is difficult and progress is slow, due to the variability of natural systems and the high cost of obtaining good data. Ecology however is charged with providing information support for environmental policy decisions with far reaching societal consequences. Demand for quick answers is strong, and demand for answers that agree with a particular point of view is even stronger.The use of Bayesian statistical analyses has recently been advocated in ecology, supposedly to aid decision makers and enhance the pace of progress. Bayesian statistics provides conclusions in the face of incomplete information. Bayesian statistics, though, represents a much different approach to science than the frequentist statistics studied by most ecologists. The scientific implications of Bayesian statistics are not well understood.I provide a critical review of the Bayesian approach. I compare, using a simple sampling example, the Bayesian and frequentist analyses. The Bayesian analyses can be "cooked" to produce results consistent with any point of view, because Bayesian analyses quantify prior personal beliefs and mix them with the data. In this, Bayesian statistics is consistent with the postmodern view of science, widely held among nonscientists, in which science is just a system of beliefs that has no particular authority over any other system of beliefs. By contrast, modern empirical science uses the scientific method to identify empirical contradictions in skeptics' beliefs and permit replication and checking of empirical results. Frequentist statistics has become an indispensible part of the scientific method.I also undertake a critical discussion of statistics education in ecology. Part of the potential appeal of Bayesian statistics is that many ecologists are confused about frequentist statistics, and statistical concepts in general. I identify the source of confusion as arising from ecologists' attempts to learn statistics through a series of precalculus "statistical methods" courses taken in graduate school. I prescribe a radical change in the statistical training of ecological scientists which will greatly increase the level of confidence and facility with statistical thinking.
2. Ecology as a science is under constant political pressure. The science is Abstract difficult and progress is slow, due to the variability of natural systems and the high cost of obtaining good data. Ecology however is charged with providing information support for environmental policy decisions with far reaching societal consequences. Demand for quick answers is strong, and demand for answers that agree with a particular point of view is even stronger.The use of Bayesian statistical analyses has recently been advocated in ecology, supposedly to aid decision makers and enhance the pace of progress. Bayesian statistics provides conclusions in the face of incomplete information. Bayesian statistics, though, represents a much different approach to science than the frequentist statistics studied by most ecologists. The scientific implications o...