this is based on poore-nemececk 2018, a meta"study" that ignores guidance on LCA studies being unable to be combined, and doesn’t even have the integrity to disclose this in the paper. it’s bad science.
“flawed study” is @commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com for “I didn’t like the conclusions some researcher who spent a long time looking into all the scientific studies drew, so I’m going to cast vague doubts about it instead”
commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 month ago
this is based on poore-nemececk 2018, a meta"study" that ignores guidance on LCA studies being unable to be combined, and doesn’t even have the integrity to disclose this in the paper. it’s bad science.
davidagain@lemmy.world 1 month ago
“Bad science” is commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com for “I don’t want this to be true”.
commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 month ago
it could be true, but the study used to support it is flawed.
davidagain@lemmy.world 1 month ago
“flawed study” is @commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com for “I didn’t like the conclusions some researcher who spent a long time looking into all the scientific studies drew, so I’m going to cast vague doubts about it instead”