3 ms·
Because that’s the scientific method? It would be entirely infeasible for them to require someone else to test the sample. I don’t think you’ve been in academi
by Maxion 3y ago
Because that’s the scientific method? It would be entirely infeasible for them to require someone else to test the sample.
I don’t think you’ve been in academia?
- p-e-w 3y ago> Because that’s the scientific method? The world's leading science journal publishing grand claims without verification, in the face of mounting evidence that the claims might be incorrect, is most certainly not "the scientific method". > It would be entirely infeasible for them to require someone else to test the sample. What nonsense. Why would that be infeasible?
- szundi 3y agoActually this is the scientific method. Anything else just makes publishing groundbraking results harder and depends on some people’s (faulty) judgements.
- mort96 3y agoPublishing incorrect results should be hard, especially if they would be ground breaking if true.
- physicsguy 3y agoNature basically publishes the sensational claims papers. That's their model, anything "high impact" goes there. It's then on other scientists to publish work refuting it or proving it's not correct. It's an issue that the refutations tend to go in lower impact journals, but it's the way it's works.
- epups 3y agoExtraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. But seriously, why can't they ship their sample somewhere?
- SiempreViernes 3y agoThey are busy trying to characterise it properly and making sure they understand what they have created. At least that's what they ought to be doing if this isn't a big scam.