2/ It's not that I hate you. (well, OK, I hate many of you, but...) It's that this is a conversation about KNOWLEDGE and SOURCE OF KNOWLEDGE and ERROR BARS AROUND KNOWLEDGE. Agreeing with the citeless assertion is bad. Disagreeing with it is ALSO bad. Providing data is good
-
-
Show this thread
-
3/ low quality data with n=1 & bad p values is actually ok if you've done some sort of
@gwern style self-hack experiment and have data on 30 days of eating sugar vs 30 days of not, ok, that's interesting stuff! but repeating a conclusion that you MAYBE heard from Joe Rogan...Show this thread -
4/ If you're just repeating what you've heard from Rogan or Mangan or something, then your statements aren't even really about science, they're about tribal signalling / mood affiliation / alliance building. Which is boring AF
Show this thread
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.