Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

The intention was to get people to read the main thesis critically. That quote is sort of a tell about the quality of this paper, and the more I dig into this paper the more it confirms this is isn't good science.


Maybe if you had articulated your objections up front instead of posturing, your subthread wouldn't now be sitting at the bottom of the page.


Your comments seem more skeptical than critical. Are you saying you believe lakes aren’t losing volume?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: