if you ask me a question and state it as a "genuine question" but actually want to link a "study" to "show that im wrong" on "twitter" i am likely to "flame your ass" for "violating the trust i implicitly gave you in spending precious seconds answering your initial question"https://twitter.com/DanielFarberPhd/status/1425744168274382848 …
-
-
Replying to @eigenrobot
i think it’s more like climate is a sexy topic, weed is a sexy topic, so climate apocalypse weed (sounds like a good strain) is great in the mind of an editor. these reporters are too proud to make something deliberately bad, and politico’s business model isn’t clicks.
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @ajaxexact @eigenrobot
They also genuinely don't know what numbers mean.
3 replies 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @LudditeHacker @eigenrobot
ya, they mostly call professors or think tankers (or government/lobbyists lol) for that. not awesome, but the rationalist “backyard meta-analysis” isn’t gonna fly in a serious pub. also math skill might trade off against (social) skill with sources at some margin.
3 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @ajaxexact @LudditeHacker
if the serious pub brought you to this of what use was the serious pub
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
ive gotten embarrassing stuff into a "good" epidemiology journal
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.