> But it does mean that very little value is attached to observations of weird new things that don't fit in anywhere.
This surprises me (as a non-scientist). As the observation is clearly real and clearly fits in somewhere to the web (the human body works after all), so it is just not valuable because it cannot easily be published without additional work?
> because you can't say anything about what it is, what it does, why it's important, or how it connects to what anyone else is publishing about.
I guess I am mostly surprised that "it exists" is insufficient. Or that the discovery of this new thing wouldn't trigger further investigation rather than "so what?"
This surprises me (as a non-scientist). As the observation is clearly real and clearly fits in somewhere to the web (the human body works after all), so it is just not valuable because it cannot easily be published without additional work?
> because you can't say anything about what it is, what it does, why it's important, or how it connects to what anyone else is publishing about.
I guess I am mostly surprised that "it exists" is insufficient. Or that the discovery of this new thing wouldn't trigger further investigation rather than "so what?"