tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10781944.post2907830732456854424..comments2024-03-28T00:36:36.460-07:00Comments on The Tree of Life: 2010 "Arsenic found in DNA", 2012 "We never claimed arsenic was in the DNA" WTF?Jonathan Eisenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07953790938128734305noreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10781944.post-24586149030834961892012-08-13T16:48:12.975-07:002012-08-13T16:48:12.975-07:00Although as a scientist I do agree that we should ...Although as a scientist I do agree that we should focus on science and stop personal attacks, I do have to say that in this particular case, this whole story is really upsetting me. We all work hard and put time and care in our experiments. We are all tested by peers who ask for more data, experiments, tests and so on before getting published. And yet, we have to keep following on this discussion. How is it possible that Wolfe-Simon stands so much by her paper? No one can reproduce her experiments, not even come close to the outlined results. And yes, she was claiming arsenic biomolecules such as As-DNA. Now she hides behind semantics, and pretends she never said what we all know she was claiming as the biggest 21st century revolution in life-sciences. How can anyone keep believing in her experiments when no one can reproduce it? She needs to stop this fight, the same way she started the fire. It is her responsibility. And the other authors, please stop hiding. You are all responsible for that fiascoJordi Cirerahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02099401199492951111noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10781944.post-66092973305034637702012-08-13T16:47:12.579-07:002012-08-13T16:47:12.579-07:00Although as a scientist I do agree that we should ...Although as a scientist I do agree that we should focus on science and stop personal attacks, I do have to say that in this particular case, this whole story is really upsetting me. We all work hard and put time and care in our experiments. We are all tested by peers who ask for more data, experiments, tests and so on before getting published. And yet, we have to keep following on this discussion. How is it possible that Wolfe-Simon stands so much by her paper? No one can reproduce her experiments, not even come close to the outlined results. And yes, she was claiming arsenic biomolecules such as As-DNA. Now she hides behind semantics, and pretends she never said what we all know she was claiming as the biggest 21st century revolution in life-sciences. How can anyone keep believing in her experiments when no one can reproduce it? She needs to stop this fight, the same way she started the fire. It is her responsibility. And the other authors, please stop hiding. You are all responsible for that fiascoJordi Cirerahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02099401199492951111noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10781944.post-47911908937463458512012-02-06T11:46:43.682-08:002012-02-06T11:46:43.682-08:00I too disagree with Gralnick and agree with Eisen....I too disagree with Gralnick and agree with Eisen. The parallels to Woese and Wolfe are ephemeral, except that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidences. The third domain of life was proposed, based on the application of a new genetic analytical method, 16sRNA analysis, which gave very different results from the widely accepted and long standing, phenotypic (morphological and biochemical) methods of the time. Woese and Wolfe continued to inexorably pile up more and more data to the point that it was generally accepted. We are waiting for that to be provided by Wolfe-Simon, and the first attempt at replicating the original analysis has been negative.mclearyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13350697365252462472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10781944.post-27015991896558757962012-02-04T07:46:10.765-08:002012-02-04T07:46:10.765-08:00I can't comment on Iron Lisa's comment unt...I can't comment on Iron Lisa's comment until it has been peer-reviewed. Gimme a minute.... OK: rejected. Come on now, this is just ludicrous. (not sure why Google is signing me in as unknown.... Benoit Bruneau)Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00067630494502257172noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10781944.post-68374564959350243422012-02-03T07:03:54.534-08:002012-02-03T07:03:54.534-08:00JB - I disagree with your assessment of the role o...JB - I disagree with your assessment of the role of the press here. Certainly the press did have a lot of hype initially. But that all can be blamed on NASA and the authors - NASA announced in a teaser that they were going to have a very important press conference about life in the universe. And then they basically told everyone that textbooks needed to be rewritten and our world had changed. The press just went with the hype NASA created.Jonathan Eisenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07953790938128734305noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10781944.post-48958284329205935842012-02-02T21:12:41.591-08:002012-02-02T21:12:41.591-08:00Peer review in the shower. lol.Peer review in the shower. lol.Stevohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08671111120803149177noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10781944.post-82862785325013272612012-02-02T13:26:19.840-08:002012-02-02T13:26:19.840-08:002 Jeff Gralnick: 'if you don't overstate y...2 Jeff Gralnick: 'if you don't overstate your case, no one will listen!'<br /><br />It's a good advise for a showman or politician, not for a scientist. In science, extraordinary claims should be supported with extraordinary proofs. Otherwise, the whole body of modern scientific knowledge will quickly loose its coherence. When some unconfirmed results of scientific research are being released directly to general public without passing through peer review, it makes me feel suspicious about intentions of the authors.garwufhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10828456435954071464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10781944.post-35025346150883166812012-02-02T09:38:37.611-08:002012-02-02T09:38:37.611-08:00Well, at first the media were on the hype bandwago...Well, at first the media were on the hype bandwagon too -- I probably wouldn't have even noticed the Wolfe-Simon article if newspapers and TV stations hadn't presented it as a huge, possibly Nobel-worthy discovery. It's true that within a week or so the media did shift sides as critics began to appear. But the main reason the stories aren't parallel is (as Jeff notes) that Woese & Fox *did* make the most important biological discovery of 1977 (and arguably of some years before and after).<br /><br />I really don't understand Wolfe-Simon's strategy at this point. She could live this down and go on to a successful career -- it's no crime to be wrong in science. But like Pons & Fleischmann (of cold fusion fame) she is sticking to her original interpretation long after more convincing ones have been presented.Jonathan Badgerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04921990886076027719noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10781944.post-49225911285003644372012-02-02T08:43:28.577-08:002012-02-02T08:43:28.577-08:00I do not think the Stories are so parallel -Wolfe...I do not think the Stories are so parallel -Wolfe Simon and NASA have been the ones doing the overhyping - not the media --Jonathan Eisenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07953790938128734305noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10781944.post-40837120718949626692012-02-02T08:15:21.861-08:002012-02-02T08:15:21.861-08:00Some very interesting parallels with #arseniclife ...Some very interesting parallels with #arseniclife and the publication from Woese and Wolfe's groups on finding the third domain of life - Archaea in 1977. Watch Wolfe recount this story here (it starts about 15 min in or so, though the entire talk is fascinating (http://archaea.igb.uiuc.edu/abstracts/wolfe.php?video=true&directory=./Ralph%20Wolfe.flv) - Thanks to D. Bond for finding it!<br /><br />The day that the paper is published, Wolfe fields phone calls from Luria and one unidentified member of the National Academy who asked him "What's this bullshit you guys are putting out?!"<br /><br />The media mostly gets it wrong - a headline from the Chicago Tribune reads 'Martianlike bugs on earth?'<br /><br />Wolfe's father-in-law advises him that 'if you don't overstate your case, no one will listen!'<br /><br />The big, big difference here is the data. Woese and Wolfe were right, and the data presented was solid.<br /><br />As a side note, Wolfe claims this is his first powerpoint lecture! I'm glad its online!!Jeff Gralnickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01967330280336303651noreply@blogger.com