> In traditional science, you start with a “null hypothesis” along the lines of “this thing doesn’t happen and nothing about it is interesting”. Then you do you

> In traditional science, you start with a “null hypothesis” along the lines of “this thing doesn’t happen and nothing about it is interesting”. Then you do your study, and if it gets surprising results, you might end up “rejecting the null hypothesis” and concluding that the interesting thing is true; otherwise, you have “no evidence” for anything except the null. Not true. The degree of evidence for either hypothesis would be determined by its respective p-value. The fact that you then take into account the evidence on either side to make a pragmatic binary decision is a different matter altogether. E.g., a p-value of 0.050000001 is not strong evidence for the null. A p-value of 0.99999 on the other hand, is.