I unapologetically view people who take a hard stance on something they have not even bothered to research as uniquely bad at thinking, let alone intellectually arrogant. twitter.com/Aella_Girl/sta
This Tweet is unavailable.
4
10
79
Conversation
Replying to
i look forward to hearing about how you have no hard stance about the earth being round
Replying to
Every time you try to equate astrologers and flat-earthers is a misfire.
I have a hard stance on things that have been refuted and for which we have more elegant and well-supported theories.
I have debated flat-earthers, gotten acquainted with their stances, and researched mine.
1
2
Show replies
Replying to
Moreover, when you uncritically shared a Wikipedia page naming what you thought were scientific refutations of Astrology, I brought to you strong critiques of those studies that were nowhere to be seen in the Wiki page.
In case you missed it, here it is:
Quote Tweet
No, this Wikipedia page is very flawed and omits A LOT.
First, it omits all the methodological problems with Geoffrey Dean's meta-analysis.
astrology.co.uk/tests/basisofa
Show this thread
1
2
And here.
Quote Tweet
And I don't expect neither @Aella_Girl or @meditationstuff to know this stuff, but the Carlson double-blind test had opposite results when replicated.
researchgate.net/publication/32
Show this thread
1
1
Show replies