How to get the sniper

[Xugumad]

MaggieL
Or your own lofty perch in the sociology tower?

You choose to answer criticisms regarding his methodology with ad hominem attacks on me. As far as I'm concerned, the discussion is over, since I'm not going to fall for flamebait. (I'll counter your points below)

As an aside, I've never studied sociology. (but it's the most commonly-attacked academic study subject, which you predictably pick on to attack academics as a whole)

Bently is indeed "a business school" (horrors!)

Business schools, like "Bently" [sic], don't often teach the same stringent methodology that science-focused schools do. This is what I have gathered from personal experience, not an overall judgement. And indeed, her argument is easily shown to be fallacious.

[...] is indeed a Visiting Scholar at the MIT Securuty Studies Program, and Harvard University Press sees fit to publish her books.

Name-dropping means nothing, especially in the academic world. If you use academic names as a means of support, you need to provide quality of publication at the same time. What I've seen her publish (that one article) is nothing. That an MIT "Securuty" [sic] program has her as a co-operator, and that HUP published her works means very little if the quality of the work doesn't stand up. The latest works by Francis Fukuyama were fairly irrelevant as well, even though his earlier works were highly-acclaimed in the academic world (mostly isolated to US academia). A name is nothing unless it's backed up by solid publication.

No one has yet found falsification and fabrication of data in her work

No, it's just shoddy and poorly reasoned. I never claimed it was fabricated. Your argument can be based on truths, but if it's foolish, it won't stand up. Please address the issues that her argument is based on Post Hoc fallacies, and that absolutely no proof is provided between her data and her conclusions.

You didn't address a single one of my actual points, but instead sought to bring additional, tangential individuals into the argument. Also, if you are going to crucify jaguar in another thread for his misspellings, at least make an attempt not to do the same here.

If you wish to continue this argument, and provide factual counter-points to my criticism of her methodology, please take it to email. I have no intention of dragging this thread into a flamewar.

X.