• PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    The onus is on the researchers making the extraordinary claims.

    Extraordinary claims require solid proof. That’s like science 101.

    • Red_October@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      And their proof is the report they already put out. A refusal to examine or test the proof doesn’t mean it’s invalid. That’s Science 102.

      It may be invalid, I myself am extremely skeptical, but in this situation it absolutely is possible to prove that the process described doesn’t work, that’s what replication studies are for. Replicating the experiment and reporting on the results is vastly more valuable than “Your study didn’t make sense to us.”