Right, because professional researchers and academics have never been blinkered by biases or had financial motives to publish certain things or the fact that most published research is unreproducible horseshit. I don’t need a meta-analyses and cross corroborated studies to know something works for me despite all the published reasons that say it shouldn’t (or vice versa). Pathetic attempt at gatekeeping IMO completely forgetting that most research is in fact based on tinkering and trial & error. Professional researchers are not magically immune to human biases and fallacies, case in point thalidomide, trans fats, “heart healthy” seed oils etc etc.
- 0 Posts
- 4 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
Cake day: April 1st, 2024
You are not logged in. If you use a Fediverse account that is able to follow users, you can follow this user.
Good question! It is hard to find off-hand examples on English YouTube admittedly but below screenshot is representative of the kind of opinions you see brandished on Israeli media regularly and cheered on in Telegram channels. For context, Ofira Asayag is a major TV personality in Israel.


Edit: ‘moderate’ Israeli podcasters openly calling for erasing of all life in Gaza, asserting what they called “typical opinions” across the nation.
sazey@lemmy.worldto
Selfhosted@lemmy.world•Pi-Hole question / Blocked Queries being reset each day?English
6·2 years agoAlthough not exactly what you are looking for (ie custom counters on the landing page), you can view counters you are after on another page under ‘Long-term Data > Query Log’





Peer review isn’t an infallible process, it has been shown to be super susceptible to cronyism for example, and even outside of it churns out a vast array of (mostly) useless unreproducible, or sometimes even entirely fraudulent, research. I don’t even have a problem with the former part, research is actually a lot more tinkering and trial based than some set-in-stone endeavour and it certainly wouldn’t hurt the good Ms Sparado to remember that.
I am paraphrasing the post from memory but it came across extremely gatekeepy and condescending with the “but have you conducted double blind trials like I have?” (or sentiments to that effect) as if those are the only valid ways of conducting research. Not even a slight sign of humility in how much researchers and academics have got wrong themselves and maybe to use that as an example in caution when doing your own research.