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.
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.
ReplyDeleteI think you're right. Will put the necessary erratum on the blog entry. Thanks!
ReplyDelete