Spotting Bad Scienc...
 

Subscribe now and choose from over 30 free gifts worth up to £49 - Plus get £25 to spend in our shop

[Closed] Spotting Bad Science (a quick check before posting/quoting?)

5 Posts
6 Users
0 Reactions
73 Views
Posts: 17
Free Member
Topic starter
 

[img] [/img]

Should shorten most threads by at least 42.764% and improve others by a clear and majestic 27.97362% while bringing at least 38.9278% of threads more to life than using normal conditioner.


 
Posted : 27/04/2014 12:43 am
Posts: 19451
Free Member
 

😆 True true ...

Believing in science too much you might as well hang yourself.

What is the probability of that! :mrgreen:


 
Posted : 27/04/2014 12:50 am
Posts: 1
Free Member
 

2, 3, 5, 7 & 10 on the car insurance thread. Although i am responsible for a couple of those!

Actually would threads not just die on their arses with no one bothered to justify each point with a spread of peer-reviewed randomised double blind trials because it was more fun to post silly pictures of narwhals etc?

[img] http://http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2012/04/22/mysteries-of-evolution-the-narwhals-tusk-or-rather-tooth/ [/img]


 
Posted : 27/04/2014 7:44 am
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Needs something on misrepresentative statistics - although I accept that's probably the most difficult thing to spot, and could probably have a whole top 10 all of it's own.


 
Posted : 27/04/2014 8:22 am
Posts: 7121
Free Member
 

Source?


 
Posted : 27/04/2014 8:35 am
Posts: 0
Free Member