Hacker News Reader

Comment by yosito | Hacker News Reader

It really drives me crazy how "study finds" just means that somebody built a hypothetical model to confirm their opinion.

View on HN

"Please don't pick the most provocative thing in an article or post to complain about in the thread. Find something interesting to respond to instead."

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Noted. I'd delete my comment, but it doesn't seem possible now.

Appreciated! No need to delete - it's all about learning (and we're all in the process of doing that)

I think "This title is misleading" is a pretty worthwhile thing to mention.

The GP didn't mention that.

The Replication Crisis has taught me that "a scientific study shows X" only gently hints that X might be true.

I don't think there is a replication crisis in astronomy. It's important not to generalize from other fields

This is very field specific. As sibling poster mentioned, claiming it true for all of science is throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

Science and predictive models are two entirely different things. A study !== science.

Science is about replication of results.

For example, if Alice did X and got Y, then published a paper about it, and Bob did X and got Y, and Charlie did X and got Y, then X->Y is scientifically proven.

If well known and proven scientist Alice said that X may cause Y, then it is just Alice words, not a science.

That's not what the published article says at all.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com