In trials

  • doom_and_gloom@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    11 months ago

    I don’t read as many science articles from lemmy as I did at one point on reddit, but in my experience many of the debunkers were clearly not scientists and were not appropriately assessing the studies based on their scientific context.

    For example studies build on each other as a database of knowledge, and every leg that database is built on needs constant re-evaluation in light of new information. But so many people expected a single study with a modest budget to do the work of 20 studies, all in one paper. When they should be reading the other 19 for context, and then determining how the 20th adds to their understanding of the field.

    And then, yes, there has always been an amount of clickbait being shared, too. But I’ve seen a lot of fingers pointed at what I would call false positives, personally.