With all of the recent controversy over people calling to defund the police I think we need to think about possibly defunding certain so called peer-reviewed studies that have been receiving government (taxpayer) grant money as of late.
I am planning a lesson on ethics in psych research on stress and this is the perfect video to open with, thank you. Why are there so few vids about Stapel, I wonder? This was great. Thanks.
A problem I've been considering a lot lately... There seems to be a very large amount of activists in careers where activism entirely undermines their responsibilities. Particularly: journalism, science (especially social sciences) and teaching. Jobs that have the great responsibility of presenting information for highly significant decision making need to be done with great care and accuracy. Activists are likely to have extremely high levels of bias toward their ends. As these biases layer up over years (or decades), the price of falsifying deeply held beliefs becomes too high. It's a real problem.
In recent months I've been exploring what lies "beneath the narrative" on the climate debate, and was horrified to discover the same glaring issues found in the "scientific consensus" over aspects of covid. With the impact of the decisions being made on this "Science", we HAVE to discuss the flaws openly, without psychological tactics, smearing of scientists, relying heavily on modelling and science by press-release etc.
great video. Laid out very logical and easy to follow. Totally bummed about the power pose discrediting though. where is the category for science that you wish was true?
I kind of liked Oliver Burkeman's response ( www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2016/oct/21/do-power-poses-work-oliver-burkeman-public-talk-confident ) Basically, if you like doing it, there's no cost/harm, keep doing it. The effects may be limited to just reported feelings ("I like this"/"I feel more confident") and not known neuro/hormonal changes.
Yes! I have been hearing some things coming out of the "scientific community" and I wonder what is going on. Meat eaters are more selfish? My common sense bs meter went off.
I have a friend who refutes the possibility that the Big Bang Hypothesis is erroneous. He won't even consider the possibility that the Electric universe hypothesis holds valid credence.
I am going to go with albert einstien on this one, and say peer review is a gatekeeping method to keep folks from shaking up science to much. Just publish science whehter its peer review or not.
Great topic but I'd suggest cutting back on the exaggerated facial expressions. Half the shot is your face and it's constantly moving around, over-stressing every single word, you change 2-3 facial expressions in a second, and in my opinion it's really distracting and anxiety-inducing. You could tone it down, or maybe make the shot a lot larger/wider so that your face is a bit more diffused and not that dominant.
Eh, a study does not go trough ONE peer review, they go trough peer review all the time,. Famous scientists are peer reviewed thousands of times, I have personally peer reviewed Dawkins whern at magistrate level. One single peer review that proves a famous scientists wrong, even if made by just a bachelor student, and it will be out. Anyone, attending any university, can peer review any scientist.
@@nicolem889 I have evidence to back it up. While taking soci 1301 about 2 years ago the professor was grading me poorly on my essay responses to some of the topics like gender conformity and topics along the lines of social imagination. I'm a black male with moderate views but I lean toward traditionalism but u can say I'm quite humanitarian. I was a classic liberal before Democrats started to get infested with insane virtue signaling. My ideas did not fit this professors ideas so I was constantly getting knocked off points from my essay scores. The minute I started writing my essays with a extreme progressive left leaning slant my scores immediately jumped. The last couple of essays and short film reviews have been damn near perfect scores. Not just soci 1301, but a lot of other classes in humanities that I applied this too and started receiving higher scores. The only thing that this rot can't infiltrate is stems because it requires hard facts other then ideologies. Academia is no longer a place for learning but a place for indoctrination.
@@mysticlegion8088 So your evidence is 1 personal account that we have to take your word for? Ignore the fact its 1 university, a few classes, and you are conflating that to all of academia. I'm more inclined to believe you're just stupid and were a poor student. "Academia is infested with liberal biased thinking so a lot of peer reviews are getting through that normally wouldn't." Lol the problem with line of thinking is that's not how science works, anyone and everyone has access to the scientific literature if a bad paper makes it through its quickly weeded out. There is no liberal bias, I'm sorry if your conservatives ideologies clash with science that's a you problem.
@@bio0link ua-cam.com/video/EZa0Xihih9w/v-deo.html I can show you tons of links of how corrupted peer reviews have become. How about do some research. But judging from your anger it doesn't matter. Plus how am I'm being stupid if I'm earning high scores by just writing far left progressive ideas without really providing ref? I've helped several others do the same. Perhaps you need to work on your reading comprehension skills or maybe go to anger management. Get mad all you want, academia is biased and corrupted.
With all of the recent controversy over people calling to defund the police I think we need to think about possibly defunding certain so called peer-reviewed studies that have been receiving government (taxpayer) grant money as of late.
I am planning a lesson on ethics in psych research on stress and this is the perfect video to open with, thank you. Why are there so few vids about Stapel, I wonder? This was great. Thanks.
A problem I've been considering a lot lately...
There seems to be a very large amount of activists in careers where activism entirely undermines their responsibilities.
Particularly: journalism, science (especially social sciences) and teaching.
Jobs that have the great responsibility of presenting information for highly significant decision making need to be done with great care and accuracy.
Activists are likely to have extremely high levels of bias toward their ends.
As these biases layer up over years (or decades), the price of falsifying deeply held beliefs becomes too high.
It's a real problem.
In recent months I've been exploring what lies "beneath the narrative" on the climate debate, and was horrified to discover the same glaring issues found in the "scientific consensus" over aspects of covid.
With the impact of the decisions being made on this "Science", we HAVE to discuss the flaws openly, without psychological tactics, smearing of scientists, relying heavily on modelling and science by press-release etc.
great video. Laid out very logical and easy to follow. Totally bummed about the power pose discrediting though. where is the category for science that you wish was true?
I read Amy Cuddy's response posted with the article by NPR and I still find some of her arguments compelling...
I kind of liked Oliver Burkeman's response ( www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2016/oct/21/do-power-poses-work-oliver-burkeman-public-talk-confident )
Basically, if you like doing it, there's no cost/harm, keep doing it. The effects may be limited to just reported feelings ("I like this"/"I feel more confident") and not known neuro/hormonal changes.
Yes! I have been hearing some things coming out of the "scientific community" and I wonder what is going on. Meat eaters are more selfish? My common sense bs meter went off.
Thank you, for your work! All videos are very informative!
I don't know why but you're emotional presentation is very engaging. Well done.
I have a friend who refutes the possibility that the Big Bang Hypothesis is erroneous. He won't even consider the possibility that the Electric universe hypothesis holds valid credence.
I am going to go with albert einstien on this one, and say peer review is a gatekeeping method to keep folks from shaking up science to much. Just publish science whehter its peer review or not.
And he said all that in one breath. 😶
Important topic, but the was of Presentation is just bad.
”... the was of Presentation” is pretty bad too
Great topic but I'd suggest cutting back on the exaggerated facial expressions. Half the shot is your face and it's constantly moving around, over-stressing every single word, you change 2-3 facial expressions in a second, and in my opinion it's really distracting and anxiety-inducing.
You could tone it down, or maybe make the shot a lot larger/wider so that your face is a bit more diffused and not that dominant.
Pretty entertaining
Eh, a study does not go trough ONE peer review, they go trough peer review all the time,. Famous scientists are peer reviewed thousands of times, I have personally peer reviewed Dawkins whern at magistrate level. One single peer review that proves a famous scientists wrong, even if made by just a bachelor student, and it will be out.
Anyone, attending any university, can peer review any scientist.
@@nicolem889 Academia is infested with liberal biased thinking so a lot of peer reviews are getting through that normally wouldn't.
@@nicolem889 I have evidence to back it up. While taking soci 1301 about 2 years ago the professor was grading me poorly on my essay responses to some of the topics like gender conformity and topics along the lines of social imagination.
I'm a black male with moderate views but I lean toward traditionalism but u can say I'm quite humanitarian. I was a classic liberal before Democrats started to get infested with insane virtue signaling.
My ideas did not fit this professors ideas so I was constantly getting knocked off points from my essay scores.
The minute I started writing my essays with a extreme progressive left leaning slant my scores immediately jumped. The last couple of essays and short film reviews have been damn near perfect scores.
Not just soci 1301, but a lot of other classes in humanities that I applied this too and started receiving higher scores. The only thing that this rot can't infiltrate is stems because it requires hard facts other then ideologies.
Academia is no longer a place for learning but a place for indoctrination.
@@mysticlegion8088 So your evidence is 1 personal account that we have to take your word for? Ignore the fact its 1 university, a few classes, and you are conflating that to all of academia. I'm more inclined to believe you're just stupid and were a poor student.
"Academia is infested with liberal biased thinking so a lot of peer reviews are getting through that normally wouldn't."
Lol the problem with line of thinking is that's not how science works, anyone and everyone has access to the scientific literature if a bad paper makes it through its quickly weeded out. There is no liberal bias, I'm sorry if your conservatives ideologies clash with science that's a you problem.
@@bio0link ua-cam.com/video/EZa0Xihih9w/v-deo.html
I can show you tons of links of how corrupted peer reviews have become. How about do some research. But judging from your anger it doesn't matter.
Plus how am I'm being stupid if I'm earning high scores by just writing far left progressive ideas without really providing ref? I've helped several others do the same. Perhaps you need to work on your reading comprehension skills or maybe go to anger management.
Get mad all you want, academia is biased and corrupted.
@@bio0link you can't just say you can identify as whatever you want and call it science 🤣🤣