They are soon completed with their book about their theory which has zero empirical support. Will emphasize that I have invited them for a constructive discussion about the typology topic but they have declined the invitation.
Published: 02-21-2015 03:11 am
Updated: 02-21-2015 03:13 am
I would propably still be curious to see their findings, I haven't taken the time to actively browse through the changes and revisions they've made post the physiognomy-approach, but it feels like their decision after removing physiognomy was to scrap all efforts to be empirically testable/verifiable and instead went for an intuitive approach. So while they can't claim to be accurate in their typing and many of their descriptors will be quite off, maybe they actually have found some kind of patterns, and I'm curious to see which. I have also asked to talk to them, but they had some concerns about my intentions, which I can understand, considering all the problems we had: Pod'lair basically infiltrated and trashed our project team during the Physiognomy studies, so they are naturally suspicious of outsiders.
Published: 02-21-2015 03:31 am
Aha, I see. Yes I will also find it interesting to read their new theory, their presentations are always professional.