Ya, but the fact that his research is still thought at school, his textbooks are still used as material, and that I'm not seeing an openly acknowledging crowd o

Ya, but the fact that his research is still thought at school, his textbooks are still used as material, and that I'm not seeing an openly acknowledging crowd of newer psychologist going: "Oh ya, we know about the methodoligical flaws in Zimbardo's research, and today's research is completly different, way more rigorous, and no one uses his data points for anything serious anymore..." makes me worried there's a pathological trend in the field. Which is why I openly asked for people to reassure me I'm wrong to believe that the science of psychology is bogus. I've yet to see any data point or argument to reassure me by the way, I've only seen people be dismissive or point that I shouldn't generalise like that. The latter is true, but also doesn't mean my hypothesis is not correct.