761

Scientific Method (mander.xyz)

submitted 3 days ago by Dav09@mander.xyz to c/science_memes@mander.xyz

16 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 16 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] magic_lobster_party@fedia.io 83 points 3 days ago

I usually just cherry pick the data that makes me happy. Works every time.

[-] tempest@lemmy.ca 23 points 3 days ago

It's missing the last two panels where he pulls out a knife and carves up the data

[-] chuckleslord@lemmy.world 13 points 3 days ago

That's how you get your paper published. Find the stat with the happiest (see, statistically relevant) outcome, publish based solely on that.

[-] Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 53 points 3 days ago

I'll take a no any day over an " I dunno,maybe, probably not, your methods might have been totally backwards and there's not enough funding to ever do this again the right way." that's often what data seems to whisper to me.

[-] Toes@ani.social 5 points 3 days ago

My personal favourite is "are you sure that's in the design specs?"

[-] lath@lemmy.world 20 points 3 days ago

But is it DATA or DATA?

[-] ummthatguy@lemmy.world 34 points 3 days ago

[-] teft@lemmy.world 5 points 3 days ago

Data should move to a country that lacks the phonemes to properly pronounce your name (looking at you Spanish and your piddly 5 vowel sounds). You end up just answering to anything that sounds similar.

[-] whotookkarl@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago

The first one

[-] Toes@ani.social 7 points 3 days ago

[-] iAvicenna@lemmy.world 10 points 3 days ago

just happened to me today, still recovering

[-] Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works 10 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

NO is good scientific information! Now you just take your old grant application, insert NOT and NO throughout as necessary, and reapply!

[-] iAvicenna@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

I hate it when I realize I failed to understand something (especially if I was very certain that I did). Making the possibilities set slightly smaller offers little consolation.

Otherwise I agree.

[-] Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 days ago

Well, now you have succeeded in understanding the limits of your previous comprehension, and that's the rung you need to stand on to see further. Onward and upward, friend.