Besides, that's why scientists use douBLE BLIND CONTROLS, PEER REVIEW, AND REPLICATION OMG.
-
-
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
So at last you accept the reality of the paranormal thanks to Sheldrake, Radin, Schwartz, etc, etc. They can't be fooled or fool themselves.
-
Yep. Peer review is actually not very good at detecting systematic error that derives from scientists fooling themselves. It's even worse at detecting outright fraud. I wouldn't necessarily say a magician is needed to detect such things, but a skeptic is.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
I'll still try and stop anyone who thinks they can fly by jumping out a 5th floor window, no matter their "lived experience"
End of 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.
