Comment on Metal Exclusionary Radical Astronomy
powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works 4 days agoSo you don’t have a mass of articles then
Comment on Metal Exclusionary Radical Astronomy
powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works 4 days agoSo you don’t have a mass of articles then
a_non_monotonic_function@lemmy.world 4 days ago
Man, you argued blog posts over the lancet. You keep thinking I owe you something.
What is your PhD in?
powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works 4 days ago
So you still have nothing?
a_non_monotonic_function@lemmy.world 4 days ago
What did you bring. To the table?
You can’t bring piss and expect the rest of us to care.
So, you don’t actually have a single credential? I asked pretty directly.
powerstruggle@sh.itjust.works 4 days ago
I’m irrelevant. The science is what matters.
This article that was peer reviewed and cites sources:
link.springer.com/article/…/s10508-025-03348-3
Here’s another source that people have linked to, thinking it supports their argument. Sex Redefined
In fact, the author states:
Two papers demonstrating that you’re wrong, and both better than anything you’ve linked to. Note that I linked these already and you apparently didn’t bother reading them, but maybe try again? I’d love it for you if you tried learning.