I'm sure this is just bias but this sounds like something that should be written in the application for a research grant. Seeing it on Twitter makes me discount the idea and wonder about the author's credentials.
Twitter was a conscious decision to limit length of the message (to something like 140 characters). Now people are trying to push longer content into it -- seems completely illogical to me.
Does anybody take content on Twitter seriously though? I assume if it's published on Twitter, it's garbage. Maybe an internal bias, but it holds true more often than not.
If you're a PhD pushing content on Twitter why would you expect to be taken seriously?
8 comments
[ 164 ms ] story [ 1207 ms ] threadWithout giving away too many spoilers, paleoarchaeologists trek to the Pamir mountains in search of ancient hominids.
I've looked at the location of the Pamir range in relation to the Tibetan plateau. Also, I found this article on the genetic makeup of modern Tibetans: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5011065/ .
If you're a PhD pushing content on Twitter why would you expect to be taken seriously?