Evan Urquhart

Yeah, I misunderstood what Jesse meant. I thought he was defending ROGD research, but he took three tweets and obscured my name to point out that I’d once been slightly hyperbolic in the comments section a year ago.

"...to point out that I’d once been slightly hyperbolic in the comments section a year ago." Listen Evan, I had never heard of you until this morning. When you lay on ham-fisted spin like this, it tells me that you are an unreliable source for information.

Oh, my bad, man. Here’s the straight news reporter version: Jesse Singal does not think I should have used the word “easily” in the Slate comments section on Jan 14, 2019.

He agrees with me that there’s no scientific evidence of ROGD’s existence.

How about this Evan? "We all agree that ROGD is a new concept that has not been studied yet in a robust way, and it is possible to do so but difficult."

How about "We all agree there's no scientific evidence for ROGD, as such evidence would need to meet the usual standards for scientific knowledge. Such standards are rigorous, which can provide barriers to non-researchers."

That's a factual statement, do you agree mine is as well? As you are no doubt aware, your version would make it sound to a casual observer like ROGD is false. We all know better, but we're more scientifically literate then the average person.

Yeah, absolutely- both our statements were accurate, with yours slanted to make ROGD sound true but understudied, mine slanted to make it sound false but understudied. Of course the truth is we don't know, w/ me (likely) more skeptical the evidence will show anything than you.