> Replicating work is far more difficult than a lot of original work.

I don’t regularly read scientific studies but I’ve read a few of them.

How is it possible that a serious study is harder to replicate than it is to do originally. Are papers no longer including their process? Are we at the point where they are just saying “trust me bro” for how they achieved their results?

> Do you want issues of Nature and cell to be replication studies?

Not issues of Nature but I’ve long thought that universities or the government should fund a department of “I don’t believe you” entirely focused on reproducing scientific results and seeing if they are real