[Dclug] Open Source Science... caution is needed...
nicholasdonovan at netscape.net
nicholasdonovan at netscape.net
Tue Jun 2 17:04:22 EDT 2009
haha?? I understand that!
I am well aware that Wilkipedia is not used in any scientific papers.
Here is my concern; Wiki is in affect, an opensource format for
knowledge in the form of an encyclopedia. You may or may not know my
background but if you google me you'll find I've been a long time
supporter and contributor of OpenSource and have run OpenSource
I am concerned that OpenSource will lose the confidence of decision makers if this continues.
A classic example is the WikiAnswers question:
Q: What are the largest cells in the body?
A: They are neurons, not as popularly believed, gamates.
As one example I have cited;
"Neurons comprise the smallest and largest cells of the body, ranging from 5 - 150 microns. " (6)
Here are my sources:
1) Austin and Short (1982)
Reproduction in mammals: Germ cells and fertilization. Cambridge
University Press, NY, NY USA
2) T. Kato1, A.
Hirano, H. Donnenfeld et al The Bluestone Laboratory,
Division of Neuropathology, Department of Pathology, Montefiore Medical
Center, Bronx, NY, USA
3) Leslie P Gartner,
James L Hiatt and Judy M Strum,? BRS Cell Biology and
Histology (Board Review Series) ISBN-0781785774
4) Barbara Young, James S. Lowe, Alan Stevens, John
W. Heath and Philip J. Deakin, Wheater's Functional Histology: A Text
and Colour Atlas, ISBN-044306850X
E. Sakas, Brian A. Simpson, Operative Neuromodulation:
Volume 2: Neural Networks Surgery (Acta Neurochirurgica Supplementum)
(Acta Neurochirurgica Supplementum), ISBN-3211330801
6) Lipponcott, Williams and Wilkens, Cell Biology and Histology 5th Ed. 2007, Board Exam Series, ISBN-13:978-0-7817-8577-8
Here is their source:
Ultimately I'm at the point of just saying, 'Why bother?'
From: Kevin Cole <dc.loco at gmail.com>
To: nicholasdonovan at netscape.net
Cc: dclug at tux.org
Sent: Tue, 2 Jun 2009 3:44 pm
Subject: Re: [Dclug] Open Source Science... caution is needed...
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 15:18, <nicholasdonovan at netscape.net> wrote:
> As an example,I am a medical student with a focus on neurology/sports
> medicine and there was a debate on WikiAnswers in which people that refuse
> to cite scientific sources. I have stated a USMLE text, various board exam
> texts and neurosurgery journals/books as the resource I am basing my answer
> on and these undergraduate kids insist that thebigbookofeverything.com is a
> valid resource.
It's like trusting Fox News for news. ;-)
When I'm digging for an answer on the web, I try to use the
pseudo-scientific method. ;-) In other words, I try to get results
that are repeatable and consistent -- in other words, multiple sources
that have steered me in the right direction previously and that agree
with each other. It helps some if they have an established rep for
monitoring and policing their works and/or some sort of peer review.
I don't want to throw out the baby with the bathwater. Wikipedia
often gives me a clue, watering down an idea to where I can digest it,
and then I look for supporting evidence that it's not all complete
ravings of lunatics.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Dclug