kenel Posted July 29, 2002 Posted July 29, 2002 MSNBC is carrying a report on how The National Academy of Sciences is evaluating the advantages of witholding information when studies are published, in an attempt to keep the information from terrorists. In my opinion, it is common sense with the war on terrorism to censor any information that could be used by our "enemy". Homeland Security advisors should have considered this quite a while ago. And as the headline questions, Should scientists hold back research?
Radical Edward Posted July 30, 2002 Posted July 30, 2002 marvellous. That will slow slow scientific progress to a crawl, and make it look to the public even more like scientists are just part of one massive military machine. not to mention, but the recipie for C4 is already out there, people can buy aircraft lessons and fertiliser and whatnot. and I'm sure alot of these people buy US weapons anyway.
Radical Edward Posted July 30, 2002 Posted July 30, 2002 furthermore, if a particular group of journals started to publish papers with insufficient detail, no-one would read them anymore. I wouldn't - It would make a mockery of the whole idea of peer review, and demote these jornals to little more than pop science.
kenel Posted August 1, 2002 Author Posted August 1, 2002 I don't see how it would slow research down, just the time period that we recieve the results of research. They didn't say they were going to stop research all together.
Radical Edward Posted August 1, 2002 Posted August 1, 2002 there is more than one group working on a topic you know. plus my main gripe is with the peer review system anyway. it would wreck that. no-one would buy any journal that published crap science like that.
Hogslayer Posted August 10, 2002 Posted August 10, 2002 Think about this for a moment. No real scientific publication with merit would be affected. Websites like our own, however, could be intimidated with prosecution. The "nuclear bomb plans" found in an AlQaida cave were part of a sarcastic piece of humor, not real science. Yet this made headlines, no one bothered to check into the details. I'm with radE, this is utterly pointless. It is like saying that hunters shou;d not exchange load data because terrorist snipers might be more accurate if they tried it.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now