[inanutshellus]

> research suggests it’s not true

You misread. Betteridge's law says it can be "no"...

I think though his "law" is referring to clickbait that imply a falsehood to get you to read it.

"New Research asks - Can your baby live entirely off of kelp?!" ... "wow can she? that's nuts! lemme read! oh. no."

[pinnochio]

Hm, not much of a law if we boil it down to a tautology.

[1718627440]

Every true statement boils down to resolving it to a tautology. In a mathematical proof you resolve definitions until only a tautology is left.

[latexr]

> You misread. Betteridge's law says it can be "no"...

That doesn’t make sense. Of course Betteridge didn’t mean “it can be answered with “no”, but also “yes””. The point is that you can answer “no” instead of reading the article.

Either way, I was responding to ultropolis’ assertion—not Betteridge’s—by citing the studies which already suggest it to be false.