[ajross]

> The disappointing part of this is the large parts of the population who will look at this and other recent cases (see: Francesca Gino) and think that "academia is broken" or "scientists can't be trusted".

No, sorry. Just no. Stop. "Scientists" were clear, loud, and nearly unanimous in their calls for caution about these results. People on this very site were in these threads saying "we should wait a few weeks, guys" and getting downvoted into gray oblivion for their trouble by a horde of kids hopped up on "proof" they saw via (and I'm not kidding about this) a multimeter screen on TikTok.

You can't fix that with science. Science did everything right here. We had a tantalizing result reported, investigated, and disposed.

[david-gpu]

Note that the article is not about LK-99, but rather about another supposed room temperature superconductor.

[jodrellblank]

> ""we should wait a few weeks, guys" and getting downvoted into gray oblivion for their trouble by a horde of kids"

Their trouble of being no-fun wet blankets? What trouble was that, exactly?

> "Science did everything right here. We had a tantalizing result reported, investigated, and disposed."

And the only thing you wish went differently is that you squashed more people's enthusiasm??

[groby_b]

Saying "These are huge claims with insufficient evidence, let's wait for clarity" is hardly "being no-fun wet blankets". It's understanding how science works.

"And the only thing you wish went differently is that you squashed more people's enthusiasm??"

It's not about "enthusiasm". It's about scientific illiteracy. You can be excited all you want. "I saw a multimeter on TikTok, therefore it's true" and then shouting down folks with actual understanding for being cautious isn't enthusiasm, though. It's Dunning Kruger in action.

[fullspectrumdev]

The incident in TFA has nothing to do with the LK-99 hype.

[mcpeepants]

> No, sorry. Just no. Stop.

I agree with your assessment, of course, but I don’t think it invalidates the comment you are responding to. Large parts of the population could plausibly think those things, despite how clear and unambiguous “scientists” were about the results.