Right. Everyone stop sending me this. This needs addressing.https://theconversation.com/retraction-of-a-journal-article-doesnt-make-its-findings-false-103829 …
-
Show this thread
-
No scientist who isn't writing a media release thinks in terms of 'truth' or 'falsity', so framing the question in this terms is a great big fat straw chap in a jolly hat. No-one is CLAIMING retracted studies are false, they're claiming they're *not reliable enough to exist*.pic.twitter.com/DR90kkLsRW
1 reply 12 retweets 43 likesShow this thread -
It's not the 'absence of evidence' that's in question, it's *the sodding-up of the evidentiary process* to such a degree that we're left with no information one way or the other. Which, I might add, is a COLOSSAL waste of everyone's time and money.pic.twitter.com/VyAddYRnoY
1 reply 8 retweets 36 likesShow this thread -
Bet you haven't re-analysed this charming figure to remove the untrustworthy studies. Does that knock a few percent off, I wonder.pic.twitter.com/TE43kUGDlU
4 replies 2 retweets 15 likesShow this thread
Based on the forest plot I would not be surprised if the findings disappeared entirelypic.twitter.com/AAVWwgrshm
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.