How can you say you believe in gentle correction while signal boosting people with misrepresent, call names, and behave in ways that very obviously petty and bullying? Why do that?
-
-
Replying to @jonst0kes @aetiology and
Will you at least address the fact that Nicholas refuses to correct his falsehoods to the effect that Eric spread a retracted R0 number (he did not) and is "a nutritionist" (he is not)? Are you just going to be silent on this and keep RTing him and liking his tweets?
3 replies 3 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @jonst0kes @z1y2x3 and
Didn't someone do a like 20 tweet thread calling out Ding's misrepresentations etc that you ignored because you didn't believe him because Twitter? Where is evidence you are acting in good faith? Again, I'm just talking about science here. I'm responsible only for my behavior.
6 replies 1 retweet 12 likes -
Replying to @aetiology @z1y2x3 and
No, no that did not happen. I engaged with that guy, and I called him out because some of what he said was wrong, and then he disappeared!
1 reply 1 retweet 6 likes -
Replying to @jonst0kes @aetiology and
Jon Stokes Retweeted Jon Stokes
I have tried a few times to get him to come back and admit his error and retract his false allegation, and he has not done it!https://twitter.com/jonst0kes/status/1231009619495063552 …
Jon Stokes added,
Jon Stokes @jonst0kesGuys I know I have to stop tweeting about this@DrEricDing drama b/c I already said it's time to move on, but there is a galaxy brain plot twist here and I have to share it. It's just too good to sit on. Strap in (or don't if you're over it... in which case I don't blame you).Show this thread1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @jonst0kes @z1y2x3 and
And multiple people have pointed out to you it was not *only* about the specific R0 number but *his misunderstanding & misrepresentation of what it meant.* I explained this once to you and you called me petty so while I have a lot of patience, I'm coming to the end of it here.
2 replies 0 retweets 13 likes -
Replying to @aetiology @z1y2x3 and
I'm sorry, but this allegation about the R0 number was false. The allegation that he is "a nutritionist" is false. These are false, and they have not been corrected or their falsehood even acknowledged by people who are so ostensibly obsessed with accuracy & quality communication
2 replies 1 retweet 7 likes -
Replying to @jonst0kes @z1y2x3 and
"Nutrition scientist"--would that appease you? And the R0 was not correct at the time of publication and again, not only about the number but the nonsensical "never seen an actual virality coefficient outside of Twitter in my entire career" and terrifying people.
3 replies 0 retweets 11 likes -
Replying to @aetiology @z1y2x3 and
How about "epidemiologist," because he has two doctoral degrees and one of them in epidemiology.
2 replies 0 retweets 8 likes -
Replying to @jonst0kes @aetiology and
His degree, once again, is a SdD, not a PhD. He's changed this on his bio now that people actually found out he was lying about having a PhD. The coursework is different. You've been shown this by tweets from Harvard faculty,
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
How is an ScD different from a PhD? I thought it was widely considered the same: it’s just Harvard named them differently.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.