The idea that one can be convicted based on methods that have not been openly validated by independents is quite disturbing!
Show this thread
On the quality of forensic DNA testing methods based on tiny amounts of DNA. Needs more (mandatory!) #openscience https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/09/04/nyregion/dna-analysis-evidence-new-york-disputed-techniques.html …pic.twitter.com/5nQp1aMRY6
-
-
-
It's one thing that one can publish science that hasn't been properly vetted, essentially misusing public fundings for research,
Show this thread -
but putting people behind bars? That should require a higher bar of evidence that includes at least independent code review and open data.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Everybody has to make decisions based on imperfect understanding of the facts.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Have you heard of the Phantom of Heilbronn in Germany?
-
I have now! Common method variance strikes again! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantom_of_Heilbronn …pic.twitter.com/meBRcEUPh5
-
I remember reading stories about this mysterious lady; theories got pretty wild given the sheer number of cases she was linked to.
End of conversation
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.