3 ms·
The OP is complaining about mainstream science reporting, in comments on an article being posted by Nature - which is literally the absolute top of peer-reviewe
by XorNot 4y ago
The OP is complaining about mainstream science reporting, in comments on an article being posted by Nature - which is literally the absolute top of peer-reviewed journals.
Which is to say, it suffers from the same fallacy as when people complain about Hacker News' collective opinion as though a collective anything with voluntary participation is going to be in anyway consistent.
- bawolff 4y agoNature the journal and nature science news articles are pretty different things though.
- petschge 4y agoAt least in my field the running joke is "it was published in Nature but it still might be right". Because Nature above all wants to be high impact. And you get that by publishing the controversial or unexpected findings. In other words the ones that are most likely to be wrong.
- dsfyu404ed 4y ago>Which is to say, it suffers from the same fallacy as when people complain about Hacker News' collective opinion as though a collective anything with voluntary participation is going to be in anyway consistent. It might not be consistent but even Ray Charles can tell you where the bell curve roughly centers for any given topic.
- porkbeer 4y agoYes, but we are a very selective audience, and often brilliantly forget we do not represent the views of the majority.