Sort:  

Again, I work in the field, I know the issues. Thanks.

so what? my statement stands. Most of it IS bullshit because there is no replicability. Doesn't matter if you work on the field as much as it doesn't matter if a fortune letter spend a lifetime interpreting coffee stains from cups. You said "Nonsense, now your just putting your ignorance on display."

obviously you are the one who is ignorant or rather trying to scoop the issue under the carpet. I am allergic to senseless science cheerleading as much as I am with pseudoscience.

Most of the work hasn't been attempted to be reproduced. Those statistics are skewed by really high profile flashy "high impact" publications. There are reproducibility issues, but you must also keep in mind those stats are created by polling a specific subset of scientists.

I have yet to be unable to reproduce ANY experiment that I have tried from the literature. Everything has been appropriate.

The majority of it is not bullshit. Some of it is, exactly how much isn't known. Certainly not a majority.

Can't take your word mate, nor your specific field. Evidence shows otherwise.

Except it really doesn't.

I will make another post about it then. This time it will be more technical as well. Let's step up this conversation.