4 ms·
Nothing scientific about misreading a scientific paper and drawing conclusions that aren't there. HN has a well-known contrarian bias that tends to manifest as
by cycrutchfield 7y ago
Nothing scientific about misreading a scientific paper and drawing conclusions that aren't there. HN has a well-known contrarian bias that tends to manifest as a "we know better than the so-called experts" hivemind.
- nostrebored 7y agoTo misread a scientific paper you have to actually read it. Data analysis is a difficult field, and there are a number of studies where the data presented tells a completely different story than the scientists presenting it. Science is political and scientists are fallible. Confirmation bias isn't a plebian problem. Reading for your own understanding and asking questions is a necessary part of both scientific accountability and personal growth! And, hearteningly, we see that OP has edited his comment to reflect the knowledge you passed along and has a better understanding of the situation. Inquiry at work.
- cycrutchfield 7y agoGreat. This is then one success story among many stories of failure to understand the scientific literature. Even now there is another story on the front page of HN where armchair epidemiologists are proclaiming in the comment section that this is no worse than H1N1. This shit is exhausting.