How are different scientific fields in terms of replicability? Here are the correlations between original and replication study effect sizes:
-Psychology research (left): r = .56
-Cancer research (right): r = .47
From https://t.co/l3ECagoP3a & https://t.co/OF6cTfklfd
@ScottAdamsSays Everything early on was designed as propaganda due to the alleged gravity of the situation.
Over time, research will get better as the perceived threat level wears off.
“If I'm always wrong so is science”
Unlike this Malthusian’s research, his statement here is correct.
If enough monkeys have typewriters, eventually one will write Shakespeare.
60 Minutes extinction story has brought the usual right-wing out in force. If I'm always wrong so is science, since my work is always peer-reviewed, including the POPULATION BOMB and I've gotten virtually every scientific honor. Sure I've made some mistakes, but no basic ones
How are different scientific fields in terms of replicability? Here are the correlations between original and replication study effect sizes:
-Psychology research (left): r = .56
-Cancer research (right): r = .47
From https://t.co/l3ECagoP3a & https://t.co/OF6cTfklfd
It still amazes me that academic fields, connected by co-citation, are arranged in a ring. Is there a missing "dark field" in the middle that we will find someday to connect it all together well?
The extraordinary thing about gen-z folk morality is that it’s both very pro diversity and anti value pluralism. There are infinitely many ways to lead a good life, but somehow there are no real conflicts and trade-offs: all good things go together, all bad things go together.
@stocksnhistory @joecal198824 @elleee_rose @israelUSAforeve@SaVonniYestanti Ever lived where mountain lions roam free? Ever run into feral dogs? Wild bear or moose? I can’t see how an African lion would be any more or less dangerous.