this post was submitted on 20 Feb 2024
49 points (100.0% liked)
Science Communication
885 readers
3 users here now
Welcome to c/SciComm @ Mander.xyz!
Science Communication
Notice Board
This is a work in progress, please don't mind the mess.
- 2023-06-14: We are looking for mods. Send a dm to @fossilesque@mander.xyz if interested!
About
Rules
- Don't throw mud. Be kind and remember the human.
- Keep it rooted (on topic).
- No spam.
Resources
Outreach:
Networking:
Similar Communities
Sister Communities
Science and Research
Biology and Life Sciences
- !anthropology@mander.xyz
- !biodiversity@mander.xyz
- !microbiology@mander.xyz
- !palaeoecology@mander.xyz
- !palaeontology@mander.xyz
Plants & Gardening
Physical Sciences
Humanities and Social Sciences
- !archaeology@mander.xyz
- !cooking@mander.xyz
- !folklore@mander.xyz
- !history@mander.xyz
- !old_maps@mander.xyz
Memes
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
So does this mean then that 77% of participants think that this is NOT true (I could not find the Supplementary Figure S2 in this open pre-print to confirm), and if so, then why flip it around so that it looks like it means somewhat of the precise opposite of what it does mean?
Also, why should adults care what the opinions of toddlers are, or scientists care what the opinion is of someone who has not even so much as read a book or watched a video on a subject?
Now a peer review on the other hand... is very much a part of the scientific process, just as the method of hypothesis testing is to begin with. So if the above-quoted statement was meant to include non-scientists, then I question its relevance, while if it was meant to include scientists, then I question its accuracy.
End Rant.:-)