this does have the potential for a reasonable discussion.
The study could be important because it points to one of the great strengths of the scientific method.
Studies are published. Information is freely distributed.
That change is enormous. Before the advent of the scientific method ideas were held back, hoarded as secrets. Today we see just the opposite, the ideas are placed out before the community.
The article says that many or even most may turn out to be wrong. That's probably true. But that is also one of the strengths of the system and method. By placing the ideas out in the public discussion area, others can test them and try to replicate the studies. It is that step, the replication, not opinion, not beliefs, not authority, not dogma, that determines which are valid and which are wrong.
It is those two features,
- early distribution and discussion of ideas
- that must then be independantly confirmed and replicated
that makes the scientific method so robust and successful.
Far from being a condemnation of the process, the article is infact a celebration of the scientific method.
Aslan is not a Tame Lion