Bad scientific journalism...examples needed

[Royston]

As some of you are already aware, Cap'n and I have recently set up a website to tackle pseudoscience, and poor scientific journalism http://www.dbunked.com. Being responsible for the latter, if anybody here finds good examples of bad scientific journalism (current articles please) that warrants a correction i.e we'll get in contact with the publisher, then please take a look at the links below.

 

It's still early stages, but we've decided to get things going and it will be great to have some solid examples to scrutinize, research and debunk.

 

Introduction to how we'll tackle the problem...

http://forum.dbunked.com/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=5

 

Details on submitting articles and links et.c...

http://forum.dbunked.com/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=274

 

Any advice, or comments please let me know, even something trivial or nitpicky

[swansont]

Bad scientific journalism and pseudoscience/bunk aren't synonymous. Though bunk often gets reported as if it weren't, there's plenty of valid science that gets reported in an atrocious fashion.

 

So, for which are you looking: bad reporting of legitimate science, or uncritical reports of pseudoscience?

[Royston]

So, for which are you looking: bad reporting of legitimate science, or uncritical reports of pseudoscience?

 

Short answer is both, obviously bad reporting of science isn't pseudoscience...but if pseudoscience is dressed as fact by the media, then that will be tackled, as well as legitimate results being misinterpreted, or information being skewed due to dumbing down et.c

 

I didn't think the distinction was important, as the articles will be dealt with on an individual basis, and the criticisms from whoever is submitting the article are what will be considered.

[Rhino]

You looking for something like Al Gore's movie?

[iNow]

You looking for something like Al Gore's movie?

 

That's not journalism, it's a documentary. Are those the same thing? Why would you propose that? Also, what makes it bad?

[DrDNA]

"Bad" because:

 

"The film claimed that low-lying inhabited Pacific atolls "are being inundated because of anthropogenic global warming" - but there was no evidence of any evacuation occurring

 

· It spoke of global warming "shutting down the ocean conveyor" - the process by which the gulf stream is carried over the north Atlantic to western Europe. The judge said that, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, it was "very unlikely" that the conveyor would shut down in the future, though it might slow down

 

· Mr Gore had also claimed - by ridiculing the opposite view - that two graphs, one plotting a rise in C02 and the other the rise in temperature over a period of 650,000 years, showed "an exact fit". The judge said although scientists agreed there was a connection, "the two graphs do not establish what Mr Gore asserts"

 

· Mr Gore said the disappearance of snow on Mt Kilimanjaro was expressly attributable to human-induced climate change. The judge said the consensus was that that could not be established

 

· The drying up of Lake Chad was used as an example of global warming. The judge said: "It is apparently considered to be more likely to result from ... population increase, over-grazing and regional climate variability"

 

· Mr Gore ascribed Hurricane Katrina to global warming, but there was "insufficient evidence to show that"

 

· Mr Gore also referred to a study showing that polar bears were being found that had drowned "swimming long distances to find the ice". The judge said: "The only scientific study that either side before me can find is one which indicates that four polar bears have recently been found drowned because of a storm"

 

· The film said that coral reefs all over the world were bleaching because of global warming and other factors. The judge said separating the impacts of stresses due to climate change from other stresses, such as over-fishing, and pollution, was difficult

 

· The film said a sea-level rise of up to 20ft would be caused by melting of either west Antarctica or Greenland in the near future; the judge ruled that this was "distinctly alarmist" "

 

And because Al Gore is a pompus Equus asinus.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/oct/11/climatechange?gusrc=rss&feed=8

[iNow]

Strange that there are exactly nine points in your post, doc.

 

http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=28925

 

 

I'll ask again though, is it accurate to label a documentary as journalism?

 

Also, I'm about 98% certain this is not what Snail had in mind when he was looking for examples for the dbunked website.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

Frankly it'll work as a topic, although I'm guessing it's been beaten to death already.

 

We're pretty much splitting the responsibilities of dbunked, Snail handling the journalism and me the pseudoscience. If you have pseudoscience that you want debunked, pass it on to me. If you found a bad science article, send it to Snail. If it's some of both, send it to either one of us and we'll work out where to put it.

[ydoaPs]

If it's some of both, send it to either one of us and we'll work out where to put it.

Here's one!

[dichotomy]

I'll ask again though, is it accurate to label a documentary as journalism?

 

Might be better to say skewed, innaccurate, wrong, etc. science 'mass media' or 'mass information'? This would include journalism, documentaries, internet... There are heaps of science documentaries made by journalists, whom are both scientific and non-sci journo's.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

Here's one!

 

I think TalkOrigins has them covered.

[dichotomy]

Here's something to prove correct ,or, debunk, or, not have enough data to do either -

 

Have all of the hoax moon landing allegations raised at Michael Palomino website been debunked?

 

http://www.geschichteinchronologie.ch/atmosphaerenfahrt-index.html

[DrDNA]

How about the recent buzz about the burning of salt water using microwaves supposedly discovered by a homeopathic cancer researcher?

In other words, does misinterpretation of electrolysis qualify?

 

If indeed this was not misinterpretation of electrolysis, and this in fact the genuine article, in other words a novel discovery.......then never mind.

 

 

 

 

Strange that there are exactly nine points in your post, doc.

 

Buzz!

Sorry, but that is incorrect sir.

 

You were very close. Unfortunately, there were actually ten points. Nine as quoted from the judge in Europe (identified in your link to another thread and my link to the article in The Guardian) plus one additional point about Al Gore being a pompus Equus asinus.

 

We do have a number of fine parting gifts for you; including an all expense paid trip via a private jet and ground transport in our Chevy Suburban fleet to Al Gore's excessively expansive mansion in beautiful Music City USA, Nashville Tennesse. Entertainment at the mansion will be provided by Al's dialogue from the award winning documentary film, An Inconvenient Truth and Al's electric meter; which, during the entire course of your stay, you will simultaneously listen to and watch spin at thousands of rpm.

 

Thanks for playing and see you next time.

[Royston]

I'll ask again though, is it accurate to label a documentary as journalism?

It depends on the documentary, there's no real difference between a 'news special', where they have an extended story on a particular topic, presenting different arguments et.c (we have these in the UK all the time), or a 'one off' documentary on current affairs be it, science related or not. However, I'll change journalism to 'reporting' if that makes more sense to anyone ?

With any broadcast, be it a documentary series or a 'news special', if it's current i.e the topic and the broadcast itself, and they've made a serious error, then I can't see any problem with submitting that.

Remember each example will be considered separately, so somebody submitting a clip of David Attenborough mispronouncing the Latin name for 'bush baby', seven years ago, is obviously trivial, dated, and not worth considering. A recent story that claims an experiment has defied general relativity, where the results have been misinterpreted by the reporter, would be a lot more relevant.

Also, I'm about 98% certain this is not what Snail had in mind when he was looking for examples for the dbunked website.

An Inconvenient Truth, although the issue of climate change is certainly a current topic, the documentary is not. I'll make it more clear (on dbunked) that both need to be current, it's really a waste of time digging up old broadcasts and articles for a number of reasons.

I'm thinking of advertising the site very shortly, and just remembered I've still got to get the headers and logos finished

[swansont]

Buzz!

Sorry, but that is incorrect sir.

 

You were very close. Unfortunately, there were actually ten points. Nine as quoted from the judge in Europe (identified in your link to another thread and my link to the article in The Guardian) plus one additional point about Al Gore being a pompus Equus asinus.

 

Perhaps he was being charitable and not including the ad hominem, which, of course, is an example of bad journalism.

[Spyman]

How about this place ? -> http://www.indiadaily.com/comp.asp

 

 

This story: -> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071012160144.htm

 

Not Just Science Fiction: 'Electromagnetic Wormhole' Possible, Say Mathematicians

In the study, which is to appear in the Oct. 12 issue of Physical Review Letters, Allan Greenleaf, professor of mathematics at the University of Rochester, and his coauthors lay out a variation on the theme of cloaking. Their results open the possibility of building a sort of invisible tunnel between two points in space.

 

 

Is twisted into this: -> http://www.indiadaily.com/editorial/18516.asp

 

Extraterrestrial UFOs - gravity wave driven wormholes provide intergalactic space travel while electromagnetic wormholes provide stealth and fast navigation around the earth

The electromagnetic wormholes are a big buzzword right now. Physics guru and mathematician Allan Greenleaf of the University of Rochester has found a simulator that can create an artificial wormhole.

...

These electromagnetic wormholes are easy to create, small in nature and makes stealth possible. The flux generated provides the stealth, the propulsion and even the guidance.

 

 

Other wierd headlines today:

 

The parallel universe of anti-matter – part of you is in there and you communicate with your other part all the time

 

Signs of extraterrestrial civilization in tiny galaxy six billion light-years away found through gravity lensing

 

India plans chemical mapping of the moon, mars, and beyond – why is India shying away from manned missions?

 

Want to see how Type IV extraterrestrial civilization created the planet earth? Look towards a young star called HD 113766 only 424 light-years

 

A naked singularity in the center of our galaxy – the unpredictable phenomenon can destroy human civilization any

 

Reason why the extraterrestrials resist human exploration of the outer space – bacteria become deadly in the space

[Phi for All]

And because Al Gore is a pompus Equus asinus.

I think this is what fosters a lot of bad journalism. You don't like the man so you shoot down his work. Never mind that he is raising awareness in a way that few can (how many 100% scientifically accurate global warming documentaries would you expect the general public to "warm up" to?). Blame him for driving a big vehicle but ignore the fact that his Secret Service detachment probably won't let him drive a Prius.

[Royston]

I've read 'India Daily' in the past, and I thought it was satire...at least the scientific content. The science articles are bordering on a parody of bad journalism. Perhaps 'India Daily' would be good practice.

 

I am more interested in more reputable and influential sources such as the BBC, in fact they prompted me to start thinking seriously on how to start tackling the problem, after watching one of their documentaries.

 

EDIT: Sure, I don't see any harm in getting in contact with India Daily, perhaps we could make a more general criticism of their articles, and give examples. What the response will be, I'm not entirely sure.

[dichotomy]

What about ‘The world’s only reliable newspaper’ – The Weekly World News?

 

I want this report debunked as a matter of urgency.

 

http://www.weeklyworldnews.com/top_story/27

 

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

I don't think it counts unless they're being serious