Because its a wonderful example of pseudoscience and false conclusions. Because its sample sizes and subject pools are far too restrictive to be considered even remotely generalizable. Because it is riddled with observer bias. Because despite the author's claims to work with demographical and statistical data, he hasn't actually shown credentials. Because it serves no purpose other than provide already common knowledge about a very small sub-genre.
Pretty much because its a piss poor excuse for science in general and has no real bearing or impact. It is intellectual masturbation.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-01-17 07:46 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-17 08:48 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-17 11:44 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-01-18 12:09 pm (UTC)Because its a wonderful example of pseudoscience and false conclusions. Because its sample sizes and subject pools are far too restrictive to be considered even remotely generalizable. Because it is riddled with observer bias. Because despite the author's claims to work with demographical and statistical data, he hasn't actually shown credentials. Because it serves no purpose other than provide already common knowledge about a very small sub-genre.
Pretty much because its a piss poor excuse for science in general and has no real bearing or impact. It is intellectual masturbation.
no subject
Date: 2009-01-19 05:28 am (UTC)Seriously. So serious about everything. =P