Improper calibration in true scientific endeavors versus forensic science in the courtroom

In the broader world of science, it is well recognized that parts of the measurement system need to be demonstrated to be in control and properly calibrated as well as properly used by a trained and knowledgable operator. It is through these basic fundamentals that we can infer with sufficient confidence that our testing is both accurate (from from bias) and precise. In the below hyptertext link we find a retraction of a peer reviewed paper based upon violation of this axiomatic principle.

As so aptly put by the blog’s author:
Scientific experiments are like recipes: With the right components and the proper steps, the end result can be a thing of beauty. But if you start with a cup of salt instead of a cup of flour, well, even the neighbor’s schnauzer won’t touch that batch of sugar cookies.
It is a continuing shame that our courts continue to allow in results that have no scientific validity under the doctrine that such basic failures in good science go instead to “the weight of the evidence.” The weight of the science commands that only valid measurements appear in court, not merely readable ones. It is time for our courts to be re-calibrated.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *