Comment on Replication crisis, my arse

• wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  Good science starts from the body of evidence we already know, creates a plausible hypothesis, and then tests that hypothesis to see whether it can be disproven.

  We don’t say “hey, maybe gravity isn’t real so to be unbiased I need to assume it’s not and test every other possibility before determining what keeps making these bricks fall on my head every time I throw them up in the air”

  No need to reinvent the wheel for every experiment.

  source

  • nightofmichelinstars@sopuli.xyz ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    Depends on how much tuna you want to eat in the process, shits be dammed. Optimize for quantity of fish consumed.

    source

    • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      I’ll eat tuna from somewhere that doesn’t give me bad tuna…

      source

      • Texas_Hangover@lemmy.radio ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

        Quite the sense of humor you’ve cultivated there.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
  • Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    Maybe not the greatest example since we don’t fully understand gravity. ”good" in the sense of being expedient, affordable and conventional. Sometimes approaching unsolved problems without the constraints of prior constructs can lead to better understanding.

    Also, vegetables usually are the culprits anyways.

    source

    • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      Okay, but they can focus on experiments designed to determine whether gravity is caused by quantum mechanics or relativity or something else. They don’t need to drop bricks on their heads just to prove newtonian physics…

      source
• Holytimes@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  Good science will use previous norms, findings and general trends to provide a more useful starting point tho.

  source
• TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  Gotta do it in random order.

  source