All you need to know about how bad a take this article is is that the author cites Rupert Sheldrake and Dean Radin as "researchers" who, according to him, were treated unfairly by Randi, while he characterizes @GSoW_team as waging a "freewheeling digital jihad on Wikipedia."
https://twitter.com/MitchHorowitz/status/1320836372257714176 …
-
-
Well, I think that'a a pretty dangerous slippery slope personally. That's a bit like saying we should discount all of Isaac Newton's work, theories and findings - because along with the laws of gravity etc he also investigated and researched alchemy & many pseudo"occult" subjects
-
He’s arguing that the specific research is trash, just like Newton’s research into alchemy and the occult was trash. But this takes nothing away from his other work, which stands today not because it was Newton’s work, but because the science has supported it’s validity.
- Show replies
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.