/sci/ - Science & Math

>>6480054
>>Citing a fucking internet article from Penthouse and a porn book as references to scientific literature.

You mean citing data from the Kinsey Institute published in Forum (pic related)? Data that is only somewhat relevant to his r/K hypothesis and a complete red herring to the race and intelligence issue (the actual topic)? That data?

Are you saying the Kinsey Institute data on phallic size was fabricated or something? (I don't know nor care tbh.)

>>Failing to account for and generally ignoring a variety of well-known factors that would have had serious impacts on his work if he left them in, essentially leaving way too many uncontrolled for variables for anything to be not junk.
>>Use of non-similar groups as test samples.

Funny how you don't elaborate on these. How is for instance Rushton & Jensen, 2005 junk?