Mike Israetel's PhD is a Joke

[Yimpa]

Science Rocks!

[Carl-Richard]

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Frankly, this whole PhD thing is irrelevant. Mike gives good fitness advice regardless. His videos are great if you are looking for fitness advice. Being a good scientist is not needed at all for making YT gym videos.

But being (now very likely if not undoubtably) a malicious liar, is probably not so irrelevant:

3 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

EDIT:

Ok what the fuck:

https://www.instagram.com/p/DPdoieaDZnh/?igsh=MWpudjl6ZjBzb2drYg==

Well, considering I currently don't see how he now didn't just lie about the entire thing and edited the document while trying to pass it off as the real version, that's pretty- wow.

"I'm a perfectionist with a massive IQ who also lies and cuts corners and delivers sloppy work". Does this summarize Mike's legacy?

Edited 2 hours ago by Carl-Richard

[Leo Gura]

5 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

But being (now very likely if not undoubtably) a malicious liar is:

Well, his whole brand is being savaged, so yeah I expect him to lie and bullshit at this point. This is a PR disaster for him and a big ego hit.

But his advice is still solid. Gotta seperate the ego from the information.

Was his PhD paper thin? Yeah.

He should watch my video: The Psychology of Being Wrong

Edited 4 hours ago by Leo Gura

[Carl-Richard]

2 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Well, his whole brand is being savaged, so yeah I expect him to lie and bullshit at this point. This is a PR disaster for him and a big ego hit.

But his advice is still solid. Gotta seperate the ego from the information.

Was his PhD paper thin? Yeah.

He should watch my video: The Psychology of Being Wrong

I've made the case that if there are lot of formatting errors and statistical mistakes in the thesis document ("clerical mistakes"), that could indicate there could be a lot of mistakes in the preprocessing and data analysis stages, as that requires (often) arguably even more diligence to get right. So it's possible that the entire conclusion of his PhD is flawed (but maybe it's less likely if he simply did correlations of relatively minimally processed data). And then, how does that reflect on his reading of the scientific literature (which is his whole shtick)? What if he does that with the same rigor as his PhD, should we then take that as "good advice"?

Edited 2 hours ago by Carl-Richard

[Vali2003]

3 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

fuck:

Truth wins in the end. I wonder what the final reason was to go this route now, though.

[Carl-Richard]

10 minutes ago, Vali2003 said:

I wonder what the final reason was to go this route now, though.

Probably one of his "not so good" weekendly weed thoughts escaped the peer review of his sober mind 😆

Edited 2 hours ago by Carl-Richard

[Vali2003]

He has an another, new Instagram post where he explains more in-depth what happened. Apparently the uploaded file on the university website, really was just a draft. But, the version that Milo (the person who did the first answer video with Mike) uploaded was even older than that one, even though it was supposed to be the final draft, which would clear away all the haters and doubters. Now, his doctoral advisor found the real final draft and it’s uploaded in the caption of Milo’s video… I’m even tempted to believe him, but that’s because I’m an absolute idiot. He should be granted no, to little trust after this. 

 

Edited 2 hours ago by Vali2003

[Vali2003]

@Carl-Richard Maybe he wanted to post this all along, but he was stuck doing very slow, controlled, enormous deep stretch RDLs all day and all night long… 

Edited 1 hour ago by Vali2003

[Vali2003]

3 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Frankly, this whole PhD thing is irrelevant. Mike gives good fitness advice regardless. His videos are great if you are looking for fitness advice. Being a good scientist is not needed at all for making YT gym videos.

I don’t understand why you have this opinion. Why do you see weightlifting as such a simpleton thing that it doesn’t require nuance or scientific understanding? I mean, I get if it’s aimed at casual lifters who overcomplicate things, but there’s levels to it. Do you think professional bodybuilders could get into the shapes they get into without science? 

[Carl-Richard]

1 hour ago, Vali2003 said:

He has an another, new Instagram post where he explains more in-depth what happened. Apparently the uploaded file on the university website, really was just a draft. But, the version that Milo (the person who did the first answer video with Mike) uploaded was even older than that one, even though it was supposed to be the final draft, which would clear away all the haters and doubters. Now, his doctoral advisor found the real final draft and it’s uploaded in the caption of Milo’s video… I’m even tempted to believe him, but that’s because I’m an absolute idiot. He should be granted no, to little trust after this. 

Firstly, what a shitshow. Secondly, "I responded too early, I did not double check". Sounds like it fits the bill. Now I guess we wait and see for the final version to be uploaded to the university websites?

Edited 32 minutes ago by Carl-Richard

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, Vali2003 said:

Do you think professional bodybuilders could get into the shapes they get into without science? 

Of course.

As long as you count all the drugs they take a not science.