I think where you and I and Femur disagree is what constitutes skepticism.
For me an experiment who's results can't be replicated, indeed have not been replicated since 1924, is as wrong as wrong can be. It is 2 + 2 = 5
For you and Femur it is perhaps merely reasonable skepticism.
Perhaps you were expecting some proof that it is wrong, not just lack of proof that it is right?
In science inability to reproduce is where the buck stops. There are no further attempts to actually prove wrongness.
I appreciate your correction. I value the more wordy opinions on HN, short ones tend to remind me of reddit, and I strive to stay away from pithy posts.
For me an experiment who's results can't be replicated, indeed have not been replicated since 1924, is as wrong as wrong can be. It is 2 + 2 = 5
For you and Femur it is perhaps merely reasonable skepticism. Perhaps you were expecting some proof that it is wrong, not just lack of proof that it is right?
In science inability to reproduce is where the buck stops. There are no further attempts to actually prove wrongness.