Mentions
Extended reach
Total likes
Video views
AI synopsis
The discussions demonstrate a strong consensus dismissing Gould as biased or fraudulent, citing the reanalysis by Lewis et al. and calling Gould's work a 'hack' or 'bogus.' The tone is often confrontational, with words like 'fraud,' 'misrepresented,' and 'debunked,' emphasizing the controversy and the importance placed on scientific accuracy and integrity.
Most discussions strongly reject Gould's conclusions, labeling him a biased or even fraudulent researcher, indicating considerable disagreement with his work.
While many participants are highly engaged with the topic, their focus is mainly on discrediting Gould rather than exploring new ideas, suggesting moderate to high interest.
Numerous posts reference specific studies, critiques, and historical debates, showing deep engagement with the scientific and methodological issues involved.
The discourse centers around correcting historical scientific inaccuracies, which could influence views on scientific integrity, but the direct practical impact remains limited.
@briebriejoy Gould was an actual fraudster, his book relied on debunking misinterpretations of century-old evidence rather than far-superior modern data and methods, and you wouldn't understand factor analysis if you read a dozen textbooks on it. https://t.co/KmV6zYhrGn
Source: https://t.co/xdie6RWlU8
@eyeslasho Ideologues will not only ignore evidence they don't like; they'll fake evidence they need to support their worldviews. Consider Stephen Jay Gould. "Ironically, Gould's own analysis of Morton is likely the stronger example of a bias influencing results." https://t.co/xIxcYYQxii
Undergraduates read The Mismeasure of Man, parroting its nonsensical propaganda lifelong, unaware it was debunked and ridiculed by scientists in the fields Gould attacked. https://t.co/fBaKo4oL2B https://t.co/n1D0Fdt5Zs https://t.co/SMZMmza6p8
@charlesmurray Stephen Jay Gould was a Marxist fraud who twisted data to serve his ideological agenda rather than presenting honest science. https://t.co/UpzMfpov0f A careful 2011 re-examination of his critiques, published in PLoS Biology, reveals that his accusations against 19th-century
"The Mismeasure of Science: Stephen Jay Gould versus Samuel George Morton on Skulls and Bias" https://t.co/35MxpzFVLt Richard J Haier, "The Neuroscience of Intelligence" https://t.co/DH3tHW9dKy Review of "Experimenter Effects In Behavioral Research" https://t.co/KAwy4dsHTf
This study explores how the 3D shape of the brain's surface reflects genetic ancestry across populations, revealing potential for understanding human evolution and reducing biases in brain research.
This study explores how the 3D shape of the brain's surface reflects genetic ancestry across diverse populations, showing that cortical surface geometry can predict ancestry amidst complex migration and mixing events.
@charlesmurray The Mismeasure of Science: Stephen Jay Gould versus Samuel George Morton on Skulls and Bias https://t.co/8kuMtn1UtR
@yamnex673 @p0tzombie420 @BWLH_ Consensus: Human “races” are social fiction, not bio-reality. Judge people on deeds, not discredited skull porn. Sources: https://t.co/OtPxxW88QN https://t.co/UoT7XbBiqV https://t.co/lfkA7KCVfM https://t.co/ogjeIM5aGv We can keep going btw lol.
@sensefoundwhere @p0tzombie420 @BWLH_ -they found the same result: asians and whites have larger brains than blacks. Sources: https://t.co/qRh7GX5sla https://t.co/kLcF20WTAS https://t.co/dJ3vMMLD0m https://t.co/RuT2YNsVgZ https://t.co/mWHTvMQdj5
@grok @PhdDavinsky @DoutoredOne @HmanQuotes1945 @outtatime200028 “The Mismeasure of Science: Stephen Jay Gould versus Samuel George Morton on Skulls and Bias” (2011) – PLOS Biology J. Michael . re-measured Morton’s skull collection and argued Gould misrepresented Morton’s data.
@aufheben_njoyer @narrenhut All culminating in Marxoid egalitarian "scientists" who are too lazy to go and measure the skulls they write about because equality must be true due to muh moral dogmas: https://t.co/Fe35Cu78Vs https://t.co/LCKEhDqz5V
RT @gen0m1cs: Undergraduates read The Mismeasure of Man, parroting its nonsensical propaganda lifelong, unaware it was debunked and ridicul…
@WalterCrankKite @Tbomb1337 @SebastianShemi @jeremykauffman Lewis, Jason E., et al. (2011). “The Mismeasure of Science: Stephen Jay Gould versus Samuel George Morton on Skulls and Bias.” Published in PLoS Biology, Vol. 9, Issue 6, e1001071. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1001071
この論文のグールドの批判を批判した論文。 https://t.co/ag5jQFkivN
https://t.co/3f7mv5oy0K https://t.co/to31bpgNH2
https://t.co/A845EiHxQB モートン関連の問題を指摘した記事 と原論文 https://t.co/UIHs7nc7pb
RT @gen0m1cs: Undergraduates read The Mismeasure of Man, parroting its nonsensical propaganda lifelong, unaware it was debunked and ridicul…
RT @cremieuxrecueil: Source: https://t.co/xdie6RWlU8
@athundt @protecttruth_ Haven't read it but I've seen the critiques and they are generally very weak. Lewis et al. (https://t.co/5EjygwkxU6) gets trotted out a lot but seems like a complete non sequitur (see response here: https://t.co/iy66RYK005).
RT @cremieuxrecueil: Source: https://t.co/xdie6RWlU8
RT @cremieuxrecueil: Source: https://t.co/xdie6RWlU8
RT @injudiciou18664: @charlesmurray Stephen Jay Gould was a Marxist fraud who twisted data to serve his ideological agenda rather than pres…
RT @injudiciou18664: @charlesmurray Stephen Jay Gould was a Marxist fraud who twisted data to serve his ideological agenda rather than pres…
RT @injudiciou18664: @charlesmurray Stephen Jay Gould was a Marxist fraud who twisted data to serve his ideological agenda rather than pres…
RT @cremieuxrecueil: Source: https://t.co/xdie6RWlU8
RT @cremieuxrecueil: Source: https://t.co/xdie6RWlU8
Source: https://t.co/xdie6RWlU8
RT @arctotherium42: @briebriejoy Gould was an actual fraudster, his book relied on debunking misinterpretations of century-old evidence rat…
@briebriejoy The Mismeasure of Man is trash. Stephen Jay Gould was a Marxist fraud who twisted data to serve his ideological agenda rather than presenting honest science. https://t.co/UpzMfpp2PN A careful 2011 re-examination of his critiques, published in PLoS Biology, reveals that his
RT @arctotherium42: @briebriejoy Gould was an actual fraudster, his book relied on debunking misinterpretations of century-old evidence rat…
RT @gen0m1cs: Undergraduates read The Mismeasure of Man, parroting its nonsensical propaganda lifelong, unaware it was debunked and ridicul…
RT @arctotherium42: @briebriejoy Gould was an actual fraudster, his book relied on debunking misinterpretations of century-old evidence rat…
RT @arctotherium42: @briebriejoy Gould was an actual fraudster, his book relied on debunking misinterpretations of century-old evidence rat…
@charlesmurray Stephen Jay Gould was a Marxist fraud who twisted data to serve his ideological agenda rather than presenting honest science. https://t.co/UpzMfpov0f A careful 2011 re-examination of his critiques, published in PLoS Biology, reveals that his accusations against 19th-century
RT @arctotherium42: @briebriejoy Gould was an actual fraudster, his book relied on debunking misinterpretations of century-old evidence rat…
RT @gen0m1cs: Undergraduates read The Mismeasure of Man, parroting its nonsensical propaganda lifelong, unaware it was debunked and ridicul…
RT @gen0m1cs: Undergraduates read The Mismeasure of Man, parroting its nonsensical propaganda lifelong, unaware it was debunked and ridicul…
RT @gen0m1cs: Undergraduates read The Mismeasure of Man, parroting its nonsensical propaganda lifelong, unaware it was debunked and ridicul…
RT @arctotherium42: @briebriejoy Gould was an actual fraudster, his book relied on debunking misinterpretations of century-old evidence rat…
RT @gen0m1cs: Undergraduates read The Mismeasure of Man, parroting its nonsensical propaganda lifelong, unaware it was debunked and ridicul…
RT @arctotherium42: @briebriejoy Gould was an actual fraudster, his book relied on debunking misinterpretations of century-old evidence rat…
Undergraduates read The Mismeasure of Man, parroting its nonsensical propaganda lifelong, unaware it was debunked and ridiculed by scientists in the fields Gould attacked. https://t.co/fBaKo4oL2B https://t.co/n1D0Fdt5Zs https://t.co/SMZMmza6p8
RT @arctotherium42: @briebriejoy Gould was an actual fraudster, his book relied on debunking misinterpretations of century-old evidence rat…
@briebriejoy Gould was an actual fraudster, his book relied on debunking misinterpretations of century-old evidence rather than far-superior modern data and methods, and you wouldn't understand factor analysis if you read a dozen textbooks on it. https://t.co/KmV6zYhrGn
@Tonya_Aria @ATLCWorker Gould lied constantly throughout the book but the worst case was with Samuel George Mortons skulls, accusing him of cultural bias whem goulds measurements were completely wrong. https://t.co/veE0I3Q6ki
@Midhache @igivesashit Det var samma inom evolutionär biologi, med en hel grupp marxistiska vänster-kreationister. De svarade aldrig på hur komplexa system skulle kunna byggas av annat än evolutionärt tryck. Här är en avslutande artikel om hur de gjorde propaganda även där: https://t.co/WwezHaEZbY
@Paizleejoe @BernieGoeres @worthwatchlng https://t.co/xfZ2aOosnR https://t.co/BJM3hkdub3 https://t.co/yibvbJ8fIx Many such studies, you wouldnt need any studies at all, just some critical thinking to conclude such thing, anyways heres 3.
RT @MengHu13: Remember that 2011 study by Lewis et al? Gould reanalyzed Morton's skull data, accusing him of selective reporting & sampling…
Remember that 2011 study by Lewis et al? Gould reanalyzed Morton's skull data, accusing him of selective reporting & sampling manipulation. Gould concluded there was no race difference. But it's Gould who manipulated the data to "prove" Morton wrong. https://t.co/ozTP3firP5
@cremieuxrecueil Would you consider Stephen Jay Gould to be the archetype of this kind of academic? https://t.co/UpzMfpov0f
@eyeslasho Dear Sir, I am sure that you are aware that Stephen Jay Gould's efforts to discredit Samuel Morton have been debunked, but hopefully this will reach your followers. https://t.co/yDUeXHaGzt #SamuelMorton #StephenJayGould #Marxist #Fraud
Here's another link to the article exposing the late Harvard Professor Stephen Jay Gould as a Marxist charlatan: https://t.co/A7rNr6NOQD
@duncanoe2 @Kenneth54226775 @CandideIII @kamilkazani https://t.co/DbFqzcOmLf
@AR90169736 @hsu_steve can't tell if you're joking or not but the mismeasure of science was a great rebuttal reanalyzing morton's data: https://t.co/lRSjm9hO2P
"The Mismeasure of Science: Stephen Jay Gould versus Samuel George Morton on Skulls and Bias" https://t.co/35MxpzFVLt Richard J Haier, "The Neuroscience of Intelligence" https://t.co/DH3tHW9dKy Review of "Experimenter Effects In Behavioral Research" https://t.co/KAwy4dsHTf
@pearlythingz There are also racial differences in brain size. https://t.co/SRlRADpVPi
@HuxleyanWorld @arvidagren @PattenLab and fairly insightful about Gould's agenda: https://t.co/djWPdfYdLY
RT @CraigMurphy8881: @eyeslasho Ideologues will not only ignore evidence they don't like; they'll fake evidence they need to support their…
@eyeslasho Ideologues will not only ignore evidence they don't like; they'll fake evidence they need to support their worldviews. Consider Stephen Jay Gould. "Ironically, Gould's own analysis of Morton is likely the stronger example of a bias influencing results." https://t.co/xIxcYYQxii
@visjevangen @gerardgovers @jdceulaer Dit was een studie waarbij de vermoedelijk wetenschappelijk juiste conclusie is komen bovendrijven. Dit was een respons op claims van S.J. Gould's in The mismeasure of man. Maar vraag blijft wie er finaal beter wordt van deze resultaten. https://t.co/JUYyxq1Gd3
@TheBulldoz @brandon_ti45695 @marxovitch @MarquisdeSabbat @ibalkany Euh, t'es au courant que Gould a littéralement été dénoncé comme étant un menteur ? https://t.co/xAS26vWxER
@charlesmurray @TennLion This article certainly casts the title "Mismeasure of Man" in a different light! https://t.co/xIxcYYQxii https://t.co/CtdgBYbhHu
@charlesmurray @TennLion Didn't they re-do Samuel Morton measurements of cranium volumes, that showed that he didn't skew his result? Thus showing that it was actually Gould who was the biased one with an agenda to push https://t.co/TNem5unTED
RT @neovictorian23: Stepehen Jay Gould, the scientific fraud? https://t.co/SD1iDXxefm
Stepehen Jay Gould, the scientific fraud? https://t.co/SD1iDXxefm https://t.co/OsU3YMZ59f
@AlexBreitenbac3 @John_Tee_Ford @wayotworld Indeed, and Lewontin's analysis is an example of such fraud. Likewise with Stephen Gould's similarly politically motivated falsification of cranial volumes: https://t.co/fzrzXWPM9z
@joolsd https://t.co/64u1sW9d3a
@WillowBranch9 @burneracctpart2 @heartlesslyrich @FromKulak "Our analysis of Gould's claims reveals that most of Gould's criticisms are poorly supported or falsified." You are wrong. Throughout your entire life, evil people have lied to you about fundamental matters of great importance. https://t.co/EOZLKf6bvc
@xiaoha1968 @Steve_Sailer @kenklippenstein @RichardHanania Gould's book was convincingly refuted in this paper: https://t.co/hp0lMuqqG8
@xiaoha1968 @Biorealism @Steve_Sailer @kenklippenstein @RichardHanania Literally the very first Google result. https://t.co/vlXir2QA36
@Pelhamgren @AshaLogos At least that Jew's malicious posthumous libel masquerading as "scholarship" has been so thoroughly refuted that very few dare to defend it. https://t.co/EOZLKf6bvc
@Cambarrett2306 @onward2slvtn @Xero1two3 @TheRetardinator @TheOldWeeb @Kissurcomrades found that Blacks averaged about 5 cubic inches less cranial capacity than Whites. These results have stood the test of time (Gordon, 1934; Simmons, 1942; Todd, 1923). https://t.co/5uVqJoDzh4 https://t.co/mHejhsf5Hy https://t.co/nfCpk4ssXF
@a_man_in_black @remnantposting @thomaharadja Present to me a single set of data showing sub-Saharans outperforming East Asians in any intellectual capacity. You can't. Here's why: https://t.co/EOZLKf6bvc
“IQ is retahrded” because I don’t have no higher than KoKo the gorilla https://t.co/5uVqJoDzh4 https://t.co/ax3D8b9D3y https://t.co/pga1ZY4htt
@refudiatem @FabianS88 @kareem_carr The most recent critique is that SJG seriously misrepresented his analysis of Morton's brain size research. Basically, SJG was guilty of the bias that he attributed to Morton. https://t.co/Omfiat6z59
@CyniqueDeGauche Le livre de Gould est assez malhonnête et complètement à charge. A aucun moment il ne donne une idée fidèle du consensus scientifique (ni celui de l'époque, ni a fortiori celui d'aujourd'hui). Lisez cet article sur son traitement des travaux de Morton: https://t.co/mrHJFUzQcf
@JeffYoungerTX Caucasians had the biggest brains, averaging 87 cubic inches (1,426 cc), Africans had the smallest brains with an average of 78 cubic inches (1,278 cc). "The Mismeasure of Science: Stephen Jay Gould versus Samuel George Morton on Skulls and Bias" (PLOS Biology, June 2011
@RalphS_Maier Caucasians had the biggest brains, averaging 87 cubic inches (1,426 cc), Africans had the smallest brains with an average of 78 cubic inches (1,278 cc). "The Mismeasure of Science: Stephen Jay Gould versus Samuel George Morton on Skulls and Bias" (PLOS Biology, June 2011
RT @slavov_n: Correcting for biases can be tricky. What helps are direct and accurate measurements. https://t.co/tNAKM1qnv6 via @PLOSBi…
RT @slavov_n: Correcting for biases can be tricky. What helps are direct and accurate measurements. https://t.co/tNAKM1qnv6 via @PLOSBi…
Correcting for biases can be tricky. What helps are direct and accurate measurements. https://t.co/tNAKM1qnv6 via @PLOSBiology
@Prehistorica_CM @SBattle74527 Gould was a fraud. https://t.co/pdVgKXfGva
@ReforgedSwordo @GodCloseMyEyes The paper was published just over a decade ago. It could never, ever, be published today. It will probably "disappear" if anyone notices it. https://t.co/0t0WuaCgg3
@lbcyber @Rainbow_Silks @agpasquella Yeah and he falsified data in service of that goal: https://t.co/uavazDUPcn
@Rainbow_Silks Gould falsified data in order to shore up his beliefs: https://t.co/uavazDUPcn
@patrickdgatti @IonaItalia https://t.co/79DtUX3ZMd
@theoggayfrog I am aware of such accusations. I am also aware that, when those accusations are investigated, the opposite often turns out to be true: https://t.co/uavazDUPcn
Blakey points out that Mann and Monge, the anthropologists at the heart of the decision to retain Tree and Delisha Africa's remains ad use them for teaching, are coauthors on this piece defending Samuel Morton's "objectivity" in his skull measurements. https://t.co/ZMAi53u37N
https://t.co/uavazDUPcn
More here: https://t.co/Y1JshbCXJA
@ElonBachman Not a book, but there is this paper. https://t.co/K47AzsHonW
@trishankkarthik @nntaleb @stephen_wolfram By criticism, do you mean J. Lewis et al. PLoS Biol. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1001071; 2011, or is there more?
RT @EvolOdonata: Also interesting to hear about the debunking of the smearing attempts of Stephen Jay Gould and his book "The Mismeasure of…
Also interesting to hear about the debunking of the smearing attempts of Stephen Jay Gould and his book "The Mismeasure of Man" and a dissection of the false claims made by critics in this article in @PLOSBiology (discussed 26 minutes in to the podcast): https://t.co/pmAmRyaWF6
RT @genologos: @jessesingal Do you know about this paper on his claims in the Mismeasure of Man? https://t.co/kkDZjvbbZk
@jessesingal Do you know about this paper on his claims in the Mismeasure of Man? https://t.co/kkDZjvbbZk
The mismeasure of science: Stephen Jay Gould versus Samuel George Morton on skulls and bias https://t.co/kHHNRYn9hw
@samthielman @crissinaz @Atrios Wade is a crank, but in this case, wasn't he just summarizing the paper published in PLOS? https://t.co/3FNuPpAxRI
@Chekhovs_Gunman @TometoJemeto Analysis of skull shape and volume is absolutely part of physical anthropology, including racial taxonomy. Claiming it is “more related to environmental factors” is a complete fabrication. Here is a Marxist ideologue being exposed: https://t.co/UPZJgrliTF
@DStrungk @a_centrism https://t.co/FeaCEQLg9Q His whole “mismeasure of man” book is bogus. He simply made the numbers up.
@itsbirdemic @UDepravity @JamesLingford @BretWeinstein Never read https://t.co/sNEyrWk4Js ?
@MarlboroughJE https://t.co/mvzLeUU0GH
@sadAdam97 @Maksy74286093 @thuletide Also Gould was made that claim in the 70s and was wrong. https://t.co/u6DbMa6bk1
https://t.co/e1rJrV2T0l wait, you can just *check* the skulls that morton measured?? why didn't we do this first? empiricism uber alles
RT @Jeannotin_Guern: @itsbirdemic I'm a great fan of Gould in general and of The Mismeasure of Man in particular. Gould's critics repeatedl…
@itsbirdemic I'm a great fan of Gould in general and of The Mismeasure of Man in particular. Gould's critics repeatedly exhibit a publication supposed to refute Gould's claims on skulls measures by Morton. What do you think about? https://t.co/ZRwe0gPtN9
@JeffRouder @dingding_peng It has been argued Gould's own RPs were somewhat Q: https://t.co/e987fXdOXe
The Mismeasure of Science: Stephen Jay Gould versus Samuel George Morton on Skulls and Bias https://t.co/A2bhm1cM5N
@ Anyone still talking about Morton, Gould: "...Ironically, Gould's own analysis of Morton is likely the stronger example of a bias influencing results [11]." Gould was a hack, and the intelligence field is worlds beyond the fricking 1830s. https://t.co/lyJWHoaCWB
The Mismeasure of Science: Stephen Jay Gould versus Samuel George Morton on Skulls and Bias https://t.co/pY0Cu9PIFI via @DavidWrites1 et al
@michelaccad @RogueRad BTW, SJG wrote a bestseller, but made up the stuff https://t.co/WXK3tO76KH Even NYT agrees: https://t.co/ysM8cOjg2y
@barttels2 Ha Masterful prose or not, SJG book allegations were not accurate See https://t.co/WXK3tO76KH Or in the grey lady https://t.co/ysM8cOjg2y
@BDSixsmith @AnAimlessJoy @FlyWhisk https://t.co/TraPXB2dA3
@FlyWhisk Because it was a very bad book https://t.co/WqCBlLr0X4 https://t.co/Iirj8JLSr0
A
C
CM
GC
UK
T推
TD
U
Y
N
TK
HD
SD
KK
A
BI
CL
TM
SG
C
ML
RG
B
P
T
LO
T
SR
SW
M
X
N
SL
KM
JR
P
TM
M
MH
O
L
DG
MH
AX
TS
HA
O
AT
N
DD
FV
AH
DP
FE
PF
EB
FD
NG
JH
AL
PS
H
K
AB
FB
EC
IR
QS
EV
PB
ES
JS
MW
GN
DK
RA
C
HK
K
JW
J
JF
KY
J
AP
SS
WG
BS