, the media in all its various forms only helps to conceal these idiots. Truth will always prevail. Science is vitally important to the human race. What is not are hokey-assed theories designed for no other purpose than to vilify other legitimate bodies of knowledge that are just as vital.

Answer 4

No we are a group of people that go through painstaking experiments to prove what is true and what is false and also what we can't know. Some people don't want to know the truth because it goes against what they have come to believe about the world. Scientist have been villified, fired from prominent jobs, called liars, and even killed back in the day for this reason.

Answer 5

What would make you think they are liars? I don't understand. How would reporting the results from experiments make someone a liar? Are you suggesting that scientists falsify their claims? Some have done this, and fortunately science is all about checking and double checking, and so it is rarely long before liars get caught.

Answer 6

reporting the facts observed from an exeriment is very different from coming to conclusions about those facts without a foundation and based on personal bias.
Not all scientists are liars and many, I believe do not behave deceptively on purpose- it is human nature to want to get our own ideas and beliefs out there -but often the facts are made to fit the story at the exclusion of any other possibilities and the facts that don't fit the story are conveniently left out.
Besides this, there is a lot of information out there that has been proven to be a hoax or at the very least faulty information- but it is still in textbooks, it is still floating out there for the ignorant and uninformed to accept as fact- basing the rest of their beliefs on these assumptions and shaky foundations to go forth and mislead the future generations

Answer 7

I believe it is the scientists who manifested the fraudulent fossil bones for evolution that most people are talking about.
We definitely have some great scientist that follow all the ethical rules. It is always the few liars that put a bad wrap on the rest of the trade. Happens in every field of work.

Answer 8

Scientists are human. There are some minority of excelent scientists, and some minority of immoral corrupt scientists, and a majority of average scientists. So some definatly lie. The system is set up to reward grants to those whom publish often, and in renowned journals. There is a positive pressure inherent in the funding system for ambicious scientists to bend the truth in order to get a paper published. In many ways, the system is at fault.

Answer 9

NOT,
What does this have to do with the war in Iraq? Scientists are generally very good at their work and very few of them would do anything but be honest in and of their results. WHY would YOU call THEM liars? GOD put them here the same as HE did you and I. Have a great weekend and a wonderful LORD's DAY!
Thanks,
Eds

Answer 10

they only report what they observe. the good thing is -- what they report is typically tested and retested and retested by MANY others, before an observation is generally accepted.

and, unfortunately for many cultists (like christians) their observations continue to disprove what is in cult manuals, like bible.

Answer 11

Unfortunately many are. They report on what brings them the "big bucks", not necessarily on their observations. Often they construct 'models' that do not recognize data that does not support their ideas.
Many are also honest.
What's your point?