Edit - Addendum: The video title is quite clickbait-y. The video doesn’t want to debunk any “serious” science, but rather investigates how badly done research with no reproducability or horrible statistical significance is used to influence the discourse in favour of regressive politics.

  • PrunebuttOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    29 days ago

    You can admit that you don’t like her style without claiming bullshit about a video you didn’t watch, homie.

    • rah@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      29 days ago

      You can admit that you don’t like her style

      WTF are you talking about?

      • PrunebuttOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        29 days ago

        Why else would you judge the video after you’ve only watched the intro?

        • rah@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          29 days ago

          I judged the video based on the introduction. Which is part of the purpose of having an introduction: to decide whether it’s worth investing one’s time and attention in what’s being introduced.

          • PrunebuttOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            29 days ago

            The introduction mostly showed the style of the creator. And it also showed published evopsych papers which the video was about to debunk. It didn’t even mention any “idiot on the internet”.