[digdigdag]

His evidence is based on predetermined assumptions. He does not even have the scientific background to even tackle this area of study. It's not even that he said something controversial. He made crude errors in his research that would have made a respectable sociologist laugh him out the door.

[scottlocklin]

Citations needed: the subject requires basic statistics to make assertions on. Pretty sure he was qualified to do so.

Also pretty sure psychometric researchers say exactly what Strumia said as any fool with google or wikipedia could determine. His only crime is having the temerity to stand up to imbeciles who insist on conspiracy theories to explain the comparative lack of female achievement in physics.

[merpnderp]

What makes you claim his research has been reviewed? The article makes it sound like it was never peer reviewed and the people debunking it are doing so merely from his claims, not his methods and data.