I’ve read a few of these articles and they all have basically the same format, which is similar enough that they’re not quite as interesting to read. First a he

I’ve read a few of these articles and they all have basically the same format, which is similar enough that they’re not quite as interesting to read. First a headline “does the invention of Swiss Cheese mean that Cheddar Cheese is extinct?” Followed by a little bit of interesting and useful scientific summarization. Then onwards to a point about how we’re dealing with lots of theories and not enough empirical data, so the whole field is useless and also not worth spending time on. I would point out that lots of other important scientific fields have been in this situation before. Maybe there’s an interesting argument to the overfunding (but then again, developing theories is also pretty important!). But mostly it just feels like she’s made the point and while it’s an important point, getting a clear picture of the scientific results is more valuable than this particular opinion. (But I stress, it is her platform to do with as she wants.)