5 ms·
Some of these academic fields are just wild. I'm not sure whether I should be impressed or highly sceptical of this paper.
by widforss 2y ago
Some of these academic fields are just wild. I'm not sure whether I should be impressed or highly sceptical of this paper.
- rf15 2y agoIt's an interesting observation nonetheless. I didn't expect the stories to be so similar.
- jhguutjn 2y agoAs an archaeological anthropologist with a classics background, this is extremely cringe and is not at all representative of the research that I or my colleagues produce. Check out the affiliations of the authors, they're both astronomers. They've taken it upon themselves to do research in fields they seem to have no experience in, nor does it seem that they engaged in any effort at interdisciplinary collaboration. Not that any anthropologist or classicist would ever want to put their name on this as it is currently drafted....
- MichaelZuo 2y agoCan you provide some evidence of your experience? A pseudonymous 1 hour old account with only 1 comment is hard to take seriously.
- jhguutjn 2y agoFeel free to believe or not believe that I am experienced in this field. Not sure why it really matters, to be honest.
- MichaelZuo 2y agoYeah that’s why I suggested you to provide some evidence, otherwise there’s zero credibility and the claims and comment likely do not matter whatsoever.
- jhguutjn 2y agoWrong. My response to the commenter who seemingly dismissed whole branches of research based on misidentification of the authors' backgrounds is valid. You don't have to be an expert practitioner to (a) read and verify the departmental affiliations of the original authors, (b) draw attention to others' misconceptions, and (c) express your informed opinion on the internet.
- MichaelZuo 2y agoThis doesn’t even make sense. You can’t gain credibility just by asserting x, y, and z from a basis of zero.