Scientific explanations holding reductive information are more alluring, even if irrelevant http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010027716301585 …pic.twitter.com/fqQv2ds17p
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
@cjprofman Funny. In reality, neuroscience is totally dodgy. http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/neuroskeptic/2014/11/19/reality-check-neuroscience/ … http://www.nature.com/nrn/journal/v14/n5/full/nrn3475.html …
And a lot of neuroscience IS psychology, sometimes scantily in disguise.
Genetics-neuroscience-psychology is a zero sum hand game to explain scientific phenomenonpic.twitter.com/WbtESVT4dD
@cMadan @DegenRolf This can't be right. Expensive equipment beats cheap equipment. Sequencer beats eye-tracker: Psych loses.
That looks to me like the hierarchy in the eyes of scientists, too (physicists for sure). Any studies on that?
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.