didn't say you were, my man, I said the hoax was. I'm cool with systemic and constructive criticism of a field made up of detailed examples
No-one is suggesting it is. You need a mass of evidence & analysis by very many ppl. Individuals contribute small pieces. Step back.
-
-
You'll always have to read more widely than 1 study, 1 experiment, 1 argument. This doesn't mean its a problem to do 1 study, 1 experiment..
-
My blog was about one specific "study", and the conclusions about an entire field that were drawn from it by proponents.
-
I think you're missing the bigger picture. It doesn't stand alone. If it did & all other evidence was that GS publishing was rigorous &sound
-
& based on empirical evidence & reasoned argument, it would disappear. Its part of a larger & growing concern.
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.