I'm an editor, and you're just wrong here. Your review describes as "oft-recited" a term that the book never uses even once. It's the kind of carelessness with facts made by an aggressive advocate, not a scientist engaged in the disinterested pursuit of truth.
-
-
I've debated writing a post about the parallels, but after the
-storm we've been dealing with since Dr. Hall posted her review, I just don't know if I'm ready to compound it right now. Maybe in a week or two (or three).Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I'm glad its not just me! I realize that it isn't practically feasible to have vaccine-like levels of certainty here, but the way that a whole movement and narrative has formed around a single low quality paper really does give me some serious deja vu.
-
The science doesn't have to be as settled as, say, evolution, vaccines, climate science, etc., for opponents to use denialist techniques. It's about the deceptive techniques of argumentation, not how settled the science behind the topic being attacked is.
- 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.