That's why I'd respond that a magician isn't necessarily needed to detect such issues, but a skeptic is. 2/
-
-
Show this thread
-
Not all scientists are skeptics and the culture of science tends to be trusting. Not all magicians are skeptics either. For example, Penn was a climate science denialist and is now into some dubious fasting woo. Randi oversells the skepticism of magicians.https://respectfulinsolence.com/2018/07/25/penn-jillette-interviews-michael-klaper/ …
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
you don't need a magician to tell someone that having prior knowledge of which sample is which would bias their result. I made that point in my follow up tweet in which I mentioned double blind controls as well as peer review.
-
Double blinding is also no guarantee. There are so many ways that it can be compromised, even if inadvertently.
- 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.