One thing science fetishists can’t bear is to have their obvious ignorance of science pointed out:
Babak Golshahi @bgolshahi1
I love being able to back up what I say with hard evidence, peer reviewed scientific consensus.Supreme Dark Lord @voxday
50 percent of which is proven to be wrong when replication is attempted. You’re out of date.Babak Golshahi @bgolshahi1
replication of what? You got a peer reviewed piece or really any article that backs up your claim? Waiting.Supreme Dark Lord @voxday
Mindlessly repeating the words “peer review” and citing “articles” shows you’re a low-IQ ignoramus.Babak Golshahi @bgolshahi1
you apologize for that or you’re blockedSupreme Dark Lord @voxday
Block away, moron. It won’t fix peer review or change the fact that you’re both stupid and ignorant.Babak Golshahi @bgolshahi1
You are blocked from following @bgolshahi1 and viewing @bgolshahi1’s Tweets.
I wish more of these morons would use Randi Harper’s anti-GG autoblocker, so I wouldn’t be subjected to their repetitive idiocy.
It is important to understand that if you’re prone to demanding “peer reviewed pieces” or shouting “logical fallacy” at people with whom you are arguing, you’re probably a midwit who doesn’t really understand what you’re talking about. In both these, and other similar cases, what we have is a person who has seen someone else win an argument successfully refuting another individual’s argument by comparing scientific evidence or identifying a specific logical fallacy being committed, and trying to imitate them without understanding what the other person was actually doing.
But if there is no genuine substance behind the demand or the identification, if you don’t have your own competing scientific evidence or you can’t point out the actual logical fallacy – and there is a massive difference between the set of flawed syllogisms and the subset of logical fallacies – then you have no business talking about such things.
The failure to cite a peer-reviewed study means nothing in the absence of competing citations. The claim of logical fallacy means nothing when the precise fallacy is not identified. If you don’t understand those things, stop embarrassing yourself by arguing with people and start reading.
Otherwise, you’re no different than the ignorant South Pacific islander building runways in the hopes that the magic sky machines will descend bearing gifts.