[david-gpu]

> No, but there's a title "Lack of peer review" in your link.

You are moving the goalposts.

Earlier you said:

> It's not making an argument, it's describing. And describing is not taking action.

The example I provided shows how describing alone is enough to be accused of being an eugenicist. Rightly or wrongly, doesn't matter.

[jraph]

Fine, something not peer reviewed, crippled with fallacies posing as scientific material which describes falsehoods gets heavily criticized. This looks good to me. There are ways to reap storm by describing something false and by not doing one's homework, yes, I'm willing to believe this. Note that I was speaking about describing truth (implicit in the first paragraph, explicit in the second).

I'm not willing to engage further, our last argument two weeks ago [1] didn't end well and history seems to repeat itself. This won't lead to an interesting discussion.

edit: like last time, you could have stated your point instead of asking a loaded question and make me do your homework.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41338751#41356028