3 ms·
I'm sorry but group think is a serious issue. And this is a major attack on basic science. We are swapping in wife's tales for fact. You mightn't think it does
by aaron695 12y ago
I'm sorry but group think is a serious issue. And this is a major attack on basic science. We are swapping in wife's tales for fact.
You mightn't think it doesn't matter on this issue, but it does. Sleep is an incredibly important part of our lives and has major health ramifications.
This split sleep idea, comes up again and again and again and is stated as fact without even question, there's no 'one theory thinks'. This is an insane way for us to be acting in the age of science.
It is obviously fiction. There's 7 billion people on earth. 2.5+ billion people on less than $2 per day. Over a billion without electricity. You don't get much more medieval than that but we have to rely on cold reading documents hundreds of years old?
If it was a one off then I mightn't care. But it's common form on the web for many topics. We need to find a way of stopping it.
If I sounded mean to be heard, then so be it, I'm happy to be downvoted, that's what downvoting is for, changing behaviour.
Hopefully people will see there's upvotes to be had and move in with nicer ways of saying it or prove me wrong and get even more up votes. Anything that's gets us out of these topics based solely on magic.
- Apocryphon 12y agoThere's a big difference between Ekirch's biphasic sleep model and the pseduoscientific polyphasic sleep lifehack popularized on the internet. If this theory is really so corrosive and wrong, why have no other experts attacked it?
- aaron695 12y agoRoger Ekirch is a historian. Why has no scientist confirmed it? Group think is my theory.