Yeah he just makes stuff up.
He will make up a reference, then say a 10 minute youtube synopsis of a study based on 10,000 hours of observation is useless and can't possibly contain anything useful.
And I have a reference.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aerohead
contextual.
manipulative.
inaccurate.
not only cherry-picked, but a 'paid to publish' paper, simply to imply to the audience, the appearance of consensus and validation within the broader scientific community.
extreme confirmation bias.
audacity to attempt to reduce a required 10,000-hours of study, down to a 10-minute sound bite.
completely lacking in scientific rigor.
failure to defend premise.
easy to understand why broadcasts would repeatedly come under fire.
I don't see any real science demonstrated, only effective marketing attempts towards an audience which is more uninformed than the author.
an un-regulated, non-juried internet is a double-edged sword.
caveat emptor.
|
Pretty much anything he doesn't agree with is always wrong, or the person who wrote it is stupid or lives in a trailer park. He spends more time digging up dirt on the messenger than the what's in question.
__________________
1984 chevy suburban, custom made 6.5L diesel turbocharged with a Garrett T76 and Holset HE351VE, 22:1 compression 13psi of intercooled boost.
1989 firebird mostly stock. Aside from the 6-speed manual trans, corvette gen 5 front brakes, 1LE drive shaft, 4th Gen disc brake fbody rear end.
2011 leaf SL, white, portable 240v CHAdeMO, trailer hitch, new batt as of 2014.
Last edited by oil pan 4; 07-26-2021 at 04:57 PM..
|