Podcasts about neuroskeptic

It sounds like a good idea in theory: a non-peer-reviewed scientific journal dedicated to pure scientific creativity. Send in your craziest hypotheses and as long as they're original ideas, the editor will publish them, and let them inspire the readers.That's the journal Medical Hypotheses—or, it was. In this episode we discuss some of the maddest papers they ever published, including the one about how wearing heeled shoes causes schizophrenia and an astonishing idea about why humans get acne, and then discuss how the whole thing went wrong.Show notes* “Withdrawn” 2009 Duesberg et al. paper on HIV-AIDS in South Africa* Flensmark (2004) on heeled footwear and schizophrenia* Neuroskeptic's 2019 investigation into Flensmark* Expressen interview with Flensmark (auto-translated)* 2008 letter proposing ejaculation as a treatment for nasal congestion* Notorious 2007 Down syndrome paper* Ben Goldacre's piece on it* Judith Rich Harris (2006) on parental selection and human hairlessness* 2014 paper arguing van Gogh had acute porphyria* 2022 paper arguing van Gogh had vestibular migraine instead* “Why do humans get acne? A hypothesis” (2020)* 2024 paper on dummies/pacifiers and SIDS* The original 2013 Brainspotting paper* 2024 Brainspotting debunking in the same journal* “Medical Hypotheses RIP” from sacked editor Bruce Charlton* Charlton's earlier piece on the journal's philosophy * 1991 paper on the inflammation–depression hypothesis* 2004 paper on the mitochondrial hypothesis for Alzheimer's* 2005 gut microbiome/brain paper* 2017 paper “On human parthenogenesis”CreditsThe Science Fictions podcast is produced by Julian Mayers at Yada Yada Productions. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit sciencefictionspod.substack.com/subscribe

A longstanding science blogger for Discover magazine and Twitter influencer, Neuroskeptic (@Neuro_Skeptic), sits down in a pub to chat with Daniel about the “generalizability crisis,” blogging, and social media in this episode of Science et al.

Honor shmonor, David and Tamler return to their repugnant roots for this one. First, we pay an overdue homage to the great anonymous blogger and twitter-redeemer Neuroskeptic. We pick a few of our favorite pithy tweets and crazy science article links from his @neuro_skeptic twitter account. Topics include: How much would you pay for porn? Should we be stereotyping zoophiles? Animal or fist - how to distinguish? And what do the left and right brain actually do? In part 2, we discuss an experiment that aims to finally answer the question: do our judgments in sacrificial dilemmas (like the trolley problem) -actually- predict our behavior? Plus, we find out live (on tape) if David is a Laurel or a Yanni - or is he a Samantha? Thanks to our sponsor www.awaytravel.com.

Great balls of fire (ants) do we have a show for you as we talk about Torgo watches Cage, Lord of Light, Twin Peaks/Picket Fences/X-Files/Northern Exposure, DCU Woes (again), Tobe Hooper, Blomkamp and the Gone World, Lore, Star Wars VOID, Slaughterhouse Rulez, Carnival Row blooms, Neuroskeptic takes on fraudulent online journals, The Valiant Cinematic Universe, Squaring the Strange, The Punch Escrow, McFarlane to direct Spawn, Bird Box coming to Netflix, and the best and worst of The Punisher. So burst that ball, it's time for a Geek Shock!

... or should this have been called data science from a neuroscientist's perspective? Either way, I'm sure you'll enjoy this discussion with Laurie Skelly. Laurie earned a PhD in Integrative Neuroscience from the Department of Psychology at the University of Chicago. In her life as a social neuroscientist, using fMRI to study the neural processes behind empathy and psychopathy, she learned the ropes of zooming in and out between the macroscopic and the microscopic -- how millions of data points come together to tell us something meaningful about human nature. She's currently at Metis Data Science, an organization that helps people learn the skills of data science to transition in industry. In this episode, we discuss fMRI technology, Laurie's research studying empathy and psychopathy, as well as the skills and tools used in common between neuroscientists and data scientists. For listeners interested in more on this subject, Laurie recommended the blogs Neuroskeptic, Neurocritic, and Neuroecology. We conclude the episode with a mention of the upcoming Metis Data Science San Francisco cohort which Laurie will be teaching. If anyone is interested in applying to participate, they can do so here.

Jean-Michel Abrassart et Thomas Guiot discutent des articles « Un nouveau genre de peer-review? (Neuroskeptic) » et « Des vérités individuelles (NY Times) ».