Comment on Metal Exclusionary Radical Astronomy
a_non_monotonic_function@lemmy.world 3 days agoYou posted two blog as evidence because the authors are really smart. The anthropologist is at the top of her field, and this is her area of expertise.
But, please, keep lecturing about the quality of sources.
powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works 3 days ago
I mentioned why credentials are relevant, but also directly addressed the meat of that opinion piece. Why are you ignoring that?
Also, it’s not just that they’re really smart lol. They have PhDs in biology and evolutionary biology. One is professor emeritus at the University of Chicago. They can be wrong, but looking at an opinion piece from an anthropologist is the same as “let’s hear what RFK has to say about vaccines” lol. Just because RFK has some wackadoodle opinion doesn’t mean the science isn’t settled
a_non_monotonic_function@lemmy.world 3 days ago
OK, I’ll spell it out, then. You don’t come off as someone who knows much of anything. You are using blog posts and bullshit argument papers as actual sources beyond “trust me bro.” There is a reason you are spinning your wheels on this post endlessly without actually resolving anything. You have no authority. Being a emeritus is honestly pretty meaningless–that shit gets given out all the time. Having a PhD has nothing to do with it. Lots of people have those. It isn’t as difficult as you make it sound.
When it comes to the trade of ideas, you are just coming off as a conservative troll. If the definitions were that settled, no on would be publishing them in peer reviewed environments for the common folk, or whatever. If I wanted to defend the notion of primality, I would pull up a definition. It really is that simple.
Lots of people do.
The truth is you haven’t made a single convincing argument, and I’m still waiting for a source that isn’t on wordpress.
My PhD is not in biology, but your arguments and sources are flaccid at best.
What the fuck does RFK have to do with anything? And this is probably the stupidest claim. Science doesn’t get settled, it gets consensus and that changes. If you want to do something more powerful than consensus, try some math or something.
This is the thing–you have ad homonyms, wordpress, and heaps of “this is a very smart guy’s blog.” From all of the posts that is literally all that I see that you have.
I can’t say you are definitively wrong, despite the mass of articles I found without effort that say otherwise, but you have zero ability to back up your own bullshit.
powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works 2 days ago
Everyone here would love to see this mass of articles that you totally found without effort lol.
I’ve linked to actual papers that cite many sources, and also blogs from people with highly relevant credentials, respected in their field. I’m not personally making arguments, merely pointing out that the overwhelming consensus is that sex is binary, according to experts in the field.
You have nothing, so you’re reverting to insults. Do better.
a_non_monotonic_function@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Do you even possess a PhD in your subject? For real–how many publications are under your belt? You don’t seem to have significant information literacy or skill at argumentation. I’m not being deliberately crass, I’m pointing out that you have not convinced a single soul in these replies.
The sad part is that everyone is literally just you. You aren’t convincing anyone, just flailing and giving WordPress blogs and a bunch of “trust me bro.”
You can’t run around posting piss and expecting everyone to hold some imaginary standard for their replies.