4 ms·
I appreciate her original intent, shining light on hypocrisy and bad science. 20% of what she puts out is great. Watching her maul some crappy paper is like wa
by sitkack 2y ago
I appreciate her original intent, shining light on hypocrisy and bad science. 20% of what she puts out is great.
Watching her maul some crappy paper is like watching a high school wrestler take down a 6th grader. It gets old quickly, esp when she is way outside of her domain knowledge.
Still not as bad when a CS person thinks their years of solving hard problems translates into a domain they know nothing about.
- barbazoo 2y ago> Watching her maul some crappy paper is like watching a high school wrestler take down a 6th grader. What makes you think this is "some crappy paper" not worth criticizing, especially after it's been picked up by the mainstream media? https://www.worldweatherattribution.org/climate-change-increased-the-likelihood-of-wildfire-disaster-in-highly-exposed-los-angeles-area/ https://www.worldweatherattribution.org/climate-change-incre...
- sitkack 2y agoI am not talking about this specific paper, it could "deserve it", I am talking about the format of her channel, where she picks apart some poor postdocs publish or perish paper and smokes it into the ground. She amps everything up like she is performing for MSNBC and it is exhausting. I am good with this thread, I capitulate, just not as much a Schumer.