Nat Geo has a good at laugh at Ute brofessors over "bro science"

[oxcoug]

fun times:

http://phenomena.nationalgeographic....to-be-punched/

The entire conjecture is based on sports like mixed martial arts and modern crime stats. And females don’t even figure into Morgan and Carrier’s hypothesis. Female mate choice, and why sexual dimorphism between the sexes has drastically decreased through time, is either ignored or overshadowed by the belief that we owe are most distinctive features to males walloping each other. This is bro science – dudes pummeling each other driving human evolution.

[woot]

fun times:

http://phenomena.nationalgeographic....to-be-punched/

Carrier has done some good work, but his stuff about hands evolving for punching has always struck me as silly (I mean, human hands do form a good fist, so it's possible it played a small role, but I bet it's largely coincidental). The skull evolving to be punchable strikes me as even sillier, for many reasons that probably wouldn't be interesting here. These are fine hypotheses though, and who knows what we'll find.

I used to read everything Switek wrote and generally like him, but I'm not sure calling this "bro science" is very helpful or accurate.

[Topper]

Carrier has done some good work, but his stuff about hands evolving for punching has always struck me as silly (I mean, human hands do form a good fist, so it's possible it played a small role, but I bet it's largely coincidental). The skull evolving to be punchable strikes me as even sillier, for many reasons that probably wouldn't be interesting here. These are fine hypotheses though, and who knows what we'll find.

I used to read everything Switek wrote and generally like him, but I'm not sure calling this "bro science" is very helpful or accurate.

Utes conjuring up Bro Science. What will the University of cold fusion think of next?

[pellegrino]

Carrier has done some good work, but his stuff about hands evolving for punching has always struck me as silly (I mean, human hands do form a good fist, so it's possible it played a small role, but I bet it's largely coincidental). The skull evolving to be punchable strikes me as even sillier, for many reasons that probably wouldn't be interesting here. These are fine hypotheses though, and who knows what we'll find.

I used to read everything Switek wrote and generally like him, but I'm not sure calling this "bro science" is very helpful or accurate.

I agree, and would add that it's borderline ad hominem. I'll never forget the comment a professor made on a paper I wrote early on as a graduate student. I called a certain scholar's argument "myopic" and in the margin he wrote "pettiness begets pettiness." We spoke about it later and he explained that just because you strongly disagree with an argument doesn't mean you can't do so civilly. There's no reason to belittle it just because you can. It seems like Switek is taking advantage of a less than stellar argument to look like a cool kid.

[Lost Student]

I agree, and would add that it's borderline ad hominem. I'll never forget the comment a professor made on a paper I wrote early on as a graduate student. I called a certain scholar's argument "myopic" and in the margin he wrote "pettiness begets pettiness." We spoke about it later and he explained that just because you strongly disagree with an argument doesn't mean you can't do so civilly. There's no reason to belittle it just because you can. It seems like Switek is taking advantage of a less than stellar argument to look like a cool kid.

Your professor sounds really lame.

[Topper]

I agree, and would add that it's borderline ad hominem. I'll never forget the comment a professor made on a paper I wrote early on as a graduate student. I called a certain scholar's argument "myopic" and in the margin he wrote "pettiness begets pettiness." We spoke about it later and he explained that just because you strongly disagree with an argument doesn't mean you can't do so civilly. There's no reason to belittle it just because you can. It seems like Switek is taking advantage of a less than stellar argument to look like a cool kid.

Really? That seems very tame in terms of some exchanges I've seen.

[Pelado]

Your professor sounds really lame.

[emoji106]

[pellegrino]

Really? That seems very tame in terms of some exchanges I've seen.

It is. I don't think he was making the comment because he truly thought I was being petty, I think he viewed it as a teaching moment. It stuck.

Your professor sounds really lame.

I never said he was awesome, nor that I cared for him, but he is highly respected in his field.

[Katy Lied]

I was a center ring witness to a faculty dispute, one that involved nearly every member of the faculty who wasn't an economist*. It was really nasty and involved name calling and accusations such as "Holocaust denyer" and "flat earther." Awful. A grad student became a sacrificial lamb.

* The economists hardly ever get involved in really bad blowups, because they fight it out on a regular basis and settle disputes annually. Which is why economic conferences are not the mind numbing snooze fests you might imagine.

[Topper]

I was a center ring witness to a faculty dispute, one that involved nearly every member of the faculty who wasn't an economist*. It was really nasty and involved name calling and accusations such as "Holocaust denyer" and "flat earther." Awful. A grad student became a sacrificial lamb.

* The economists hardly ever get involved in really bad blowups, because they fight it out on a regular basis and settle disputes annually. Which is why economic conferences are not the mind numbing snooze fests you might imagine.

So I should buy a ticket to these fights?