I suspect you didn't read it. Or you skimmed it. Or you turned your brain off and never honestly considered anything I wrote because you're not of an inclination to ever have your mind changed unless you want it to be.
It is plenty though. One outlier is absolutely a nothing burger. It's such a common thing. I don't even understand what you're imagining that could make this a big deal.
Do you often entertain theories you have no evidence for? Does that sound productive?
This is easily explained with the universal experience of research science in biology. Until there is evidence to the contrary, the more likely explanation (by far) is the reasonable course. What you are engaged in is confirmation bias.
What you see fits your preconveived notion that there is something fishy going on. And likely there is. But just because something 'fits' your prefferred bias does not lend credence to that interpretation - you don't get to abandon alternatives merely because your preferred interpretation can't be rejected.
If I believe my wife is cheating on me, and she arrives home late, that is not evidence she is cheating on me. Particularly if everyone who has to take the same freeway home at the same time of night are themselve all, always late because every other day there's a pileup or whatever.
A common experience is not evidence of your theory merely because your theory can't be rejected.
I just told you why several times.
I suspect you didn't read it. Or you skimmed it. Or you turned your brain off and never honestly considered anything I wrote because you're not of an inclination to ever have your mind changed unless you want it to be.
No, I understand what you wrote and it was an excellent explanation. I was not attempting to challenge your knowledge.
There is not enough information to say if what is in the video is.of great importance or if it is a nothing burger.
It is plenty though. One outlier is absolutely a nothing burger. It's such a common thing. I don't even understand what you're imagining that could make this a big deal.
There could be more than one instance, there could be many. There could be more tests conducted by others that have had the same result.
There is not enough information to know either way from the video. Not saying there is other info, but if there is we dont have it.
Do you often entertain theories you have no evidence for? Does that sound productive?
This is easily explained with the universal experience of research science in biology. Until there is evidence to the contrary, the more likely explanation (by far) is the reasonable course. What you are engaged in is confirmation bias.
What you see fits your preconveived notion that there is something fishy going on. And likely there is. But just because something 'fits' your prefferred bias does not lend credence to that interpretation - you don't get to abandon alternatives merely because your preferred interpretation can't be rejected.
If I believe my wife is cheating on me, and she arrives home late, that is not evidence she is cheating on me. Particularly if everyone who has to take the same freeway home at the same time of night are themselve all, always late because every other day there's a pileup or whatever.
A common experience is not evidence of your theory merely because your theory can't be rejected.
Is that a good example?