FYI: Some have suggested that Mendel's data might be too perfect, indicating possible manipulation or fraud. (1) Mendel's results are unusually close to the exp

FYI: Some have suggested that Mendel's data might be too perfect, indicating possible manipulation or fraud. (1) Mendel's results are unusually close to the expected ratios of 3:1 for dominant and recessive traits. Some argue that real-world data often show more variation. (2) In 1936, statistician Ronald A. Fisher analyzed Mendel's data and suggested it was "too good to be true." Fisher believed the results might have been altered or selectively reported to better match Mendel's hypothesis. (3) Despite these concerns, many of Mendel's experiments have been replicated, and his fundamental findings remain valid. Most scientists believe any discrepancies in Mendel's data were not due to intentional fraud but possibly unconscious bias or error.