Charles Piller

And of course, with people, with Alzheimer's disease, these are usually samples from people who have died and have donated their body to science. But these images then may not necessarily show what you're trying to show to prove your hypothesis out. But by altering them, you can make the image look more in line with what you're thinking is.

Let me give you a sense of how I think it sometimes evolves in the thinking of a scientist. So a scientist might start out being completely straight up and honest and not interested in doing any sort of manipulation and be very, very deeply in...

Let me give you a sense of how I think it sometimes evolves in the thinking of a scientist. So a scientist might start out being completely straight up and honest and not interested in doing any sort of manipulation and be very, very deeply in...

Let me give you a sense of how I think it sometimes evolves in the thinking of a scientist. So a scientist might start out being completely straight up and honest and not interested in doing any sort of manipulation and be very, very deeply in...

Committed to the science.

Committed to the science.

Committed to the science.

So committed in such a state of kind of rapture about their own ideas that they really would love to prove them out. And who among us can really step completely away from that? People become absorbed in their thinking and, you know, want to be right. And especially with something for which so many people are hoping that they might be right about, say, a new drug or a new experiment.

So committed in such a state of kind of rapture about their own ideas that they really would love to prove them out. And who among us can really step completely away from that? People become absorbed in their thinking and, you know, want to be right. And especially with something for which so many people are hoping that they might be right about, say, a new drug or a new experiment.

So committed in such a state of kind of rapture about their own ideas that they really would love to prove them out. And who among us can really step completely away from that? People become absorbed in their thinking and, you know, want to be right. And especially with something for which so many people are hoping that they might be right about, say, a new drug or a new experiment.

And so what you might have is a stepwise process where, first of all, what these scientists might be thinking is, well, I'm just going to make this image look a little bit better. I'm going to make it look prettier, and it'll have more curb appeal for journal editors who...

And so what you might have is a stepwise process where, first of all, what these scientists might be thinking is, well, I'm just going to make this image look a little bit better. I'm going to make it look prettier, and it'll have more curb appeal for journal editors who...

And so what you might have is a stepwise process where, first of all, what these scientists might be thinking is, well, I'm just going to make this image look a little bit better. I'm going to make it look prettier, and it'll have more curb appeal for journal editors who...

Like everyone else are susceptible to looking at more perfect looking images, even in the scientific sense that maybe most lay people aren't going to know the difference between a better looking or worse looking slice of brain tissue imagery. But scientists know what they're looking for and what they're looking at.

Like everyone else are susceptible to looking at more perfect looking images, even in the scientific sense that maybe most lay people aren't going to know the difference between a better looking or worse looking slice of brain tissue imagery. But scientists know what they're looking for and what they're looking at.

Like everyone else are susceptible to looking at more perfect looking images, even in the scientific sense that maybe most lay people aren't going to know the difference between a better looking or worse looking slice of brain tissue imagery. But scientists know what they're looking for and what they're looking at.

So you could say that maybe that isn't misconduct, it's maybe frowned upon, but it's something that can prove to be acceptable in the scientific process. Or at least people get away with it so often, and it's kind of like a misdemeanor, you might say. Then they might think, well...

So you could say that maybe that isn't misconduct, it's maybe frowned upon, but it's something that can prove to be acceptable in the scientific process. Or at least people get away with it so often, and it's kind of like a misdemeanor, you might say. Then they might think, well...

So you could say that maybe that isn't misconduct, it's maybe frowned upon, but it's something that can prove to be acceptable in the scientific process. Or at least people get away with it so often, and it's kind of like a misdemeanor, you might say. Then they might think, well...

I know that my experiment is correct, and there's a little bit of evidence for it in the scientific images that were generated, but it's not really crystal clear. I'm just going to sharpen it up a little bit. And they think, well, I'm only enhancing slightly what I know to be true. So that might be the next step of thinking. And then finally, what sometimes happens is that people say, well,