RE: Peer reviewed study published in Science Journal turns out to be fraud.
May 23, 2015 at 12:34 pm
Pure chance? Did you even read the article you buffoon?
A separate group tried unsuccessfully to replicate the results. They then asked for the raw data from the original study, which didn't exist. That's exactly how it's supposed to work. If you do a study with fantastic (and I'm not using that term colloquially) results, people are going to look at it closely and try to disprove or confirm the experiment.
A separate group tried unsuccessfully to replicate the results. They then asked for the raw data from the original study, which didn't exist. That's exactly how it's supposed to work. If you do a study with fantastic (and I'm not using that term colloquially) results, people are going to look at it closely and try to disprove or confirm the experiment.
"There remain four irreducible objections to religious faith: that it wholly misrepresents the origins of man and the cosmos, that because of this original error it manages to combine the maximum servility with the maximum of solipsism, that it is both the result and the cause of dangerous sexual repression, and that it is ultimately grounded on wish-thinking." ~Christopher Hitchens, god is not Great
PM me your email address to join the Slack chat! I'll give you a taco(or five) if you join! --->There's an app and everything!<---
PM me your email address to join the Slack chat! I'll give you a taco(or five) if you join! --->There's an app and everything!<---
