A problem with the "Eddowes Shawl" DNA match

[Archaic]

"Science Has Failed" vs Human Error

Perhaps this spectacular fail of science towards solving the ripper case means we should settle on whatever suspect, no matter if we cant ‘see’ it, that has the most circumstantial evidence surrounding them?

Hello Richard.

I don't agree that 'Science' has failed.

'Science' isn't some sort of static Monolith. Science is a vast body of knowledge that has been accumulated and refined over the centuries via application of 'Scientific Method', including such techniques as Observation; Measurement; Formulation, Testing and Modification of Hypotheses; Experiments/Tests; Accurate Recording of Test Results, Analysis of Test Results, Statement of Conclusions, etc.

All of these techniques must be performed according to accepted methodologies for the specific field, in this case Human Genetics.

If there is an error in the testing, recording, or analysis of the Shawl's DNA it's a HUMAN error, not a "Failure of Science."
If you made a mistake while working out a math problem and got it wrong on a test, would you throw up your hands and announce, "Mathematics has failed!" (I hope not.)

An 'Error of Nomenclature' is an error in the systematic application of naming, categorization, etc., that is the accepted standard within a given field, and such an error can mistakenly skew results.

One or more errors of nomenclature appear to be the situation here. If true, it's an entirely Human error, not a failure of Science.

- Which is not to say that there are not other potential areas of "failure" in this case, chief being the current lack of any reason to believe the shawl was ever in the possession of either Katherine Eddowes or Aaron Kosminski.

Best regards,
Archaic

[pinkmoon]

It's to easy to say "we got it wrong" after selling all those books and yoyos how about refunding people's money because let's face it that book only sold because of the claims it was "case closed ".

[GUT]

It's to easy to say "we got it wrong" after selling all those books and yoyos how about refunding people's money because let's face it that book only sold because of the claims it was "case closed ".

G'day Pinkmoon

Doesn't look like it's too easy yo say "we got it wrong".

They haven't said it yet and don't look like saying it anytime soon.

[mickreed]

G'day Pinkmoon

Doesn't look like it's too easy yo say "we got it wrong".

They haven't said it yet and don't look like saying it anytime soon.

You're the bloke, GUT, to organize and present the poor downtrodden punters in a class action

You could end up richer than Croesus. Squillions could be won for the poor AK rellies. Squillions more for the emotional trauma caused to people who thought that RE and JL were right, and have had their faith in human nature, not to mention science, destroyed.

And I might get my money back.

[pinkmoon]

G'day Pinkmoon

Doesn't look like it's too easy yo say "we got it wrong".

They haven't said it yet and don't look like saying it anytime soon.

I think they will at some stage just to cover their backs and make a little more money .

[GUT]

You're the bloke, GUT, to organize and present the poor downtrodden punters in a class action

You could end up richer than Croesus. Squillions could be won for the poor AK rellies. Squillions more for the emotional trauma caused to people who thought that RE and JL were right, and have had their faith in human nature, not to mention science, destroyed.

And I might get my money back.

And how's any of that gonna make me rich?

[Peter Griffith aka gryff]

I don't agree that 'Science' has failed.

'Science' isn't some sort of static Monolith.

...

If there is an error in the testing, recording, or analysis of the Shawl's DNA it's a HUMAN error, not a "Failure of Science."

...

Well said Archaic.

cheers, gryff

[mickreed]

And how's any of that gonna make me rich?

Well, so long as you do it on commission, you might get 3/8 of 4/5 of not a lot.

[Archaic]

If there are conditions of silence, can't JL simply say that he cannot comment owing to contractual obligations? Or is it a contractual obligation to not mention the very existence of the contractual obligation - like those super-injunctions we hear about?

Robert - for shame. You know one mustn't mention the super-injections!!

Sheesh.
Archaic

[Peter Griffith aka gryff]

No, it doesn't alter his obligations. But he hasn't satisfied those obigations either way, which opens the possibility that he is not able to do so.

Exactly Paul. To me there are potentially four players involved.RE, Dr. JL, the publishers and the LJM University.

Edwards provided the shawl, a budget, and the DNA samples from descendants

If the budget was more than a few hundred pounds it seems likely to me that LJMU's Research & Innovation Services were involved.

As Edwards was paying the bills, who owns the data that was accumulated ? From the above link under the definition of "Contract Research":

Contract Research is generally defined as research commissioned by an external organisation, where any rights generated are usually owned by that organisation.

I hate to think of all the possible legal agreements Dr.JL has signed or what pressures he is under from all quarters. And he may not be able to use the data that he obtained to defend himself.

cheers, gryff

[Peter Griffith aka gryff]

Robert - for shame. You know one mustn't mention the super-injections!!

Sheesh.
Archaic

The ones with that big six inch needle that goes .... OW!!!!

cheers, gryff

[GUT]

Well, so long as you do it on commission, you might get 3/8 of 4/5 of not a lot.

Can't take a percentage unlike the Yanks.

[mickreed]

I hate to think of all the possible legal agreements Dr.JL has signed or what pressures he is under from all quarters. And he may not be able to use the data that he obtained to defend himself.

Frankly Gryff, I very much doubt that JL is under any contractual inhibitions over this. In all of the communications from him that I know of, he has pleaded privacy firstly, and then later that he didn't accept the information provided.

Now these could be a form of words used to deflect questions, but somehow I doubt it.

And, I keep saying this, he is still out there with RE promoting. If he knew he was wrong, but couldn't say so (not the case I'm sure) then the least he could do would be to shut up on the promotion front.

[GUT]

And, I keep saying this, he is still out there with RE promoting. If he knew he was wrong, but couldn't say so (not the case I'm sure) then the least he could do would be to shut up on the promotion front.

That worries me no end, considering he is clamed to have said he's getting nothing out of it. But the attention may have gone to his head.

[Peter Griffith aka gryff]

And, I keep saying this, he is still out there with RE promoting. If he knew he was wrong, but couldn't say so (not the case I'm sure) then the least he could do would be to shut up on the promotion front.

Understand your point Mick - and it really bothers me too. Both you and Chris have tried direct contact - and it seems to have failed.

Maybe one day we will know what is driving Dr. JL. But short of more adverse publicity about the book from the mainstream media, it may be a while.

cheers, gryff

PS: Anyone know about those trips to the BBC and CNN they made Monday? Any appearances on TV etc?