2 ms·

Hold it up for all to see as an example of bad science. Make your case, back it up by data, publish your findings. Ya know, academic discourse. It's not like t

by Spivak 1y ago

Hold it up for all to see as an example of bad science. Make your case, back it up by data, publish your findings. Ya know, academic discourse. It's not like the man can't get funding for such a study. Realistically, if you're going to shout from the rooftops wouldn't you rather it be data that unequivocally proves you right than poking holes in studies that prove you wrong. The former is a victory.

SilverElfin 1y ago
But why is “academic discourse” needed? The issue is that THIS study essentially falsified data. That can be discussed on its own, without some weird battle of studies each manipulating results to demonstrate a conclusion they’ve each decided on.
- Spivak 1y ago
  That's a much stronger claim, stronger than the one made in Kennedy's criticism. If you or anyone can prove that they actually lied or fabricated data then yeah, nuke the paper from orbit. But if the criticism is that they're wrong—and that is the criticism here, then you tear it apart in the open. And if you want people to believe the opposite conclusion rather than simply ignoring the results then you need some data proving your new conclusion.
- lovich 1y ago
  Where or how did you come across the belief that this study used falsified data?