Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2019/oct/11/work-of-renowned-uk-psychologist-hans-eysenck-ruled-unsafe

Have you seen a psychologist about this?
21st century m&m technology is so fearsome, only the president knows the code (held in a svelte, titanium-chain fanny pack code-named Klinger).

Originally posted by Putinbot1
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2019/oct/11/work-of-renowned-uk-psychologist-hans-eysenck-ruled-unsafe


The same.


This is a result of a broken peer review system, where too many people are more concerned with "keeping the peace" to preserve a comfortable culture, and don't want to risk sinking careers with damaging, if just, criticism.


It's the equivalent of your wife asking you to criticize her new hair style or outfit. Even if you don't like it, what are you gonna say?

Originally posted by Putinbot1
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2019/oct/11/work-of-renowned-uk-psychologist-hans-eysenck-ruled-unsafe

http://giphygifs.s3.amazonaws.com/media/FZuRP6WaW5qg/giphy.gif

So Pooty has a Prob with "Psychos" cause a NewsPaper told him to?

There is a Word for People like that...


https://image.shutterstock.com/z/stock-vector-u-crazy-111076673.jpg

Originally posted by Putinbot1
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2019/oct/11/work-of-renowned-uk-psychologist-hans-eysenck-ruled-unsafe " Why I struggle to see Psychologists as Scientists"


So a single psychologist's research from many decades ago is being rightly scrutinized by scientists today, leading to the dismissal of once accepted facts in favour of ones with more evidence surrounding them--you know, the scientific method... and that's a valid reason to indict all of psychology as a scientific field?


That's flat out f*cking retarded.

If it was just one, your attempt at trolling and flaming would be valid. It isn't little one.

https://www.vox.com/2018/6/13/17449118/stanford-prison-experiment-fraud-psychology-replicationp

https://futurism.com/28-classic-psychology-experiments-failed-replicate/

A major research initiative, the second of its kind, tried to reconstruct 28 famous classic psychology experiments. But of those 28, only 14 of the experiments yielded the same results, according to research published Monday in the journal Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science.

Tip of the iceberg btw.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
If it was just one, your attempt at trolling and flaming would be valid. It isn't little one.

https://www.vox.com/2018/6/13/17449118/stanford-prison-experiment-fraud-psychology-replicationp

https://futurism.com/28-classic-psychology-experiments-failed-replicate/

A major research initiative, the second of its kind, tried to reconstruct 28 famous classic psychology experiments. But of those 28, only 14 of the experiments yielded the same results, according to research published Monday in the journal Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science.

Tip of the iceberg btw.

There is also tons of dishonesty in the psychology community where they are pushing narratives.

For example, the "homosexuality and genetics" research has been atrocious because almost everyone is pushing hard for the genetic link.

One study done showed an immensely strong link between the two using twin studies. Only problem is...it was self-reported, not random sample. So there was an inherent bias in the results.

A truly random sample showed a much lower correlation that was slightly above population average. Which should indicate to most people that there is a genetic element to homosexuality but it is only a minor contributor. The fact that there are ANY identical twins that do not have the same sexual orientation should put a stop to the "I was born gay" claims.

Extremely complex human behaviors cannot be solely put on genes. Humans are much more than just genes, epigenetics, and "in utero."

I posted on this in detail, before. But, basically, if you're born with the genes that are more closely linked with homosexuality, it's more like, "Bob has an increased chance of having his sexual orientation settle on bisexual or homosexual after 19 years of age. And the increase ranges from 18%-42% above the population average based on his experiences - both sexual and non-sexual."

But telling that to psychologists who have agendas would cause them to scream you out of their office. They don't want to acknowledge this. It puts the "problem" back on the environment instead of something out of people's control.



And the replication crisis is worse than the research you posted.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/results-of-many-psychology-experiments-cant-be-duplicated-study-finds/

It's greater than 50%.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis

Originally posted by dadudemon
There is also tons of dishonesty in the psychology community where they are pushing narratives.

For example, the "homosexuality and genetics" research has been atrocious because almost everyone is pushing hard for the genetic link.

One study done showed an immensely strong link between the two using twin studies. Only problem is...it was self-reported, not random sample. So there was an inherent bias in the results.

A truly random sample showed a much lower correlation that was slightly above population average. Which should indicate to most people that there is a genetic element to homosexuality but it is only a minor contributor. The fact that there are ANY identical twins that do not have the same sexual orientation should put a stop to the "I was born gay" claims.

Extremely complex human behaviors cannot be solely put on genes. Humans are much more than just genes, epigenetics, and "in utero."

I posted on this in detail, before. But, basically, if you're born with the genes that are more closely linked with homosexuality, it's more like, "Bob has an increased chance of having his sexual orientation settle on bisexual or homosexual after 19 years of age. And the increase ranges from 18%-42% above the population average based on his experiences - both sexual and non-sexual."

But telling that to psychologists who have agendas would cause them to scream you out of their office. They don't want to acknowledge this. It puts the "problem" back on the environment instead of something out of people's control.



And the replication crisis is worse than the research you posted.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/results-of-many-psychology-experiments-cant-be-duplicated-study-finds/

It's greater than 50%.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis I was actually keeping the replication crisis up my sleeve as I expected further trolling. Well brought up mate and yes we are more than.genes... but we have no real idea how much more yet.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
I was actually keeping the replication crisis up my sleeve as I expected further trolling. Well brought up mate and yes we are more than.genes... but we have no real idea how much more yet.


My bad. I don't know when you're playing a game and when you're not. I didn't mean to ruin the game.


Next time, just send a PM and say, "Hey, STFU in X thread and let me do my thing." Then I'll refrain from posting until you've had your lulz.

Originally posted by dadudemon
My bad. I don't know when you're playing a game and when you're not. I didn't mean to ruin the game.


Next time, just send a PM and say, "Hey, STFU in X thread and let me do my thing." Then I'll refrain from posting until you've had your lulz. Thanks mate. But what you said underlined the point anyway. So, well said!

Originally posted by dadudemon
There is also tons of dishonesty in the psychology community where they are pushing narratives.

For example, the "homosexuality and genetics" research has been atrocious because almost everyone is pushing hard for the genetic link.

One study done showed an immensely strong link between the two using twin studies. Only problem is...it was self-reported, not random sample. So there was an inherent bias in the results.

A truly random sample showed a much lower correlation that was slightly above population average. Which should indicate to most people that there is a genetic element to homosexuality but it is only a minor contributor. The fact that there are ANY identical twins that do not have the same sexual orientation should put a stop to the "I was born gay" claims.

Extremely complex human behaviors cannot be solely put on genes. Humans are much more than just genes, epigenetics, and "in utero."

I posted on this in detail, before. But, basically, if you're born with the genes that are more closely linked with homosexuality, it's more like, "Bob has an increased chance of having his sexual orientation settle on bisexual or homosexual after 19 years of age. And the increase ranges from 18%-42% above the population average based on his experiences - both sexual and non-sexual."

But telling that to psychologists who have agendas would cause them to scream you out of their office. They don't want to acknowledge this. It puts the "problem" back on the environment instead of something out of people's control.



And the replication crisis is worse than the research you posted.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/results-of-many-psychology-experiments-cant-be-duplicated-study-finds/

It's greater than 50%.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis



The example that broke me is what happened to David Reimer, at the hands of John Money.



The infamous story about the botched circumcision, that resulted in David being turned into a social experiment. It wasn't going well, yet John Money staked his career on it's success and pretended the many problems did not exist. He lied.



The end result was a re-transition, followed by a suicide.

Hey DDM, while we're on the subject of lgbtq:



Where does this pressure to keep a narrative even come from?


I mean, I know there's a strong lobby out there, but I could never wrap my head around why lobbies can control narratives, quash careers, or make the waves they do. I mean, all lobbies do is offer money to politicians so they can run their campaigns, right?


It's not like they'd buy and sell judges, literally own big media, or control business and school/university policy? Would they?


Is that what's going on? Buying ownership of key pillars like news organizations, making big donations to colleges, and essentially gaining influence by spreading money around?



Sort of like what we're seeing with China now, and how everyone's afraid to insult them, because they'll lose money if they do?

Originally posted by cdtm
Hey DDM, while we're on the subject of lgbtq:



Where does this pressure to keep a narrative even come from?


I mean, I know there's a strong lobby out there, but I could never wrap my head around why lobbies can control narratives, quash careers, or make the waves they do. I mean, all lobbies do is offer money to politicians so they can run their campaigns, right?


It's not like they'd buy and sell judges, literally own big media, or control business and school/university policy? Would they?


Is that what's going on? Buying ownership of key pillars like news organizations, making big donations to colleges, and essentially gaining influence by spreading money around?



Sort of like what we're seeing with China now, and how everyone's afraid to insult them, because they'll lose money if they do?

Part of it is money, yes.

Another part of it is facing the reality that we are a set of decisions, choices, and environment instead of just being thrown a bag of genes that dictates everything. It is very scary for many people to realize that their current situation is a set of choices. If they view their situation as negative, they won't want to accept the fact that their choices led up to that negative predicament. Part of it is also the religious oppression trying to shame people for enjoying this or that. If they have the "I was born this way" card, it makes it far easier to not have to confront the idea that they are sinning against a religious belief. It is a far better argument and it feels so much better to the individual.

And at the heart of it, are not psychologists seeking to understand humans, their emotions, and how to make a human function better? If you can help them do that by telling them that the problems in their life resulted from a set of genes they could not change, it seems helpful from some perspectives.