3101: Good Science - Revision history

GSLikesCats307 at 16:27, 6 May 2026

2026-05-06T16:27:38Z

Strike 2: Fixed.

2026-04-14T10:57:32Z

Fixed.

Duralumin-here: Added Cueball to categories as he is present in this comic.

2026-03-31T18:11:59Z

Added Cueball to categories as he is present in this comic.

FaviFake: AI

2025-12-24T15:36:51Z

2001:4450:812D:4300:D48A:FA43:B07D:794D at 09:05, 23 December 2025

2025-12-23T09:05:26Z

FaviFake: AI

2025-11-29T11:17:24Z

Utdtutyabthsc: /* Explanations for Predictors */

2025-11-26T05:42:37Z

‎Explanations for Predictors

Utdtutyabthsc: /* Explanations for Predictors */

2025-11-26T05:35:13Z

‎Explanations for Predictors

Utdtutyabthsc: /* Explanation */

2025-11-26T05:33:17Z

‎Explanation

Utdtutyabthsc: /* Explanation for Predictors */

2025-11-26T05:33:00Z

‎Explanation for Predictors

@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
 ==Explanation==
-[[Miss Lenhart]] is teaching a class to [[Jill]] and a [[Cueball]]-like kid. Based on her opening statement "I'm supposed to give you the tools to do good science." this is likely a general class on the principles of science, although it could be the start of a class on a specific field of science such as biology or physics. Classes about the principles of science (i.e. the scientific method, or what makes "good science") are common at the very introductory level, such as middle school science classes that give young students a basic framework to understand science, and also at the very advanced level, where PhD students take classes on the philosophy and history of science with detailed examination of epistemology, metaphysics, logic and ontology to be able to understand how their research affects the world.
+[[Miss Lenhart]] is teaching a class to [[Jill]] and [[Kidball]]. Based on her opening statement "I'm supposed to give you the tools to do good science." this is likely a general class on the principles of science, although it could be the start of a class on a specific field of science such as biology or physics. Classes about the principles of science (i.e. the scientific method, or what makes "good science") are common at the very introductory level, such as middle school science classes that give young students a basic framework to understand science, and also at the very advanced level, where PhD students take classes on the philosophy and history of science with detailed examination of epistemology, metaphysics, logic and ontology to be able to understand how their research affects the world.
 However, Miss Lenhart explains that doing "good science" is hard, because research [https://www.discovermagazine.com/the-sciences/5-times-that-science-got-it-wrong often] [https://www.famousscientists.org/10-most-famous-scientific-theories-that-were-later-debunked/ produces] [https://www.siliconrepublic.com/innovation/scientific-theories-proven-wrong incorrect] {{w|List of experimental errors and frauds in physics|results}}. Most famously, it's been shown "by indisputably correct mathematical equations ... with the addition of only very modest assumptions" that in medical research, {{w|Why Most Published Research Findings Are False|Most Published Research Findings Are False}}. She wonders what are the key things she should teach her students so that their scientific inquiry ends up being successful. She lists a series of items that are commonly suggested as leading to successful research, such as collaboration or skepticism, and explains that she performed a {{w|regression analysis}} (a mathematical technique often used in science), to find out which were most important. She concludes that the two most crucial factors are genuine curiosity about the subject (which makes sense as something that would drive scientists to achieve good results) and {{w|ammonium hydroxide}}, a chemical which does see some {{w|Ammonia_solution#Laboratory_use|laboratory use}}, but it does not obviously relate significantly to achieving good results (although it's often used to clean laboratory equipment, so it is possible that regular or thorough cleaning of equipment reduces experimental error).{{Actual citation needed}}
@@ Line 26: / Line 26: @@
 :Miss Lenhart: I'm supposed to give you the tools to do good science.
-:[Miss Lenhart is now seen standing in front of Jill and Cueball, who are seated at classroom desks. She is shrugging and has her arms up and looking away from board.]
+:[Miss Lenhart is now seen standing in front of Jill and Kidball, who are seated at classroom desks. She is shrugging and has her arms up and looking away from board.]
 :Miss Lenhart: But what '''''are''''' those tools?
 :Miss Lenhart: Methodology is hard and there are so many ways to get incorrect results.
@@ Line 61: / Line 61: @@
 [[Category:Comics featuring Miss Lenhart]]
 [[Category:Comics featuring Jill]]
-[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
+[[Category:Comics featuring Kidball]]
 [[Category:Science]]
 [[Category:Comics featuring children]]

@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
 ==Explanation==
 [[Miss Lenhart]] is teaching a class to [[Jill]] and a [[Cueball]]-like kid. Based on her opening statement "I'm supposed to give you the tools to do good science." this is likely a general class on the principles of science, although it could be the start of a class on a specific field of science such as biology or physics. Classes about the principles of science (i.e. the scientific method, or what makes "good science") are common at the very introductory level, such as middle school science classes that give young students a basic framework to understand science, and also at the very advanced level, where PhD students take classes on the philosophy and history of science with detailed examination of epistemology, metaphysics, logic and ontology to be able to understand how their research affects the world.
 However, Miss Lenhart explains that doing "good science" is hard, because research [https://www.discovermagazine.com/the-sciences/5-times-that-science-got-it-wrong often] [https://www.famousscientists.org/10-most-famous-scientific-theories-that-were-later-debunked/ produces] [https://www.siliconrepublic.com/innovation/scientific-theories-proven-wrong incorrect] {{w|List of experimental errors and frauds in physics|results}}. Most famously, it's been shown "by indisputably correct mathematical equations ... with the addition of only very modest assumptions" that in medical research, {{w|Why Most Published Research Findings Are False|Most Published Research Findings Are False}}. She wonders what are the key things she should teach her students so that their scientific inquiry ends up being successful. She lists a series of items that are commonly suggested as leading to successful research, such as collaboration or skepticism, and explains that she performed a {{w|regression analysis}} (a mathematical technique often used in science), to find out which were most important. She concludes that the two most crucial factors are genuine curiosity about the subject (which makes sense as something that would drive scientists to achieve good results) and {{w|ammonium hydroxide}}, a chemical which does see some {{w|Ammonia_solution#Laboratory_use|laboratory use}}, but it does not obviously relate significantly to achieving good results (although it's often used to clean laboratory equipment, so it is possible that regular or thorough cleaning of equipment reduces experimental error).{{Actual citation needed}}
-This may illustrate a potential problem with regression analyses caused by including too many predictor variables for the available data. This can cause random statistical noise in the sample to be interpreted as a meaningful effect.
+In statistical regressions, a predictor variable is a variable that a regression model uses to predict the predicted variable. In this case, the predictors are likely a set of values assigned to different studies that represent the prevalence of the different "predictor aspects" in the studies. These weights may be regressed against a variable representing how much "good science" the studies are conducting. This may illustrate a potential problem with regression analyses caused by including too many predictor variables for the available data. This can cause random statistical noise in the sample to be interpreted as a meaningful effect.
 When Jill points out that ammonium hydroxide is a nonsensical factor, Miss Lenhart replies that Jill is doing good science. The joke is that including ammonium hydroxide was just a means to get Jill to question the results. It also suggests that skepticism is actually the second crucial factor after genuine curiosity, as being skeptical of ammonium hydroxide as an important factor led to Jill's newfound success as a scientist. Alternatively, because Jill is being curious about how ammonia got onto the list, she is performing good science by using both curiosity and ammonia.

@@ Line 62: / Line 62: @@
 [[Category:Comics featuring Miss Lenhart]]
 [[Category:Comics featuring Jill]]
 [[Category:Science]]
 [[Category:Comics featuring children]]

@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
 ==Explanation==
+{{incomplete|Add explanations for predictors.}}
 [[Miss Lenhart]] is teaching a class to [[Jill]] and a [[Cueball]]-like kid. Based on her opening statement "I'm supposed to give you the tools to do good science." this is likely a general class on the principles of science, although it could be the start of a class on a specific field of science such as biology or physics. Classes about the principles of science (i.e. the scientific method, or what makes "good science") are common at the very introductory level, such as middle school science classes that give young students a basic framework to understand science, and also at the very advanced level, where PhD students take classes on the philosophy and history of science with detailed examination of epistemology, metaphysics, logic and ontology to be able to understand how their research affects the world.
@@ Line 22: / Line 22: @@
 Randall has previously suggested that rigor is not as important in science as some make it out to be, when discussing ''{{w|MythBusters}}'' (see [[397: Unscientific]]).
 ==Transcript==

@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
 ==Explanation==
-{{incomplete|Add explanations for predictors.}}
 [[Miss Lenhart]] is teaching a class to [[Jill]] and a [[Cueball]]-like kid. Based on her opening statement "I'm supposed to give you the tools to do good science." this is likely a general class on the principles of science, although it could be the start of a class on a specific field of science such as biology or physics. Classes about the principles of science (i.e. the scientific method, or what makes "good science") are common at the very introductory level, such as middle school science classes that give young students a basic framework to understand science, and also at the very advanced level, where PhD students take classes on the philosophy and history of science with detailed examination of epistemology, metaphysics, logic and ontology to be able to understand how their research affects the world.
@@ Line 22: / Line 22: @@
 Randall has previously suggested that rigor is not as important in science as some make it out to be, when discussing ''{{w|MythBusters}}'' (see [[397: Unscientific]]).
 ==Transcript==

@@ Line 23: / Line 23: @@
 Randall has previously suggested that rigor is not as important in science as some make it out to be, when discussing ''{{w|MythBusters}}'' (see [[397: Unscientific]]).
-==Explanations for Predictors==
+===Explanations for Predictors===
 {| class="wikitable sortable"

@@ Line 26: / Line 26: @@
 {| class="wikitable sortable"
-!Concept !! Explanation
+!Predictor !! Explanation
 |-
 ! Collaboration