| > This article was later debunked by experts who have taken time and effort to do that It was debunked by a single non-academic with no publishing track record, who is currently completing a master's thesis. In other words it could have been debunked by anyone. > the article passes the peer-reviewing process because the peer-reviewing process does what it is supposed to do Indeed, it passed the process because the process is designed to create the illusion of consensus and credibility without actually blocking false claims. It worked wonderfully here. > I think there is a problem with layman people Yes that's right, those unwashed masses who expect scholars to not make shit up, who are these scoundrels? Do they not understand how the great processes of discovery work? > social sciences or history are ideologically biased. This is a valid hypothesis, but not the only one explaining what we observe. Yes it is the only one explaining what we observe. The claims were made up, completed with fake references, there is no scope for statistical P-hacking "oh bad luck old boy" explanations here (not that they're acceptable anyway). It's not just scholars, the whole left is like this. Black Woman With Magical Powers is by now a Netflix trope. You can guess the plot of a lot of post-2015 Hollywood output just by looking at the race of the characters. This sort of scam is exactly what we'd expect from an academic culture in a state of advanced decay. |