James DamoreVerified account

Note: it's weakly argued and poorly supported regardless of language

>Cites proper sources with unbiased scientists >Doesn't matter because it's 'poorly supported' according to @Fired4Woo

> Makes biological claims that are not supported by mainstream biological science > Cites psychologists instead Yeah seems legit

I think it’s only fair to ask them, “did you read the rebuttal?” If not, you don’t get to debate the topic until you have. I read his essay.

Now it’s his defenders’ turn to read the copious evidence against his vague, unsupported theories. Damore’s Wikipedia refs were misleading.

If you read Erin Giglio’s rebuttal, you can see that the original research doesn’t support the summary in Wikipedia that Damore copied. Sad.

Someone told me they didn’t read beyond the first screen because they didn’t like the Terry Pratchett quote for some reason. What an excuse.

Unfortunate, given that it's not only wrong but terribly written

Insults author, cites nothing inaccurate... Troll's gonna troll.

So it’s groupthink to disagree with an nearly baseless opinion?

It's groupthink to think what the other group doesn't. They don't groupthink though. They're woke. Probably.

I just posted it into several tech wechat groups in China

That was a dumb idea

Why?

Repeating nonsense generally is

thank you for your excellent contributions to twitter