One thing that bothers me is when ppl critique my data as "unscientific" due to sampling bias. First, y'all better not look into a lot of what you think are "scientific" studies Second, there's nothing wrong with sampling bias if you acknowledge limitations and don't extrapolate.
-
-
I would say bias is bias but great paper on the topic:https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1065912907313077 …
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
You're asking too much. Many people view science with a distinct religiosity, despite ironically believing the opposite. This is probably due to a lack of general understanding of what "science" actually is.
-
I think it is a lot easier to define science than religion - which is kind of the problem here. Science is a process, but it also makes epistemic statements about the nature of reality. How those epistemic statements are interpreted to some may constitute a kind of religion.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I would say science is the process of creating models that we hope help us figure things out. :D They don't and cannot actually truly show us anything beyond whatever confidence interval we assign to the model.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
So I would say thinking about it as "Finding things out" is the pop science way of thinking about what science is - what you are doing is trying to explain your data with a model and you are trying to see if you can falsify that model with a 95 percent confidence interval.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
These are reasons why I have (and I'll keep doing it) recomended people to follow you.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.