News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Study of pet dogs shows breed does not predict behaviour. Parent comment

Re:Study of pet dogs shows breed does not predict behaviour by TameAntelope on Tuesday May 03, 2022 @02:44PM (#31251924)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_equivalence

They didn't put out a paper saying the sky is red, they put out a paper saying the magnitude of impact from breed on dog behavior is substantially less pronounced than previously thought.

It is not rational for you to double down on this belief.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Study of pet dogs shows breed does not predict behaviour by dTal on Tuesday May 03, 2022 @02:50PM (#31252001)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motte-and-bailey_fallacy

The headline does not say "substantially less pronounced than previously thought". The headline says "breed does not predict behaviour (nature.com)". Any fool who works with dogs will tell you that yes, it ruddy well does.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Study of pet dogs shows breed does not predict behaviour by TameAntelope on Tuesday May 03, 2022 @03:22PM (#31252367)
Not a Motte-and-bailey fallacy, because I said the paper, not the linked article about the paper.

And no, the "headline" (called a "Title") of the paper published in Nature says, "Ancestry-inclusive dog genomics challenges popular breed stereotypes".

[ Parent | on HN ]