Analysts, however, had pointed to methodological weaknesses calling these results into question. In view of both the empirical uncertainties and the potential significance of a non-null result, the Foundation's advisory board advocated that substantial resources be put forth in order to advance methodological rigor in the design and execution of a new "blue ribbon standard" study.I guess they won't stop until they get positive results.
----
April 5 erratum: I had egregiously misread the Templeton statement. As KipEsquire clarifies the "methodological weaknesses" refer to those of previous studies. My apologies to the Foundation and to all.
2 comments:
I think you're misreading the press release (as I also did at first). They're referring to the previous studies having "methodological weaknesses," not their own STEP research.
I think you're right. Will put the necessary erratum on the blog entry. Thanks!
Post a Comment