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 …
-
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.