3 ms·
A paper with many egregious methodological issues is, at worst, a paper that should be ignored, as though it never happened. We cannot say that it is "wrong" or
by phendrenad2 4y ago
A paper with many egregious methodological issues is, at worst, a paper that should be ignored, as though it never happened. We cannot say that it is "wrong" or "incorrect" or "bunk" because it's a nothing, a non-argument. Until the experiments are repeated, sans egregious methodological issues, we can't logically make that determination.
- eurasiantiger 4y agoSo if it’s generally accepted that the world is flat, we shouldn’t listen to anyone claiming otherwise?
- cwkoss 4y agoA better analogy would be "If it’s generally accepted that the world is flat, we shouldn't assume its round because one student was unable to measure the curvature."