2 ms·
To respond to some concerns from marginalia_nu, I've spoken to Guzey once remotely and keep up with his writing from time to time. He is certainly not one to Gi
by ludicity 4y ago
To respond to some concerns from marginalia_nu, I've spoken to Guzey once remotely and keep up with his writing from time to time. He is certainly not one to Gish Gallop someone, and generally I've been impressed by his forthrightness.
Furthermore, Walker is aware of all the concerns raised in the original article (it was released a long time ago, not sure if it has been edited since). I dimly recall that most, if not all, of the concerns raised by Guzey turned out to be true. Walker essentially got away with it anyway. There's also a debate between the two of them on some British radio station, I believe, though at that point I declined to listen as I knew I'd get frustrated as it was clear you can just get away with this stuff.
What's doubly weird for me is that I spent a year doing research at a prestigious sleep lab when I was studying, and honestly feel that Guzey's writing elsewhere is weirdly hostile to the concept of sleep. I'm extremely careful about it myself, and absolutely have massive performance degradation if I get anything less than eight hours. I,e. I don't even understand why Guzey is so opposed to pro-sleep messaging, but I think that's irrelevant when discussing Walker's conduct in writing the book.
Asking Guzey to focus on just one or two undermines the thrust of his argument. Walker doesn't commit to a few big lies, truth throughout the entire first chapter is conveniently twisted for the sake of 'storytelling' that I saw done constantly in certain academic circles. The disdain for inconvenient facts (and oh boy, some of the graph edits seemed fraudulent to me when I last checked) is unacceptable if you have any respect for your audience or honesty. And I believe there was also a fabricated WHO quote? I just don't see how there can be nuance to this - the only thing I can see Walker hiding behind is a flimsy excuse like "it isn't a journal article". I don't expect pop science to be phenomenal, but I expect an academic not to falsify graphs: https://guzey.com/books/why-we-sleep/#appendix-what-do-you-do-when-a-part-of-the-graph-contradicts-your-argument-you-cut-it-out-of-course https://guzey.com/books/why-we-sleep/#appendix-what-do-you-d...
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]