14 days won't cut it now with archive and screen shots. Best to think hard before tweeting.
-
-
Replying to @SkepticReview89 @rasmansa and
Most people don't bother to screenshot or archive stuff, so deleting old ('old') tweets is usually enough if one isn't a high profile target (like a politician) where people archive everything at once.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @KirkegaardEmil @rasmansa and
I did look over the Murderist argument you sent. It is long and wandering, but what you are basically saying is we are assuming you are "racist by motive." I don't know enuf about it to refute, but I see the issue at least.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @SkepticReview89 @KirkegaardEmil and
Your tweet on Black Americans not knowing who the president is tho--I mean, that's just not even remotely related to your research. So, maybe you do need to take a look at all this and think about it. That's just not right, Emil. There's really no getting around it.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @SkepticReview89 @rasmansa and
I don't recall the context of the tweet. But if you look at surveys of political ignorance, then rates are high all around. I was able to find a survey now of that specific claim and it was wrong (everybody basically knew who Trump was). So what?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @KirkegaardEmil @rasmansa and
Much of your research shows a near obsession with race, particularly black vs. white, when I can't even see a purpose. Your study on biracial children in Japan you even state yourself is a pitifully low sample to mean anything.
3 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @SkepticReview89 @KirkegaardEmil and
Yes, you decide to further divide this nonsignificant sample into those with white or black fathers? To what end? I find you to be little more than a hobbyist masquerading as a scientist who is clearly obsessed with IQ and trying to prove whites are superior thru pathetic means.
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @SkepticReview89 @KirkegaardEmil and
I will not, as Maria suggests, declare everyone who studies in this field to be a racist, but looking at your "research" (which doesn't deserve to be classified as such), you clearly have an underlying agenda which adds nothing to scientific knowledge.
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @SkepticReview89 @KirkegaardEmil and
Your notes reflect a certain paranoia that people are out to get you for your bad ideas--a stalker you name, etc. But it is likely that you have a misperception of the world--I am not going to diagnose you, but something's not right.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @SkepticReview89 @rasmansa and
Time for argument by internet diagnosis? Come on now. The stalker thing is plain to see for those who will look. His name is Oliver D Smith, he's well known for years of this behavior. Google him. He has made at least 398 edits to RatWiki in May alone. https://rationalwiki.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Tobias&offset=&limit=500&target=Tobias …pic.twitter.com/hfe0vPH6cf
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
@EPoe187 @BenWinegard Incidentally, I see that your page is coming up soon... He made the draft version.
-
-
Replying to @KirkegaardEmil @SkepticReview89 and
My very own rational wiki page!? Life goal unlocked.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes - 1 more reply
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.