pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Rothbardian_fanatic 17 Jan \ parent \ on: The strain on scientific publishing science
You would spend time repeating work that has already been done to validate or falsify it. As you say, it is the only valid review.
How many times have we seen falsified data, bogus results and other scientific hijinks in the peer-reviewed but not replicated published papers? I realize that sometimes you cannot replicate because of expense or lack of equipment and talent, but what else can you do?