Neuroscientists reach divergent conclusions after analysing the same data. Is this surprising?
Would be nice to know how specific the analysis questions and conclusions were, as it isn't obvious there is a serious problem here.
For thirty years of my career studying this, I considered the #AMOC tipping risk serious but low probability.
Why I've changed my mind. ⬇️
youtu.be/Cg0N9MWw9Vk?...
Important advance commented in @nature.com reporting the first successful application of base editing approaches to human embryos. Both impressive and potentially worrysome. Study is not yet peer-reviewed, nor published, but deposited in @biorxivpreprint.bsky.social
www.nature.com/articles/d41...
Excellent and thought-provoking essay by Ted Chiang. [gift link]
www.theatlantic.com/philosophy/2...
The sweeping new regulations proposed by OMB would subject *every federal research funding decision* to political review. Peer review has never been formally binding, but this proposal would drastically expand the power of political appointees to *override* expert assessments of scientific merit 1/4
