This was @ConceptualJames project and he put inordinate amounts of work into it. He is our supercomputer. He sees the patterns and systems and holds it all in his head and makes it work. Peter was in on it from the start and he is responsible for much of the creative madness.
We've been doing that for years. I am currently writing a book on it. People deny that the problem exists. We wanted to show that it does by getting papers published which draw on main theories and arguments.
-
-
Stick to it then, don't go into pseudoscience.
-
I don't know what is pseudoscience about what we did? Why shouldn't we test our claim that epistemologically poor ideologically biased papers are being not only accepted but encouraged by certain journals? You've said what we should do but not why doing this too was wrong.
-
Again you are showing that the process is flawed. You didn't disprove theory.
-
It's not an attempt to "disprove theory." It's an attempt to show that epistemologically poor and ideological motivated scholarship is required in certain fields. You are v confused about the purpose of the project but we have set it out at length so I'm not explaining again here
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.