it’s always good to verify your hypothesis even if it’s seemingly obvious. Just because something seems like it’s logical and how it should be doesn’t mean it is.
In the same vein now we now exactly how much more effective it is vs alternatives. Studies often answer many questions at once even if on the face of it the study’s result seems obvious
No shit Sherlock
it’s always good to verify your hypothesis even if it’s seemingly obvious. Just because something seems like it’s logical and how it should be doesn’t mean it is.
Except in this case we already knew the hypothesis was correct
did we? were there studies done? and if there were what’s the harm in repeating and verifying?
In the same vein now we now exactly how much more effective it is vs alternatives. Studies often answer many questions at once even if on the face of it the study’s result seems obvious
you should start at the wikipedia page for false equivalence instead
This is why I am starting to conduct my study into if fire is hot.
It appears to be, but I feel extensive additional researchers required.
“Ow”