I strongly believe in the validity of my hypothesis (which every experimentalist does I guess), but I can’t find an explanation for the outliers, or the possible explanations are too many. Can I still publish with five good data points? How should I deal with the other five? I assume it’s unethical to not report them, right?
Theyve edited the post, looks like they had a pretty reasonable question but wrote it badly.
- Post was edited three years ago. The answer I link to also responds to the update.
- Though it’s no longer insane, I don’t think the question was made reasonable by the update.
It’s disturbing that an academic, presumably a PhD candidate, has to ask this. Either they’re scared of the PI, or the whole department is fucked.
That was a crazy read
As it so happens, forensics experts DO say things like that in court all of the time.
IDK about it court, but they definitely say it on forensic TV shows
Jfc. Thank gods my anti-intellectual “all scientists are paid lackeys of our corrupt government” family members don’t see this shit. Holy hell is this an embarrassing read.
