Slashdot Mirror
10th Anniversary Of Supreme Court's Daubert Ruling
scraggly codger writes "Slashdot readers might find it interesting to learn about the ongoing legal controversy over the role of federal judges as gatekeepers for scientific evidence in civil and criminal litigation in the US. Ten years ago the Supreme Court provided guidelines for admissibility of scientific evidence in the Daubert ruling. Readers might find it hard to believe from the text of the ruling, but the result has been a huge increase in the power of judges to exclude scientific evidence from presentation to juries, based on what many scientists and other observers consider an incredibly naive (or perhaps merely self-serving) model of science. There's been a spate of news stories covering the topic, perhaps the most prominent in the WSJ of Friday, 27 June, "'Junk Science' Ban Also Keeps Jurors From Sound Evidence" (regrettably not freely available online). I particularly recommend Daubert: The Most Influential Supreme Court Ruling You've Never Heard Of."
Anyone else read that as the "Dogbert" Reading?
Dammit! Alex Chiu wins again!!
Well, I for one WELCOME our new computer overlords.
If tits were wings it'd be flying around.
"Your honor, I have here two peer-reviewed, meticulous studies which show how the Daubert decision prevents legitimate science from being submitted ..."
"Evidence denied. Next case!"Him and his pointy-haired boss
So one could have legitimate scientific evidence excluded from court, but a kook on the stand could say "My god (or any other invisible friend) made me do it." and the judge would allow that? fear...
Trolling is a art,
You probably think I'm about to blast the Dogbert ruling
Who the hell is Dogbert?
Well I never bought it...being sold on an infomercial pushes it far enough into the Bullshit realm. My girlfriend's mother did...she said it did jack shit for grass and mud stains. She also bought those ionic breeze things (noticing a trend?) which weren't cheap...didn't notice a thing.
Putting a magnet bracelet on my dong, however, has yielding me the ability to " 1split my girl with my hum!ungous john_son5 "
Blar.
You only say that because you've never seen the virgin mary in a danish, dirty window, or carpet stain!
Blar.
As a "physics genius", why do you have a yahoo account and why are you reading slashdot? Shouldn't you be out Einsteining something?
riding round the world on an old motorcycle
Clearly the lawsuit was withdrawn because of your brave protest. I salute you. If only more of us would selflessly buy packages of oreos, we might suffer from fewer pointless sco-like lawsuits. Based on your example, I'm buying one myself as soon as possible.
Do I get extra points for mentioning SCO?
Shouldn't you be out Einsteining something?
Ah yes, all physicists spend all their free time working on string theory and finding Riemann surfaces. Can't keep us away from it with a stick!
Don't feed the trolls.
The parent comment was funny. Yours was not.
Oh come on, it wasn't that bad. Lighten up. Have an Oreo.
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;