3 ms·
> They're responding to a paper that seems flawed based on the evidence presented. No, they're probably right about the papers they mention—they both seem pret
by mcphage 3y ago
> They're responding to a paper that seems flawed based on the evidence presented.
No, they're probably right about the papers they mention—they both seem pretty bad. But the "jumping to conclusions from a very small sample" refers to saying that "historians are destroying their own discipline", because of these bunk papers.
- kbenson 3y agoI think the conclusion is not just from the papers, but from what appears to be widespread support regardless of criticism. The sampling is not one or two papers in that respect, it's multiple well known historians and at least one well known group of historians coming our strongly in support publicly.