Then thereâs also the flat-earther style: âWe applied a flawed model and flawed methodology to standard circumstances and got the results we wanted!â
I guess we need a new comic to address all the different kinds of pseudo-science.
Business as usual, just another day at the lab. People using actual real world samples instead of the expensive standards to produce a very messy calibration squiggle. Also, the machine probably requires some maintenance from time to time.
We were awarded grant money from a corporation and got results that are favourable to them but require further grants to really boost that evidence up a notch, wink wink
Aka "we applied a standard theory to standard circumstances and got the expected result" - one can argue it does help in a way by providing another dataset although it didn't really accomplish anything it can be useful for student research projects in that field.
Don't forget "these are novel circumstances and so we attempted something, but really the circumstances are so novel that just documenting them is pretty neat"