Originally Posted by GarfieldJL
He got in trouble for deliberately using bad data to manipulating and misrepresenting data to skew the results, if he did that for one study, what's to say he didn't do it for another.
By the way, you can't argue the issue SkinWalker, because it was the college he is employed at that suspended him.
Why don't you take a look at the data at hand? This is just unbelievable.. Skinwalker went to great lengths and posted details about the methodology yet all you do is spout something about how the guy got into trouble somewhere..
If you want to show that the data is biased, skewed bad or whatever, do that by referring to flaws in the methodology. You can't just go "oh that guy has a reputation for blalblalbla, therefore the data is false".