Fellow scientists: If you are going to make broad public pronouncements based on your results, please have someone check your math first. The general population is losing faith in science, and reversals like this are a big part of the problem.
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
in theory, yes. but attention to numeric detail in peer review tends to be variable, unfortunately, so it's really a crapshoot as to whether something like this gets caught in review.
This also seems to be a example of the "bug-hacking" problem - i.e. that we are more likely to find errors that contradict our predictions than those that don't. You have to imagine that if the results had come out the other way they would have looked a bit harder at the math.
Comments