Please don’t use fallacies in that way. They are not automatic game overs and can be part of reasonable arguments. Yes, a warning light should go on in your he

Please don’t use fallacies in that way. They are not automatic game overs and can be part of reasonable arguments. Yes, a warning light should go on in your head when someone uses a fallacy – but they can be very useful shortcuts – and if not presented in isolation, i.e. without any further argument, they are usually not so problematic (and discussions shouldn’t then be derailed by only focusing only on fallacies). When scientists decide how to filter which information to take in they usually always rely – as a first step – on arguments from authority or (if you reverse it) ad-hominems. There is no time to check everything based on its merits. Journals exist to increase efficiency, as a first-defense shit filter. Considering the repute of a journal and the editors involved as a first step makes total sense. Phil Plait is not a biologist. If he wouldn’t write for Slate about stuff like this, he probably would have seen the name of the journal, recognized it as extremely problematic and dismissed the research as most likely bullshit. And that’s that. It’s a perfectly valid approach. So much crap is published every day, there just isn’t enough time to consider everything based on its merits. Even though there really isn’t much of a need in this case, Phil Plait doesn’t stop there and pushes further, presenting some very solid arguments for why this research is bullshit, going even so far as to directly consulting experts in the field. If that’s not thorough (for a non-scientific publication, you know, a blog post) I don’t know what is. Yeah, Phil Plait has a writing style that isn’t for everyone (I’m personally not a huge fan, but I still like him), but really, you are putting style over substance there. All the while you drone on about ad-hominems, only to launch a huge one yourself. You completely ignore his arguments in favor of the writing style. Conclusion: This research is bullshit. Plus, if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out (says Tim Minchin). And Phil Plait has an axe to grind. With bad science. And that it’s bad is something he quite elegantly demonstrates. There is no need to stay perfectly neutral in tone when you discuss obviously bad science.