Talk:Sound science

""Sound science" is a euphemism for anti-scientific bullshit." - that doesn't even make sense. The lead section needs a serious rewrite. I'd do it if I could figure out what it's trying to say. 07:48, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Looks fine to me. It seems to be a code word for "science that agrees with our policies". Röstigraben (talk) 07:59, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, yeah, it's better now that I rewrote it, but the original I quoted above and what you rewrote it as are both as clear as mud. Seriously. An article about a mis-used term needs a very clear intro, and this one doesn't have one yet.  08:05, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * From the reference:
 * It all sounds noble enough, but the phrases "sound science" and "peer review" don't necessarily mean what you might think. Instead, they're part of a lexicon used to put a pro-science veneer on policies that most of the scientific community itself tends to be up in arms about.
 * The important thing is that this phrase is used by politicians, not scientists. Maybe "encountered in policy debates"? Röstigraben (talk) 08:11, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Perhaps that's a good phrase to use, yes. 08:34, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Rewrite looks much better, that thing was train-wreck. That's what I get for editing under the influence (of sleep deprivation, that is). Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 16:42, 6 June 2011 (UTC)