Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Scientists Publish Letter Saying, "We Need More Scientific Mavericks"

Posted by samzenpus on from the funding-favors-the-bold dept.

coondoggie (973519) writes "Gotta love this letter published in the guardian.com this week. It comes from a number of scientists throughout the world who are obviously frustrated with the barriers being thrown up around them — financial, antiquated procedures and techniques to name a few — and would like to see changes. When you speak of scientific mavericks, you might look directly at Improbable Research's annual Ig Nobel awards which recognize the arguably leading edge of maverick scientific work."

2 of 126 comments (clear)

  1. Maverick theory of MH370 by goombah99 · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    We begin with Goodfellows argument for a fire which, by the way, was also raised by another anaylyst. The we demolish Slates counter argument.

    1) There's an electrical fire, all the breakers are tripped (removing the data transponders and maybe the communications). http://www.airtrafficmanagemen... http://www.wired.com/autopia/2...

    The Malaysian primary radar inferred a flight path with the turns at VAMPI and GIVAL after the Lankawi International airport overflight:
    supposed: flight path :http://skyvector.com/?ll=10.332212843477643,95.11743164439306&chart=304&zoom=8&plan=F.WM.IGARI:F.WM.VAMPI:F.WM.GIVAL:F.VO.IGREX

    So Slate asks how do we account for the red herring turns at VAMPI and GIVAL?

    3) Coincidentally, after the incapacitated MH370 overshoots the airport, at that very moment UTC March 7 18:00, another 777 flown by Singapore Airlines (Flight SIA 68) crosses MH370s flight path.

    http://www.flightradar24.com/2...

    4) MH370 is low since its trying to land and so the Malaysian Royal Airforce primary radar is having some trouble following it. The primary radar initially sees one 777 (MH370) then after losing it confuses this with SIA 68, which is the only 777 they can now see in the air at the same GPS coordinate.

    5) SIA68 then executes two planned waypoint turns (GIVAL and IGREX), so we get the red herring that a skilled pilot was in control of the flight just before SIA 68, not MH370, goes off the end of the Malaysian radar

    We add one more flourish to explain why the Indonesians also missed the (tiny) overflight of one of their archpeligo, a point Slate did not raise.

    6) The pilots are incapacitated as MH370 continues on the same line, skims low over the tip of indonesia and flys out into open ocean. As it happens at 18:05 UTC Flight UAE343 (as well as one other flight before it) , also a 777, is also flying over the tip of Indonesia at that same moment so again a potential for misattributed distant radar returns.

    http://www.flightradar24.com/2...

    Finally tie it into a bow to answer slates last objection:

    7) if you extend that line out it will eventually intersect the supposed last ping satellite transmission radius somewhere far off the west coast of Australia, perhaps vaguely near the Coco islands. I can't be too precise because the maps are not draw with correct spherical geometry.

    8) since Goodfellow's claim a new set of facts has come out that aid it further. It has been now revealed that the Lankawi overflight path was entered into the computer prior to the "goodnight all is well" message from the co-pilot to the tower. Some people saw that premeditaion as suspicious. However It has also been revealed that extremely conscientious pilots do this routinely. they program the nearest escape path into their flight computers and keep it updated as they travel from way point to way point. they don't hit the execute button. It's just there already to go if things go south and no matter who is flying the plane at that moment. Goodfellow also said the first thing he saw was a pilot who already knew what he was going to do in an emergency and didn't have to think about it. So rather than being suspicious it explains a lot.

    Goodfellow also noted that while there is some uncertainty about the strange climb and dives inferred from the (altitude-unreliable) radar data, that these are consistent with a huge smoky fire: climb to 40,000 feet in a desperate move to starve it of oxygen. Then dive at a ridiculous rate to try to blow it out or at least get close to ground for a ditch in the ocean.

    the theory is that by the time they got close to L

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
  2. The Guardian? by SplashMyBandit · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    The Guardian spends a huge amount of effort banning 'mavericks' from its comment boards regarding things like 'Global Warming'. Where you stand on the 'Anthropic Global Warming' (AGW) is less important than understanding that both proponents and opponents can provide insights into the issue. What matters is not 'consensus' (which is only invoked if the observations don't support a hypothesis), but the *data* ... and sometimes the 'mavericks' are pointing to critical data you may not have come across before.

    It is thoroughly excellent the Guardian are promoting Free Speech for science, through their 'maverick' meme. I really just wished they'd put what they preach into practice - as we all should :)

    There is *no substitute* for Free Speech. And Free Speech is not about what we all agree one, but the right of a 'maverick' to disagree and voice their opinion - and the right of many many more to listen to that maverick and then make their own minds up. Without this we have *no* Liberty - no matter how well intentioned the censors are.