I think @gidmk is being too optimistic. 0.5% max? I’m thinking closer to 25% is unreplicable. Maybe more.https://twitter.com/GidMK/status/1338602405462646785 …
-
-
I think if unreplicable because it was done wrong or fundamentally flawed reagents yes. If just because you’re slick, limitedreagent or just very difficult than no. I agree, that line is challenging but that’s why so much of the basic sci literature is utter garbage.
-
It would be great if there was a simple way to see replicability. Instead I think we see forward propagation of errors and no way to tell, without great effort, what is consistent/durable and what is BS. It’s basically the functional role of meetings at this point to dish.
- Show replies
New conversation -
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.