Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication Type
- File Type
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Evidence
Experts, Statistics, Science & Bad Science, Curtis E.A. Karnow
Experts, Statistics, Science & Bad Science, Curtis E.A. Karnow
Curtis E.A. Karnow
Articles, books, and other online resources relating to expert testimony with a specific focus on problems with peer review, bad science, and statistics
Dumping Daubert, Popping Popper And Falsifying Falsifiability: A Re-Assessment Of First Principles, Barbara P. Billauer Esq
Dumping Daubert, Popping Popper And Falsifying Falsifiability: A Re-Assessment Of First Principles, Barbara P. Billauer Esq
barbara p billauer esq
Abstract: The Daubert mantra demands that judges, acting as gatekeepers, prevent para, pseudo or bad science from infiltrating the courtroom. To do so, the Judges must first determine what is ‘science’ and what is ‘good science.’ It is submitted that Daubert is deeply polluted with the notions of Karl Popper who sets ‘falsifiability’ and ‘falsification’ as the demarcation line for that determination. This philosophy has intractably infected case law, leading to bad decisions immortalized as stare decisis, and an unworkable system of decision-making, which negatively impacts litigant expectations. Among other problems is the intolerance of Popper’s system for multiple causation, …
Cell Phones, Brain Cancer, And Scientific Outliers In Murray V. Motorola, David H. Kaye
Cell Phones, Brain Cancer, And Scientific Outliers In Murray V. Motorola, David H. Kaye
Journal Articles
Pending before the District of Columbia's highest court in a case asking whether cell phones can cause cancer is whether to replace the jurisdiction's venerable Frye standard for reviewing the admissibility of scientific evidence with the approach adopted by the U.S. Supreme Court in Daubert v. Merrell Dow. The author analyzes one aspect of the two evidentiary standards that leads him to question the trial judge's suggestion in Murray v. Motorola that adopting the Daubert perspective would allow greater leeway in excluding the plaintiff's evidence.