I thought it's a scientific study, not a protest against a political regime? 
-
-
It was a metaphor. From the knee-jerk reactions to this hoax, you can safely conclude that the disciplines in question perceived it as protest.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @DorianGray321 @gorskon and
So let's talk about the study then. I said it's unethical to lie to people over the course of a study, and in cases where it seems justified to do so, the least you could do is debrief the people you lied to afterwards.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
1. They were not lied to. It was tested, if BS Paper would pass the oder review. 2. If you lied to people, for a study, I agree with you.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @DorianGray321 @gorskon and
When you hand in a paper you click on the little checkmark that says you followed scientific standards, generated the data yourself, etc. So, clicking that checkmark when you didn't do those things means you're lying.
3 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
Yes. The *whole point* being that the reviewers are not able to identify, if those standards are met, because of intellectual corruption and a tremendeous amount of BS published as "science" being around.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @DorianGray321 @RayTski and
No. Peer review does not detect fraud. That is known. Science functions on the honor system. You don’t expect to have to counter deception and peer review is well known to do poorly at it. It’s proven nothing.
3 replies 0 retweets 9 likes -
Replying to @MarkHoofnagle @DorianGray321 and
"It is known." But seriously, Mark's correct. Peer review is pretty bad at detecting fraud, especially in a context like this. Peer review *can* sometimes detect fraud, but it's usually post-publication review that leads to investigations that turn up fraud.pic.twitter.com/bhxyRpUtDJ
2 replies 0 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @gorskon @MarkHoofnagle and
That Boghossian thinks his study/hoax was so damning just reveals how little he knew about the subject he was claiming to study, in addition to his utter ignorance about human subjects research ethics and regulations.
3 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
No, his public statements and attempt to play the martyr demonstrates quite clearly his cluelessness.
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.