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

Home Forum Chat Forum Spotting Bad Science (a quick check before posting/quoting?)

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
  • Spotting Bad Science (a quick check before posting/quoting?)
  • chewkw
    Member

    😆 True true …

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

    What is the probability of that! :mrgreen:

    Premier Icon mikewsmith
    Subscriber

    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.

    julianwilson
    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?

    bokonon
    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.

    Premier Icon cloudnine
    Subscriber
Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)

The topic ‘Spotting Bad Science (a quick check before posting/quoting?)’ is closed to new replies.