The philosophy, nature and practice of forensic sediment analysis
The philosophy, nature and practice of forensic sediment analysis
复制标题
法医沉积物分析的理念、本质和实践
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2007
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
P. A. Bull
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
R. Morgan;P. A. Bull
法医地球科学领域的迅速发展源于19世纪和20世纪初的科学家，他们既影响文学和小说，也受到文学和小说的影响。法医地球科学从地质学和地貌学分析技术中借用了许多但不是全部的概念。法医地球科学和它的姐妹学科之间存在着根本性的差异，根本性的差异足以使粗心的地球科学家屈服于哲学和实践的陷阱，这不仅会危及他们报告的大纲，而且可能确实提供假阴性或假阳性结果，导致相反或不准确的结论。在法律上，这样的结果具有破坏性和难以承受的后果。法医地球科学需要排除技术而不是包括技术，并承认分析技术只能在非常具体的情况下进行诊断。无论选择分析普遍存在的成分还是外来成分，都需要确认样本的代表性。假阳性结果的呈现或缺乏对样本“混合”的识别是应用统计检验的先决条件，必须以最谨慎的方式应用。实现技术的局限性，需要在可能的情况下，其他真正独立的技术的合取分析。虽然个人意见来自经验，但没有假设的余地。法医地球科学的研究论文不会像地貌学和地质学的许多领域那样具有推测性或挑战性。在法医地球科学中没有推测的余地。
The rapidly expanding field of forensic geoscience derives its roots from nineteenth- and early twentieth-century scientists who both influence and are influenced by literature and fictional writing. Forensic geoscience borrows much, but not all, of its precepts from geological and geomorphological analytical techniques. Fundamental differences exist between forensic geoscience and its sister disciplines, fundamental enough to make the unwary geoscientist succumb to philosophical and practical pitfalls which will not only endanger the outline of their report, but may well indeed provide false-negative or false-positive results leading to contrary or inaccurate conclusions. In the law, such outcomes have devastating and untenable consequences. Forensic geoscience requires techniques of exclusion rather than inclusion and an acknowledgement that analytical techniques may be diagnostic only in very specific situations. Whether analysis of the ubiquitous or the exotic component is chosen, acknowledgement of the need for samples to be representative is required. The presentation of false-positive results or the lack of identification of sample ‘mixing’ is prerequisite to the application of statistical tests which must be applied in the most careful manner. The realization of the limitations of the technique requires, wherever possible, conjunctive analysis by other truly independent techniques. While personal opinion derives from experience, there is no place for assumption. Research papers in forensic geoscience are not submitted to be speculative or challenging as may be the case in many fields of geomorphology and geology. There is no place for conjecture in forensic geoscience.