The Fountain is a composition, one in which each and every member of the human family can hear his or her conscience’s calling, a reflection of what is not always visible to the eye, or a response to the yearning deep in the heart and mind; a response that sometimes finds its definition best expressed in a poem, and at other times in a journey into outer space or through the veins of the human body. It is reading the universe, the major book of creation, and making sense out of it by way of the manual of Divine guidance.

The Fountain is an effort to try and see the reality through the veils of apparent causes and to obtain our share from each phenomenon, each of which is a letter enclosed with a message addressing us.

The Fountain covers the following themes:

• analytical articles on religious and scientific topics
• reviews for books about new and contemporary issues
• answers for frequently asked questions

The Fountain prefers to publish articles which:

• encourage scientific discovery that is in the service of humanity,
• popularize scientific topics for average readers, rather than addressing to a field-specific audience,
• promote altruism and devotion to positive action,
• adopt a multicultural approach, aiming to find a consensus on universal human values,

• serve to break the stereotyped images in minds about different cultures and faiths, and provide guidance in a world of cultural diversity,
• accept everybody as they are, encouraging dialogue in society and preventing the idea of the other,
• underline that terror has nothing whatsoever to do with religious faith,

• do not deal with temporary agendas, like politics, but promote actuality instead.

Note: The explanations above aim to exemplify the type of topics with which the magazine is concerned in order to help brainstorming. Please do not feel restricted about writing on any other topic that may be suitable for the magazine.

STYLE CONVENTIONS

The editors reserve the right to edit and correct all articles. The essence of the article will be maintained. If there are numerous stylistic inconsistencies, the article will be returned to the author for further review and resubmission.

The article’s title; author’s full name, address, phone number, and e-mail address; educational background, university affiliation, other publications; the length of the article (the number of pages and words); and a brief abstract (150 words or less) should be provided. Articles should not be less than 1,500-2,000 words.

Proper sources, citations, and endnotes according to the Chicago Manual of Style should be provided. If another style is used, all citations must be consistent. Alphabetize bibliographical references in endnotes. References must contain: Author, (year of publication), title, place of publication, publisher, and page numbers. Citations within the text must be in the Harvard style: Author surname, year, page number(s). Quotations from the Sacred Books must be italicized. Provide the chapter’s name and number, and the number of the verse(s). Send original illustrations or photos in hardcopy, or on disk in Adobe Photoshop or Adobe Illustrator formats.

As The Fountain is intended for general readers, please do not use jargon, region-specific, or technical terms. Non-English or unfamiliar words may be explained in a glossary, or translated/explained immediately after the word.

The opinions and views expressed by The Fountain’s contributors and editors are their own, and do not necessarily express The Fountain’s viewpoint or position. The Fountain does not accept responsibility for views expressed in articles or other contributions that appear in its pages.

Please send your submissions to editorial@fountainmagazine.com.

Recent advances in science have led to longer lives, better health care, and healthier societies. Science develops through trial and error. However, irreproducibility still remains a problem, with issues related to bias, a high level of competition, a lack of appropriate statistical analysis, and preference to publish novel and positive findings instead of negative or additive results.

Irreproducibility issue

One of the pillars of scientific work is its reproducibility. Repeated proofs with a statistically significant number of experiments that show the finding is true under defined conditions further consolidate its acceptance by the scientific community. Positive findings often need reproducibility from different scientists and laboratories to be accepted as scientific fact. This does not mean, however, that they are completely discredited when they cannot be reproduced. Each bit of research is significant and worth praise by itself.

Scientists often do not find the means to repeat somebody else’s work given that large amounts of effort and money need to be spent. The practical way to test someone else’s findings usually happens through industries that could gain commercially from a certain finding. Unfortunately, this often comes with a price, even if research is found to be irreproducible. Bruce Booth, a venture capitalist, states that at least half of the findings in publications cannot be reproduced in industry settings. This might be an underestimation, given recent reports from different biotech companies.

According to various reports the reproducibility of published articles, in biomedical sciences for instance, is as low as 10-30 percent. Amgen, a biotech company with a team of around 100 scientists, tried to reproduce the results of 53 key cancer research articles in top journals, and found only 6 of them were reproducible (11% reproducibility). Bayer’s scientists found that only 14 of 67 projects related to oncology, cardiovascular medicine, and women’s health were reproducible (21% reproducibility).

Another example is the PsychFileDrawer project related to experimental physiology, which showed only 6 out of 21 articles were reproducible (28% reproducibility). In addition, one study to reproduce findings drawn from 18 articles regarding gene microarray analysis found in Nature Genetics largely failed. Similarly, when protein samples of identical proteins, as shown in article by Bell et al (2009), were sent to different laboratories, those labs failed to reproduce the initial findings. Dr. Asadullah, Vice President and Head of Target Discovery at Bayer, points to the increased trend of failures in Phase III trials, which also suggests a serious problem in the way research is vetted and published.

These numbers regarding the reproducibility raise an important question regarding the system of scientific research. If these alarming findings are true, it could mean that 70-90% of money spent on science does not bring about anything that is reproducible. It is intriguing that although the technologies used for scientific discoveries are now much improved, which would be expected to make date more precise and rigorous, the opposite is happening. This tends to suggest that the issue is not with the technology, but with the attitude and atmosphere of the larger scientific community.

Table 1: Major issues regarding today’s science

Publish or perish

A scientific publication is not only a tool for the transfer of knowledge between scientists, but also the basis for promotion and the awarding of grants. A rule in scientific communities regarding finding money to perform research is “Publish or Perish.” This refers to the cycle of publishing a high impact paper to get a grant, or losing one’s ability to compete with other labs.

The bar for success in the scientific community is set very, very high. This forces fledgling scientists to publish quickly and in high impact papers. Remarkably, in the major science journals, there has been a 10-fold increase in the retraction of articles in the last ten years, while there has only been a 1.4-fold increase in the number of journals published (Fang et al, 2012, Misconduct accounts for the majority of retracted scientific publications, PNAS).

Selective publication issue

Providing the best figures for publication, and selective interpretation of data, can also lead to incorrect results within scientific literature. A lack of blind experiments in basic science also plays a role in these mistakes. Some researchers may design their experiments, know what the control and experimental groups are, and may have biases in terms of wanting their hypothesis to be correct – thus they may interpret their data in favor of their idea.

Dr. Begley, head of global cancer research at Amgen, tells of a case where they tried to reproduce scientific findings in a paper but failed to reproduce the findings, even after 50 trials. Finally, they went to the author of the article and discussed how to solve this issue. Dr. Begley learned that the authors had tried the experiment only 6 times and it worked only once, but they put it in the paper since it made the best story. This might be seen as an extreme case, but similar selective publication of “good data” is not uncommon.

Scientists are under a great deal of pressure to publish the “best story” – both to advance their own careers and to fulfill their own competitive ambitions. This is increasingly becoming an important issue, and it stresses the need for verifying the results of others and publishing findings that negate previous publications.

Lack of incentive for verification

A majority of journals require authors to publish novel and positive findings and disregard negative findings and repetitive studies. There are a few journals that publish negative results, such as the Journal of Negative Results in Biomedicine, the Journal of Pharmaceutical Negative Results, and the Journal of Interesting Negative Results, etcetera. But publishing negative findings is still a low priority for most publications, which seek new and exciting discoveries to attract more attention. But a renewed focus on verifying existing science, and publishing negative results, will create more reliable scientific literature.

Another issue is the lack of incentives for verification. Since the easiest way to get funding is novelty and publishing in high impact journals in the current hypercompetitive environment, there is almost no room for verification, if any. Under these conditions, many scientists tend to write up their own observations and seek to get published with little concern for reproducibility. Why do they need to find out whether it is wrong or not? If it is wrong, this would make it tougher for them to get funding.

But is this proper scientific conduct? Given these issues within the community, how can we be certain their research and its findings are sound?

Given the potential amount of misinformation in scientific literature, we need a scientific renaissance. We could have a reward system, such as funding or recognition that improves reproducibility, robustness of data, and an increased publicity of data and protocols, as Dr. Ioannidis suggested. Other approaches to increase reliability could be decreasing the requirements for getting grants, and providing a reproducibility parameter in the citation index.

Toprak is a freelance writer, living in Texas, studying Genetics.

References

1. In cancer science, many “discoveries” don’t hold up. Retrieved from http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/28/us-science-cancer-idUSBRE82R12P20120328 on 4/28/13.
2. Reliability of ‘new drug target’ claims called into question. Retrieved from http://blogs.nature.com/news/2011/09/reliability_of_new_drug_target.html on 4/28/13.
3. Retrieved from http://www.psychfiledrawer.org/view_article_list.php on 4/28/13.
4. John Arrowsmith. Trial watch: Phase III and submission failures: 2007–2010. Nature Rev. Drug Discov. 10, 87; 2011.
5. Ioannidis JPA (2005) Why Most Published Research Findings Are False. PLoS Med 2(8): e124. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124
6. Ioannidis et al. 2009. Repeatability of published microarray gene expression analyses. Nature Genet. 41, 149–155; 2009
7. Fang FC, Steen RG, Casadevall A (2012) Misconduct accounts for the majority of retracted scientific publications. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 109: 17028–17033. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1212247109
8. Bell et al. 2009. A HUPO test sample study reveals common problems in mass spectrometry–based proteomics. Nature Methods 6, 423–430; 2009
9. Bruce Booth. Academic bias & biotech failures. Retrieved from http://lifescivc.com/2011/03/academic-bias-biotech-failures/#0_undefined,0 on 4/28/13.

This perspective was endorsed by many scholars and writers from around the world who kindly submitted their testimonials for The Fountain in 2013. Here is one by Rabbi Allen Maller from Los Angeles: “What I like most about The Fountain magazine is its wide perspective – not just about religion, science, the past or the present. It seeks to bring together in a special, respectful way different people’s insights in the nature of both the material and spiritual world that we live in.” Professor Wan Daud, from Malaysia, says, “All the articles and interviews show respect for knowledge, sciences, and hospitality, in a manner that is engaging and friendly to the mind.” John Davis from Athens, Alabama, concurs when he says, “Through the articles in The Fountain we can see that the other person faces the same concerns about life, about family, and about love and friendship as we do.” Professor David Perlmutter from Austin, Texas, explains our motto even better: “The Fountain is one of those few venues left where they step back and ask some big philosophical questions about society and faith.” You can read more of these testimonials from our anniversary pamphlet, “A Panorama of 20 Years,” which is available on our website, or watch these testimonial videos by clicking the Testimonial button.

The change of motto inspired us to conduct last year’s essay contest to inspire writers to ponder over their life philosophies and to condense them into a few words, like a motto. The 400 essays we received from around the world is evidence that all of us are quite interested in investing in some intellectual engagement and voicing our worldviews with others.

In the interest of sharing such viewpoints, we also convened a small group of 12 scholars from the US and Europe to meet with their colleagues based in Turkey for a three-day workshop last November. The topic was again inspired by our motto: “Conversations on Life, Knowledge, and Belief.” Unobstructed by formal structures of paper presentations that are usually required in other academic gatherings, partners enjoyed the freedom of lengthy periods of free discussions and defending their arguments. You can read a detailed report of the event on our website under blog: “An Overview of the Conference.”

Borrowing from the Lead Article of this issue, “we reflect on the joyous past and the beautiful future yet to come.”

For Muslims, it is now the Hajj season, a grand reflection of humanity’s unity and devotion to their Creator. Although countless authors have analyzed it, one point stands out: Hagar, a wife of Prophet Abraham and left by him in the desert with her infant son, ran between the hills of Safa and Marwah to find water. Muslims would be well advised to remember this as they jog between these two hills, as the Qur’an tells us to improve our lot through work, not through talking and complaining.

This is also a time of great importance for all Fountain staff members, for it is our tenth-year anniversary! As we launch into our eleventh year, we pledge to continue our mission: to work for interfaith dialogue, encourage individual and civilizational tolerance, and show the relevance of religious values and belief to modern life. Along with your continued active support and trust, which has helped us reach this milestone, we know that the Fountain’s articles will continue to improve and reach an ever-larger audience with its message that ‘yes, all of us really can live in peace if we treat each other with respect and dignity.’

In this issue, in honor of International Women’s Day, our feature article discusses how the monotheistic religions’ legal codes traditionally viewed women. The author provides a detailed study based upon a close reading of the Torah, the Bible, and the Qur’an. What he found might surprise you.

We also present several scientific articles on defining intelligence, attempts to formulate a ‘theory of everything,’ and how modern scientific discoveries are providing proof of God’s Existence. In the interest of sparking discussion, we offer articles on Christianity, Islam in the eyes of non-Muslims, an imaginary dialogue on democracy, and what could happen if human consciousness were transplanted. We also have our regular spiritual articles and one on a Chinese Muslim admiral who, before Columbus, led naval expeditions that dwarfed those of the later European explorers.

As technology makes physical distance ever more irrelevant and allows more people to travel, we need to understand that we also must globalize our minds and worldviews in order to contribute to humanity’s and society’s betterment on an ever-larger scale. The Qur’an tells us to plant a tree even on the Last Day. Just like Hagar in the desert, we must act instead of complain.

Thanks to all of our readers who tell us that they appreciate our efforts. We receive many calls from our subscribers in America who are anxious to get the latest issue. The mainstream media is also taking note of us: Several prestigious publishers want to reprint a few The Fountain articles. This is the kind of magazine that we want to be: relevant, eagerly awaited, and expanding. Send us your articles, and let’s work together to make the world a better place for everyone!

As this is the kick-off issue for our new era, we have changed the design. Please let us know what you think about it. We also ask all of you to work with us, for The Fountain belongs to all of us. We look forward to hearing from you!

Our article on biorhythms and time management gives us a better understanding of how our body functions and what we can do to help it perform at its highest level. Becoming better managers of our time allows us to achieve our goals quicker and with less frustration. As a result, w can have more time to pursue the joys of life, such as enjoying our family, friends, and the beauties of nature.

Although it is a cliché to say that our children are our future, it nevertheless is true. One article explores ways to handle gifted children so that their full potential can be realized. The author asserts that this is not discrimination and does not disadvantage other children; rather, it is meeting the needs of those who will bring us the greatest benefit in the future.

Several articles deal with topics that people usually do not join together: religion and the environment, Sufism and quantum physics, and music as a tool for healing. Many people seem to be taking a renewed interest in nature. This is a positive development, especially for those who were raised on the idea that nature is dead matter that can be manipulated by people for their own benefit, instead of a display of Divine Mercy and Compassion that we are to benefit from as well as to enjoy.

Recent discoveries in physics have confirmed the Sufi view that the universe is essentially based on nothing but relationships between the infinite parts of creation. This begs the following question: If everything consists only of relationships, who or what holds it together? But even more importantly, who originally created the relationships? Modern science remains unable to answer this question, even though it has engaged the minds of humanity’s greatest philosophers and religious figures since the dawn of time.

Questions have been raised in various circles about the suitability of the latest literary sensation, Harry Potter, for children. This book is just the latest in a series of popular children’s books, television programs, and movies that deal with magic: Sabrina the Teenage Witch, Aladdin, Lord of the Rings, and many others. This genre of entertainment has a unique worldview: The replacement of an ordered universe run by God with a world that people with God-like powers can manipulate the laws of nature at will; the existence of people with special powers that make them superior to others instead of recognizing that all people are created equal and dependent upon God; and that such people can perform ‘miracles”exactly like those given by God to His Messengers and Prophets to confirm their status. Are these the types of ideas upon which we want our children to form their worldview?

Several of our shorter articles deal with individual reactions to the events of September 11th. Many people still find it hard to comprehend such a terrible tragedy. Let us hope that they soon find the wisdom to go beyond their anger and fear and begin to ask themselves and others why such a horrific event took place and how similar ones can be avoided in the future.

This fundamental teaching of brotherhood and sisterhood regardless of religious affiliation is being overshadowed by suspicion, anger, mistrust, and other negative trends and emotions that continue to arise from our pursuit of ever-more comfort and possessions and our refusal to realize that such things are finite. As we continue to gather them into our hands, others are deprived of what they regard as their fair share and become fertile ground for resentment and either passive or active resistance. Their negative worldview is only strengthened and expanded by the continued lack of modern education, meaningful employment, adequate health care, freedom from fear, and many other things that those of us who are more fortunate take for granted.

Underlying the above quotations is the need to understand others, for there can be no love among people without mutual respect and acceptance of one’s right to be different. Calls to celebrate diversity and accept multiculturalism abound, but many individuals and institutions have yet to go beyond mouthing the words while doing nothing to make them a reality. This is the true challenge of the new millennium.

In this issue, we present several articles on what we should expect from believers; certain similarities among the monotheistic religions; the roles of men and women, parents and children, and how they should work together to create a better society; the place of prayer in one’s life; and the need for joining scientific and spiritual knowledge to improve the quality of life for everyone. In addition, we present several short articles on the values of introspection and self-reflection, self-reliance and the need to stop blaming others for what happens to us, and how we should view other people.

We analyze one nation’s successful quest for development to see if its methods can be applied by other nations. Also discussed is the potential of e-learning to spread relevant knowledge in areas that previously had no access to it, and the hope that they will be able to benefit from it. Two of our authors explain how democratic governing institutions prevent wars between democratic nations and civil wars within those same nations, and how the formation of social capital increases society’s overall well-being.

Our scientific articles discuss the benefits of lightning on our health and even our moods, and how the existence of what scientists call ‘dark matter’ could signal a change in how we perceive ourselves and our place in the universe.

We hope that you enjoy this issue and, as always, look forward to your comments.

Establishing peace between people of different religions, backgrounds, and nationalities has always been a primary concern of civilized nations. Such a goal cannot be achieved overnight, of course, for it requires that all people become aware of the need for understanding and appreciating various religions and cultures through peaceful dialogue. The Fountain attaches great importance to such values, and strives to bring our readers’ articles that embrace this concept. To ensure a peaceful and productive future for everyone, it is vital that all societies incorporate and abide by these values.

In this issue, we present two articles that discuss this goal. The first article emphasizes the importance of interfaith dialogue and shows how misunderstanding other people’s religions actually veils many common beliefs and practices. Only dialogue can bring about a mutual understanding and appreciation of differences.

Thee second article focuses on the two largest religions today: Islam and Christianity. Interesting facts are brought forward about Islam’s respect for Christianity, and how the respect was implemented from the days of Prophet Muhammad and on into the Ottoman era. For instance, after Jerusalem was conquered during the Caliphate of Umar, all people, regardless of race and religion, were guaranteed their rights to life, property, and religion, as well as the rights to pray and keep their churches and synagogues.

As The Fountoin always strives to keep our readers up-to-date on current issues and developments in various fields of technology and science, we present an article on the energy market’s current situation and short-term future trends, as well as one on the increasing computerization of motorized transport.

On the more spiritual side, one article sheds light on our pursuit of and path to happiness and perfection. We have been created perfectly; we have all the faculties and senses we need. But are all of our amazing capabilities meant to be used here alone? After all, we are here only for a while and then enter the grave. According to the author, our eternal life starts at that point. While we are in this world, we are supposed to prepare ourselves our eternal life by using our senses, intellect, and feelings, not to mention worshipping God, to realize our full potential and achieve all kinds of perfection. The author describes and shares two analogies to explain his views.

Thank you to all of our readers who participated in our Writing Competition 2000! The deadline for writing submittals has passed, and we look forward to announcing the winners in our October 2000 issue. Keep an eye out to see if you’re one of them!

Please keep sending or e-mailing your comments. We eagerly await your input on each issue and value your opinions. Always feel free to send in general feedback and requests for topics or questions that you would like answered. Remember this is your magazine. It’s up to you to shape it the way you would lik to, and it’s up to us to implement your ideas and suggestions.

We hope to hear from you soon!

Enjoy your magazine!