Trick question. Are rational adjustments for published reasons allowed?
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Do you see the irrationality in your question? No scientist approves of fudging. All scientists approve of adjusting data from lower quality to higher.
11 replies 0 retweets 11 likes -
No. Raising “quality” of data after the fact IS fudging Good scientists (not even close to “all”) understand there are uncertainties at all stages of science, including errors in recording, and their statistical analysis and conclusions reflect that uncertainty.
3 replies 6 retweets 106 likes -
Improving quality of data is fudging? Word salad time, I'm out.
7 replies 0 retweets 13 likes -
"Improving quality of data" is word salad Scott. You are being an asshole.
8 replies 0 retweets 96 likes -
Replying to @normonics @ScottAdamsSays and
Joe; never ever debate science with a nonscientist. Gabish?
16 replies 12 retweets 169 likes -
Replying to @nntaleb @normonics and
tweet was offensive. An unnecessary shot from friendly guns. Assuming you don't want to discourage rational inquiry, an apology and reconciliation are in order.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
I'm going to block you for continuously mischaracterizing me.
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.