Striker@lemmy.worldM to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world · 11 months agoSophie's choice 70s editionlemmy.worldimagemessage-square150fedilinkarrow-up1623arrow-down128
arrow-up1595arrow-down1imageSophie's choice 70s editionlemmy.worldStriker@lemmy.worldM to Lemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world · 11 months agomessage-square150fedilink
minus-squarebustrpoindextr@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up5arrow-down2·11 months agoWell your article isn’t a study, it’s a literary review from a very biased source of a Colleen Lynn In fact if you want to read up on your source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dogsbite.org You can see that she complains about science and ignores expert opinions in the field because they disagree with her. It’s very telling when her literary review comes to very different conclusions than actual scientists performing studies in the field.
minus-squarecandybrie@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up5arrow-down1·11 months ago The site’s founder is also contemptuous of people in the relevant sciences, including those at the AVMA, the CDC, the Animal Behavior Society, etc. She refers to them as ‘science whores,’ which alone is enough to discredit her claims. Science whores? And people take her seriously?
Well your article isn’t a study, it’s a literary review from a very biased source of a Colleen Lynn
In fact if you want to read up on your source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dogsbite.org
You can see that she complains about science and ignores expert opinions in the field because they disagree with her.
It’s very telling when her literary review comes to very different conclusions than actual scientists performing studies in the field.
Science whores? And people take her seriously?