Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

290077 t1_j6tc1d6 wrote

Reply to comment by TheNinjaPro in How to be a sceptic | We have an ethical responsibility to adopt a sceptical attitude to everything from philosophy and science to economics and history in the pursuit of a good life for ourselves and others. by IAI_Admin

https://retractionwatch.com/the-retraction-watch-leaderboard/

You're telling me none of these passed peer review? Look at the timelines, several of these took over a decade between publication and retraction.

5

TheNinjaPro t1_j6tcgxm wrote

How the fuck is nobody reading my original comment.

Peer Reviewed + REPEATABLE Data meaning MULTIPLE studies from different groups came to the same result using the same parameters.

I am well aware of the abuse under the peer review system, but it does have an once of integrity and with the key word repeatable which everyone is overlooking, you can have some faith that it is correct.

−1

XiphosAletheria t1_j6udfh7 wrote

I think the point people are making is that the process as it currently exists often lacks repeatability, in the sense that many published studies don't actually have anyone trying to repeat the results. Like, sure, you have grasped how the scientific process is supposed to work in theory, but no one is naive enough to think science is like that in the real world.

7

TheNinjaPro t1_j6uh7e1 wrote

Its just a rule that a study is only as trustable as it is repeatable. Most meaningful science is repeatable, with potentially hundreds of scientists conducting the same experiments.

1