In the last 15 months, HarperCollins has published two, 400+ page, thoroughly-researched books by me, each with 1,200+ endnotes. You might not agree with them, but if you haven’t read them, you have no business accusing me of cherry-picking evidence.
I tweet 280 characters. I write op-eds 900 words long, publish Substacks 2,500 words long, and write books 115,000 to 140,000 words long.
Don’t read a tweet or skim a Substack and then accuse me of not being comprehensive.
My books are comprehensive. It’s why I write them.
Don’t read a tweet or skim a Substack and then accuse me of not being comprehensive.
My books are comprehensive. It’s why I write them.
I do 3-minute TV segments and 3 hour long podcasts. Don’t complain about the things I left out of 3 minutes. Almost everything is left out of 3 minutes. Even 3 hours isn’t very long.
If you want comprehensive, thorough, and balanced, please, read the books.
If you want comprehensive, thorough, and balanced, please, read the books.
In both books I “steel-man” my opponents’ arguments better than they do. I sift through the evidence across hundreds of pages. The reviews of the scientific literature and data are more comprehensive than any other work of commercial nonfiction on these topics in last 20 years.
You might not like how I’ve summarized my books on Twitter, Substack, TV or a podcast, but don’t accuse me of cherry-picking if you haven’t read the books. And if you are going to accuse me of cherry-picking, you better bring the receipts, and not just assert it.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
