They chose nuclear power plants because a story could be built around that framework.
I feel like the article authors critiquing the research don’t have a firm grasp on the basic scientific method… Ice cream is highly correlated with murder and whatnot. A hypothesis is supposed to be attached to a reasonable guess before it’s worth looking for mechanisms through which it might be a causal effect. Throwing statistics at the wall to look for any correlation and then reporting that correlation as your hypothesis is decidedly bad methodology and is quite frowned upon. We call incidental correlations spurious relations. X is spuriously related to Y rather than causing it. They teach you this in high school when they teach you the scientific method, it’s not high level stuff.
I feel like the article authors critiquing the research don’t have a firm grasp on the basic scientific method… Ice cream is highly correlated with murder and whatnot. A hypothesis is supposed to be attached to a reasonable guess before it’s worth looking for mechanisms through which it might be a causal effect. Throwing statistics at the wall to look for any correlation and then reporting that correlation as your hypothesis is decidedly bad methodology and is quite frowned upon. We call incidental correlations spurious relations. X is spuriously related to Y rather than causing it. They teach you this in high school when they teach you the scientific method, it’s not high level stuff.
My feeling as well. It reads like Francis Galton haphazardly did science.