You actually don't get to assign people disciplines on Twitter. What you are doing is wrong, Genevieve. But it appears you have no interest in listening to the many, many people who are in these disciplines trying to tell you that. Instead, you say we are attacking you.
-
And why do you think it's wrong if that's what your own research shows? I'm completely baffled!
I am similarly baffled. @leahstokes, I respect you and your work immensely. I've benefitted so much from your work and ideas. I don't understand, but would sincerely like to, why @DoctorVive's pushback is so upsetting to you. She hasn't hasn't called him a shill... 1/
-
-
I believe she is engaging with this topic in good faith. She's coming from a good place and raising questions that, I believe, certainly should be raised. I know her tone can be biting at times and rub people the wrong way (maybe that's a factor in what's been upsetting). But, 2/
-
I'm thankful that we're having this discussion. And I truly don't understand why more aren't raising the same concerns
@doctorvive has raised. I can't find anything to disagree with@doctorvive on the points below, specifically. But I am very open to hearing where I'm wrong. /endpic.twitter.com/zTNnmZV1Ny
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
A few weeks ago she got similar flack for an analysis of the Sanders plan in which she ignored specific language that called for a relicensing moratorium of nukes rather than an unconditional shutdown.
-
I cannot believe all these energy/climate experts are out here defending this guy. He got $7.5 million for his programs from an oil major and is pushing PETE BUTTIGIEG for president. Jfc. He’s made some bad decisions, and experts should be questioning him *not* his critics
- 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.