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.

  • rah
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    29 days ago

    She discusses several professors of evopsych with published papers, like Geoffrey Miller and David Buss.

    Discussing evolutionary psychology professors instead of discussing evolutionary psychology? Another reason not to bother.

    • Prunebutt@slrpnk.netOP
      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
        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?

          • rah
            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.

            • Prunebutt@slrpnk.netOP
              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”.