4 ms·

I think you vastly underestimate how much a lot of scientific studies cost. It would be ideal to be able to have studies replicated by a separate group, but the

I think you vastly underestimate how much a lot of scientific studies cost. It would be ideal to be able to have studies replicated by a separate group, but there are many times labs that have specialized equipment and engineering that make replicating studies by some random group unfeasible. In addition, if you spend too much time trying to replicate others' work, you have no time to work on the things that will actually continue to fund your own research. The best thing is to have a healthy, skeptical, but collegial, competition in the field. That still requires more funding though!

mixedCase 10y ago
> I think you vastly underestimate how much a lot of scientific studies cost. On the other hand, the money currently being invested seems to produce mostly garbage. "Fake science", just to rustle some feathers.
RodericDay 10y ago
> I think you vastly underestimate how much a lot of scientific studies cost Do you have data for this claim? There's tons of extraordinarily expensive experiments through and through, but there's also stuff with incredibly high and time-consuming up-front design and exploration costs that is actually almost trivial to replicate on a per-unit basis.
Tsagadai 10y ago
If it only works on a Wizbang 200 and cannot be reproduced with the Doodad 3000 then it probably doesn't work or there are other variables missing from their results. Specialised equipment should not affect results (proving that equipment is broken has some value though).
Fomite 10y ago
Really, even without specialized equipment, science is expensive. And many scientists got into the field because they wanted to do their own work. Locking a lab that can't afford to fund an independent replication study out, or who isn't prominent enough to be able to rouse someone's attention to do it, would be disastrous for a lot of early career researchers.

mixedCase 10y ago

> I think you vastly underestimate how much a lot of scientific studies cost. On the other hand, the money currently being invested seems to produce mostly garbage. "Fake science", just to rustle some feathers.

RodericDay 10y ago

> I think you vastly underestimate how much a lot of scientific studies cost Do you have data for this claim? There's tons of extraordinarily expensive experiments through and through, but there's also stuff with incredibly high and time-consuming up-front design and exploration costs that is actually almost trivial to replicate on a per-unit basis.

Tsagadai 10y ago

If it only works on a Wizbang 200 and cannot be reproduced with the Doodad 3000 then it probably doesn't work or there are other variables missing from their results. Specialised equipment should not affect results (proving that equipment is broken has some value though).

Fomite 10y ago

Really, even without specialized equipment, science is expensive. And many scientists got into the field because they wanted to do their own work. Locking a lab that can't afford to fund an independent replication study out, or who isn't prominent enough to be able to rouse someone's attention to do it, would be disastrous for a lot of early career researchers.