As a scientist, you could always start off with my interview series with 18 of the worlds foremost experts on human intelligence: http://www.fdrurl.com/iq https://twitter.com/ScientistMel/status/1156253904830685184 …
-
-
You have no sources. She's absolutely correct. Citing yourself falls under a number of fallacies. You suck at this, bud. Just let it go.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
If Mel won't say it, I will. I'm sorry you think those are sources.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
hahah that is funny now ..
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
sir this is a wendy's
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
So the papers the interviewees wrote and discuss in the interviews aren’t cited in the content? Ok.
-
Because those interviews are not good enough to make his claim scientific. If he wrote an elaborate thesis on content of the interviews and then added proper sources that support his claim we are somewhat closer to something you could call "scientific" maybe
- 7 more replies
New conversation -
-
Is it a coincidence that you fail to mention that many of those experts regret that they did the interviews with you, because you misrepresent their findings?https://twitter.com/ent3c/status/987678582163025921 …
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Sophist never change their tune. They offer no evidence just assertion and no evidence. She claims the moral good does that for her. Very scientific.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Sick em Stefan! Get em!!!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.