>Doesn't science require replication? He wrote books based on un-replicated studies. People even publish studies on un-replicated research! There might be a lo

>Doesn't science require replication? He wrote books based on un-replicated studies. People even publish studies on un-replicated research! There might be a lot to be said about his research, but I disagree that publishing your research is the worst thing you can do. Maybe there wouldn't be any replication of his studies if it hadn't been for his books.