I'm going to start by re-posting my comment on the actual article, excuse wall of text.
"This is a terrible article for a number of reasons.
"Science now has an explanation for that."
We need to stop saying things like this, this is a single paper which is not peer reviewed,
(original article here http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/arxiv/27260/ .)
Since when does a single paper, not peer reviewed, constitute saying "science now has an explanation for that".
If you read the comments on the original article there's almost exclusively criticism of the paper's poor methodology, without a single response to the criticisms.
The most basic being
for example "From the referenced paper: "The clocks in the OPERA experiment are orbiting the earth in GPS satellites."
I believe that's incorrect. The clocks in the OPERA experiment are atomic clocks on the ground that are synchronized by GPS clocks. If I remember correctly, they are then checked against each other using other on-ground, highly accurate atomic clocks."
It's not "Scientists at the University of Groningen in the Netherlands did the math" it was one paper by one man, "Ronald van Elburg".
If your so lazy that you don't even go past DVice to original source before reporting, as you clearly haven't, why even post at all.
Lazy lazy lazy journalism,
and please, please, stop saying "Science says..."
de-anthropomorphize science because it does no one good, it just creates the same dogmatic lack of critical thought which most ironically criticize the religious of while being guilty of themselves.
Whether this man's paper is right or wrong, this article represents everything that's wrong with the media's treatment of science, and frankly I think that that phenomena is more damaging to us than any dissolution of relativity. If you are unwilling to address primary sources, or even be aware of them while reporting, I suggest you apply for a job at Fox news as this seems to be their preferred M.O."
So my question is why does stuff like this happen in an age where to get to the source would have literally been a single click of a mouse button?
The title of this article itself, "Science: (implying science has somehow grown a mouth and consciousness and is saying something) Don't worry physics is safe (Implying that further understanding of the physical world would somehow damage our knowledge of the physical world), is completely illustrative of the above mentioned problems.
There is a fun saying I once heard and can no longer remember the source of, that "physics moves ahead funeral by funeral", while this may or may not be the case, it shouldn't be the case that shoddy sensationalist reporting inhibits peoples understanding of what's going on.
What even further bothers me is that if you look at the original source, or even the DVice repost, there is a ton of critical commentary whereas all of the commentary thus far on the escapist has been "I knew it all along".
Why are people here so happy to look at a poorly written article and leave it at that with no actual personal inquiry.
If you knew it all along why aren't you interested in the source material to validate your conjectural and probably baseless opinion.
/rant done, but I'm now generally concerned about the quality of reporting on this site, hope I'm not the only one.
Cheers.
"This is a terrible article for a number of reasons.
"Science now has an explanation for that."
We need to stop saying things like this, this is a single paper which is not peer reviewed,
(original article here http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/arxiv/27260/ .)
Since when does a single paper, not peer reviewed, constitute saying "science now has an explanation for that".
If you read the comments on the original article there's almost exclusively criticism of the paper's poor methodology, without a single response to the criticisms.
The most basic being
for example "From the referenced paper: "The clocks in the OPERA experiment are orbiting the earth in GPS satellites."
I believe that's incorrect. The clocks in the OPERA experiment are atomic clocks on the ground that are synchronized by GPS clocks. If I remember correctly, they are then checked against each other using other on-ground, highly accurate atomic clocks."
It's not "Scientists at the University of Groningen in the Netherlands did the math" it was one paper by one man, "Ronald van Elburg".
If your so lazy that you don't even go past DVice to original source before reporting, as you clearly haven't, why even post at all.
Lazy lazy lazy journalism,
and please, please, stop saying "Science says..."
de-anthropomorphize science because it does no one good, it just creates the same dogmatic lack of critical thought which most ironically criticize the religious of while being guilty of themselves.
Whether this man's paper is right or wrong, this article represents everything that's wrong with the media's treatment of science, and frankly I think that that phenomena is more damaging to us than any dissolution of relativity. If you are unwilling to address primary sources, or even be aware of them while reporting, I suggest you apply for a job at Fox news as this seems to be their preferred M.O."
So my question is why does stuff like this happen in an age where to get to the source would have literally been a single click of a mouse button?
The title of this article itself, "Science: (implying science has somehow grown a mouth and consciousness and is saying something) Don't worry physics is safe (Implying that further understanding of the physical world would somehow damage our knowledge of the physical world), is completely illustrative of the above mentioned problems.
There is a fun saying I once heard and can no longer remember the source of, that "physics moves ahead funeral by funeral", while this may or may not be the case, it shouldn't be the case that shoddy sensationalist reporting inhibits peoples understanding of what's going on.
What even further bothers me is that if you look at the original source, or even the DVice repost, there is a ton of critical commentary whereas all of the commentary thus far on the escapist has been "I knew it all along".
Why are people here so happy to look at a poorly written article and leave it at that with no actual personal inquiry.
If you knew it all along why aren't you interested in the source material to validate your conjectural and probably baseless opinion.
/rant done, but I'm now generally concerned about the quality of reporting on this site, hope I'm not the only one.
Cheers.