The latest in guilt by association without any actual scientific criticism. Business as usual in this field. I don't mind too much because reasonable people will check the primary sources and come to their own conclusions.https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/education/2018/12/no-objecting-cambridge-s-appointment-eugenicist-not-about-free-speech …
-
Lol, being targeted by the
@NewStatesman is a mark of distinction: taking flak means one is over the target.
-
-
They've only done one hit piece on me so far, so I am wondering where I went wrong...
-
@_BvdM yo Mr journo activist, can haz another hit piece on Adam? Think you need to warn the world a little bit more about this evil counter-revolutionary. -
Yes I am worried that I am becoming too PC: I can barely remember the last time I was no-platformed and it's been ages since anyone secretly tried to force the retraction of one of my papers.
-
Maybe you should submit something to openpsych. This seems to qualify you for this latest round of derision.
-
No the next time I have some data to publish I am going to submit it to Ben and colleagues at the New Statesman since it seems they are the only true judges of scientific purity.
-
Of course you are right. Ben knows best! We should have peer review be review by activist left-wing journalists, that way we can be sure that no result that goes against the party line is published.
-
Yes I agree, it is fitting that the New Statesman should be the ultimate arbiter of wrong-think as they did have a soft spot for Stalin.
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.