• mrgreyeyes@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    Not a fan of Neil, but this is a really respectful way in into teaching someone how scientific studies work.

    • Jesus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Yeah, I’m still on the fence with what happened after the me-too stuff. Some women spoke out against him, but several independent investigations were not able to substantiate the claims. And after different organizations did their own investigations, they all came to the same conclusions, and let him keep his projects and jobs.

      • yesman@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        several independent investigations were not able to substantiate the claims.

        Tyson was investigated by National Geographic and Fox to protect the shows they were producing starring him. I suppose the Natural History Museum looked into it enough to decide not to fire their star celebrity academic.

        So the investigations had massive conflicts of interest actually. And none of them had an interest in his actual guilt. An none of them were victim advocates.

        The accusations against Tyson are credible and they’ve never been properly investigated.

    • danc4498@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      It still comes off a bit douchey. He kept saying that his bluntness of the peer review would be th same as if it was a friend or colleague requesting a peer review. I didn’t get the impression that Howard was a friend or a colleague and certainly did not request a peer review. Or even understand the process of a peer review for that matter.

      With that said, I do find the video interesting from the perspective of a person that also doesn’t know anything about a peer review.

      • Moneo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 months ago

        Terrence sent his “paper” to NDT. Idk whether or not he was requesting a peer review but he spouts this stuff publicly constantly, he can’t be upset that people are refuting him publicly.

        • danc4498@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          I’m not saying Terrence has any legs to stand on, he doesn’t.

          I’m just saying it seems a little douchey to get a paper from someone that is in no way a colleague or friend and go to town on that paper. He should have treated it like an amateur that needs encouragement not a colleague that needs the hard truth.

          • nova_ad_vitum@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            5 months ago

            He should have treated it like an amateur that needs encouragement not a colleague that needs the hard truth.

            There is no way of saying “your fundamental method of understanding the world is faulty” in a way that someone won’t describe as “douchey”.