this post was submitted on 14 Nov 2025
935 points (98.5% liked)
memes
18021 readers
2515 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads/AI Slop
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.
A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Assuming the papers actually dispute the original claim, you'd expect the person to whom OP's referring to not require that approach but accept the facts and admit their wrongness upon viewing the data. The situation just ends up being ironic otherwise.
I mean yeah, i don't know many people who can just "Read" an entire damn research paper, but usually the abstract is sufficient and taking a look at a few gathered data points. But in my experience, like you said, sometimes the paper just concludes not too strongly one way or another