 |
 |
Post Archive
December (5)
First most influential paper
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
Twelve (minus one) Months of pondering Blather
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
I'll save Tideliar the trouble
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
Thinking differently
Friday, December 3, 2010
Music Warz! - The Maccabees
Thursday, December 2, 2010
November (6)
Standing out in a crowd: An addendum
Monday, November 8, 2010
Standing out in a crowd
Friday, November 5, 2010
Ripping your arms off
Tuesday, November 2, 2010
The Tea Party explained
Tuesday, November 2, 2010
Words of wisdom for prospective graduate students
Monday, November 1, 2010
Grant advice
Monday, November 1, 2010
October (10)
Planet of the Apes
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
Too many postdocs?
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
Oh! Rats! [UPDATED]
Thursday, October 21, 2010
Rethinking Education
Monday, October 18, 2010
Elephant man, rabies and leprosy
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
Over-priced mochas and syphilis
Sunday, October 10, 2010
DonorsChoose - give early and give often. [UPDATED]
Friday, October 8, 2010
Question
Wednesday, October 6, 2010
What I would be doing if I weren't doing science
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
Time spent reviewing
Monday, October 4, 2010
September (6)
Dear PI's who wrote the NSF proposals I am now reviewing...
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
Funding Illusions
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
FIve years ago today
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
A (temporary) cure for vortices of suckitude
Wednesday, September 15, 2010
Things that make Odyssey grumpy
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
What I wish I knew before starting my faculty position
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
August (10)
Flying 101
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Don't panic!
Monday, August 23, 2010
One to Rule Them All
Friday, August 20, 2010
The NSF review panel process
Thursday, August 19, 2010
Peer review, schmeer review
Friday, August 13, 2010
Hypotheses: The most disposable of lab supplies
Thursday, August 12, 2010
How much do you need to want it?
Monday, August 9, 2010
Bugger
Sunday, August 8, 2010
REPOST: How Many Papers for Tenure?
Thursday, August 5, 2010
Checking it out
Thursday, August 5, 2010
First most influential paper
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
Twelve (minus one) Months of pondering Blather
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
I'll save Tideliar the trouble
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
Thinking differently
Friday, December 3, 2010
Music Warz! - The Maccabees
Thursday, December 2, 2010
Standing out in a crowd: An addendum
Monday, November 8, 2010
Standing out in a crowd
Friday, November 5, 2010
Ripping your arms off
Tuesday, November 2, 2010
The Tea Party explained
Tuesday, November 2, 2010
Words of wisdom for prospective graduate students
Monday, November 1, 2010
Grant advice
Monday, November 1, 2010
Planet of the Apes
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
Too many postdocs?
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
Oh! Rats! [UPDATED]
Thursday, October 21, 2010
Rethinking Education
Monday, October 18, 2010
Elephant man, rabies and leprosy
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
Over-priced mochas and syphilis
Sunday, October 10, 2010
DonorsChoose - give early and give often. [UPDATED]
Friday, October 8, 2010
Question
Wednesday, October 6, 2010
What I would be doing if I weren't doing science
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
Time spent reviewing
Monday, October 4, 2010
Dear PI's who wrote the NSF proposals I am now reviewing...
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
Funding Illusions
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
FIve years ago today
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
A (temporary) cure for vortices of suckitude
Wednesday, September 15, 2010
Things that make Odyssey grumpy
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
What I wish I knew before starting my faculty position
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
Flying 101
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Don't panic!
Monday, August 23, 2010
One to Rule Them All
Friday, August 20, 2010
The NSF review panel process
Thursday, August 19, 2010
Peer review, schmeer review
Friday, August 13, 2010
Hypotheses: The most disposable of lab supplies
Thursday, August 12, 2010
How much do you need to want it?
Monday, August 9, 2010
Bugger
Sunday, August 8, 2010
REPOST: How Many Papers for Tenure?
Thursday, August 5, 2010
Checking it out
Thursday, August 5, 2010
|
|
Rate This Post
Total votes: 0
|
|
Blogger Profile
Odyssey
I'm a molecular biophysicist in a biochemistry department. In a college of medicine. And I'm funded by the NSF. Not too sure my dean likes that... I'm here to blather on about things that interest me and to raise the average age of the bloggers here by at least 1.2567 years. And I'm Australian.
My posts are presented as opinion and commentary and do not represent the views of LabSpaces Productions, LLC, my employer, or my educational institution.
|
|
Blog RSS Feed
|
|
Awesome Stuff
|
|
Around the Network
Author: Brian Krueger, PhD | Comments: 9
Author: Brian Krueger, PhD | Comments: 0
Author: Brian Krueger, PhD | Comments: 2
|
|
Blogroll
Jun 19, 2013, 10:03am
Jun 18, 2013, 5:06pm
Jun 14, 2013, 12:05am
Jun 13, 2013, 7:00am
Drugmonkey (Scientopia)
Unpaid internships are a systemic labor exploitation scam- yes, in science labs too.
Jun 12, 2013, 1:51pm
Jun 05, 2013, 12:21pm
May 30, 2013, 12:11pm
May 18, 2013, 1:08am
May 17, 2013, 1:22pm
Apr 25, 2013, 1:00pm
Apr 23, 2013, 12:12pm
Apr 22, 2013, 3:52pm
Mar 04, 2013, 7:48am
Feb 14, 2013, 9:30am
Jan 02, 2013, 8:53pm
Jun 11, 2012, 9:37pm
May 27, 2012, 11:41pm
Feb 29, 2012, 10:31am
Jan 12, 2012, 12:31pm
Nov 19, 2011, 4:38pm
Sep 05, 2011, 10:05pm
Aug 25, 2011, 12:31pm
Aug 19, 2011, 12:28pm
Jun 03, 2011, 3:41pm
Mar 14, 2011, 8:48pm
Feb 17, 2011, 9:40am
Feb 11, 2011, 8:27pm
Jan 20, 2011, 10:25am
Dec 17, 2010, 8:14am
Thursday, August 12, 2010
We put so much effort into crafting our hypotheses. Carefully collecting our data. Collating. Analyzing.
Considering. Pondering. Thinking.
For hours. Days. Weeks. Months.
Even years.
Finally sculpting.
Behold you unwashed masses! We present to you a thing of great beauty and wonder-
A new hypothesis!
Bow down and worship it's awesomeness!!!
Is it any wonder that some scientists have such a hard time discarding their pet hypotheses? Or refuse to discard them at all, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that they are wrong?
I'd be willing to bet we all know someone like that.
Understandable.
But not excusable.
Considering. Pondering. Thinking.
For hours. Days. Weeks. Months.
Even years.
Finally sculpting.
Behold you unwashed masses! We present to you a thing of great beauty and wonder-
A new hypothesis!
Bow down and worship it's awesomeness!!!
Is it any wonder that some scientists have such a hard time discarding their pet hypotheses? Or refuse to discard them at all, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that they are wrong?
I'd be willing to bet we all know someone like that.
Understandable.
But not excusable.
This post has been viewed: 452 time(s)
 |
 |
Blog Comments
Page: 1
Follow the blog comments feed here.
Line breaks are put in for you automatically between paragraphs. If you're using HTML, be sure there are no carriage returns in your post, otherwise you'll get double the spacing :)
I live in the lab by the belief that I should be doing experiments to disprove my hypotheses, not prove them.
Dude, don't you know that it is sooooo much easier to come up with the hypothesis after you have your data?
GUEST COMMENT said:
Dude, don't you know that it is sooooo much easier to come up with the hypothesis after you have your data?
Shhhh! You're giving away my secret!
This post might just be printed and left in a conspicuous place for a particular PI to find after I depart the lab. (Probably not, but I do like to fantasize.)
Of course, if you're doing "discovery-driven" research (e.g. anythingomics), you don't really need this so-called hypothesis.
Of course, if you're doing "discovery-driven" research (e.g. anythingomics), you don't really need this so-called hypothesis.
Dr. O said: 
One of the strongest memories/impressions from a conference I have is Sir Alan Fersht standing before a room of hundreds of scientists saying the way he was trained is that you developed a hypothesis and set out to falsify your hypothesis... and that it didn't mean your hypothesis was true just because you couldn't disprove it. He also made a comment along the lines that this isn't how most science is done today. It was definitely ranty and totally awesome. So awesome that I included his point when I presented my conference report to my lab (not the lab referred to in the above comment, unfortunately).
One of the strongest memories/impressions from a conference I have is Sir Alan Fersht standing before a room of hundreds of scientists saying the way he was trained is that you developed a hypothesis and set out to falsify your hypothesis... and that it didn't mean your hypothesis was true just because you couldn't disprove it. He also made a comment along the lines that this isn't how most science is done today. It was definitely ranty and totally awesome. So awesome that I included his point when I presented my conference report to my lab (not the lab referred to in the above comment, unfortunately).
Page: 1
Haha the comment above is funny! Research before hypothesis! . . .Read More
Good article! "Do proponents of this system have any idea just how hard it is to find reviewers under the current system?" I've just stumbled across this artcile, so my comments are. . .Read More
Rules of the Internets, #3"Don't necro dead threads n00b"Corollary Rule 3.1"If the best you can add is content-lite, don't fucking necro dead threads n00b"Corollary Rul. . .Read More
anyone interested in helping my kindergarteners? Check out http://www.donorschoos. . .Read More
Thanks for the post! Very helpful. - Reshmi . . .Read More