  In an essay published in 1997, M. J. Harris pointed out that the development
of a theoretical explanation, or "synthesis," of a group of astronomical
results can lead to a situation where subsequent observations are forced to fit
within that framework. Moreover, new results may be reported that fit within
the framework but which can no longer be reproduced following the advent of
more sensitive observations that overturn the synthesis. Although Harris
considered gamma-ray line transients, a similar situation regarding the
collapsar model for gamma-ray bursts now holds. In two recent papers posted on
astro-ph by J. S. Bloom et al., and by P. A. Price et al., the synthesis effect
is illustrated with respect to the collapsar model. These authors dismiss
observations that contradict the collapsar model, appeal to "simplicity" to
justify their preferred model, and dismiss (or better yet, ignore) competing
models with unscientific reasoning. Whether or not the collapsar model is
correct, these papers serve as textbook examples of the synthesis effect in
science.
