this post was submitted on 14 Mar 2025
579 points (100.0% liked)

Science Memes

14397 readers
1688 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.

Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.

Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
579
cherry pickers (lemmy.dbzer0.com)
submitted 1 month ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
37 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 month ago (7 children)

I still don't get the 340% increase in the production part though.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Anti-vaxxers love cherry picking.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Yeah, but if your results are only a biased subset of your total gamut (vaccers + anti-vaccers) then 340% is still an astonishing result when only taking your preferred group.

It actually does build credibility that the group you're biased towards had the most significant result.

If the total gains were 1000% including contributions from both groups, then yes I can understand the point the post is making (340 from anti-vaccers, 660 from vaccers, clear cherry-picking).

But 340 is already an incredibly high number, so it sort of weakens the post, if you catch my meaning

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago

You are overthinking a (bad) joke

load more comments (4 replies)