(February 19, 2013 at 1:57 pm)Esquilax Wrote: You're missing the crucial fact that peer review- which is an ongoing process of self correction, by the way- continued to dissect your study, and found it wanting. From top to bottom, that last link you cited has been found to be trash; that's how peer review works.No, peer review found it acceptable for publication. It was then shouted down in blogs and such.
Quote:As for your other study, I've already gone into that in detail: it doesn't show what you think it shows, for one. Secondly, wonderfully, if you'd actually bothered to look at that link at all, you'd see that it deals in the discrimination that bisexuals suffer, and is actually quite sympathetic to our cause. It literally presents exactly the case that I have been, that there are other sociological factors like bigotry that have an effect on the data. And that's just by its tone.Not that one, the other logitudinal one on women.
Quote:You don't have a leg to stand on, dude. And I notice you've got nothing to say about the head of the ministry that funded your latest citation coming out and saying the whole set up is a crock of shit, too. I wonder why that could be?Because it's weak compared to a study in a peer-reviewed journal.
