<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Irreproducible analysis</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2008/01/15/irreproducible-analysis/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2008/01/15/irreproducible-analysis/</link>
	<description>The blog of John D. Cook</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 01:10:06 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Bad science is tolerable, résumé padding is not &#8212; The Endeavour</title>
		<link>http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2008/01/15/irreproducible-analysis/comment-page-1/#comment-103070</link>
		<dc:creator>Bad science is tolerable, résumé padding is not &#8212; The Endeavour</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Sep 2011 14:02:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2008/01/15/irreproducible-analysis/#comment-103070</guid>
		<description>[...] The Economist posted an article online this weekend about the scandal over irreproducible cancer research by Anil Potti. My colleagues Keith Baggerly and Kevin Coombes have been crying foul about this since 2007. I first blogged about it in January 2008. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] The Economist posted an article online this weekend about the scandal over irreproducible cancer research by Anil Potti. My colleagues Keith Baggerly and Kevin Coombes have been crying foul about this since 2007. I first blogged about it in January 2008. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Reproducible research &#171; The Home for Wayward Statisticians</title>
		<link>http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2008/01/15/irreproducible-analysis/comment-page-1/#comment-92214</link>
		<dc:creator>Reproducible research &#171; The Home for Wayward Statisticians</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Jul 2011 13:36:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2008/01/15/irreproducible-analysis/#comment-92214</guid>
		<description>[...] is a big proponent of using tools like Sweave to make analysis [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] is a big proponent of using tools like Sweave to make analysis [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Venier</title>
		<link>http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2008/01/15/irreproducible-analysis/comment-page-1/#comment-677</link>
		<dc:creator>John Venier</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 22 May 2008 13:49:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2008/01/15/irreproducible-analysis/#comment-677</guid>
		<description>Jan de Leeuw has been agitating for this for years, maybe decades:

http://directory.stat.ucla.edu/~deleeuw</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jan de Leeuw has been agitating for this for years, maybe decades:</p>
<p><a href="http://directory.stat.ucla.edu/~deleeuw" rel="nofollow">http://directory.stat.ucla.edu/~deleeuw</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.308 seconds -->

