2 ms·

> Hence why there is a replication crisis. Also, perhaps, why politicians and activists have so much influence on science. Which doesn't contradict what I sai

> Hence why there is a replication crisis. Also, perhaps, why politicians and activists have so much influence on science. Which doesn't contradict what I said at all, but confirms it: they do have that influence. Requesting "strong evidence" isn't much of a solution unless you have some concrete ideas about how to obtain that. > There are many claims can be proven that aren't social science ... Maybe look into something like medecine or physics Social science is the field where politics trumps science. It's what I'm talking about. Politicians and activists don't care about physics and everyone wants people to have effective medicine, so there's no conflict in those fields.

dmbche 3y ago
I disagree - feel free to try and find an example of your claim
- leereeves 3y ago
  I've already cited examples. You dismissed them because they don't fit your arbitrary narrow criteria. Want another? Stephen Hsu. Forced to resign for discussing research that found no racial bias in incidents of officer-involved shootings. Another? After more than a decade at Harvard without complaints, Roland Fryer had several complaints filed against him shortly after he published research showing that Black and Hispanic Americans were no more likely than white Americans to be shot by police in a given interaction with police. I'm sure you'll find reasons to dismiss these as well. Edit: As I said, Roland Fryer was at Harvard for more than a decade without incident. It's more than a little suspicious that there was an investigation immediately after he published his research. And are you just going to ignore Stephen Hsu? Edit 2: "I gladly will not research your claims further" I knew you wouldn't in the first place. You've been dismissing any evidence that contradicts your narrow world view. Edit 3: "Feel free to eat bags friend". I see you've deleted that and all your other unreasonable comments. I'll leave the quotes here though, because you did say these things. Edit 4: "why keep editing your comment?" Because HN admins don't like long threads like this and have set up a rule that says I'm "posting too fast".
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]

dmbche 3y ago

I disagree - feel free to try and find an example of your claim

leereeves 3y ago
I've already cited examples. You dismissed them because they don't fit your arbitrary narrow criteria. Want another? Stephen Hsu. Forced to resign for discussing research that found no racial bias in incidents of officer-involved shootings. Another? After more than a decade at Harvard without complaints, Roland Fryer had several complaints filed against him shortly after he published research showing that Black and Hispanic Americans were no more likely than white Americans to be shot by police in a given interaction with police. I'm sure you'll find reasons to dismiss these as well. Edit: As I said, Roland Fryer was at Harvard for more than a decade without incident. It's more than a little suspicious that there was an investigation immediately after he published his research. And are you just going to ignore Stephen Hsu? Edit 2: "I gladly will not research your claims further" I knew you wouldn't in the first place. You've been dismissing any evidence that contradicts your narrow world view. Edit 3: "Feel free to eat bags friend". I see you've deleted that and all your other unreasonable comments. I'll leave the quotes here though, because you did say these things. Edit 4: "why keep editing your comment?" Because HN admins don't like long threads like this and have set up a rule that says I'm "posting too fast".
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]