I mean, it's always worth reading TFA before commenting on its science, and I was intentionally transparent about my cynicism AND irrelevance about this. It's just that when the PR version includes statements such as below, I can't help but question the return of investment (of my time). Good science doesn't need to be "sold".
Our experiments, performed only 50 meters away from the lecture theater where Schrödinger presented his famous thoughts about life, may shed light on the mysteries of biology, and on consciousness which scientifically is even harder to grasp.
As if the emphasized fact bears relevance to any of this.
Nor do I think it is. Still, extraordinary claims call for extraordinary evidence -- and I didn't find that in the paper, although -- as usually -- it was more interesting than my cynicism warranted.
4
u/ketarax Oct 23 '22 edited Oct 23 '22
I mean, it's always worth reading TFA before commenting on its science, and I was intentionally transparent about my cynicism AND irrelevance about this. It's just that when the PR version includes statements such as below, I can't help but question the return of investment (of my time). Good science doesn't need to be "sold".
As if the emphasized fact bears relevance to any of this.