<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Bad Science &#187; evolutionary psychology</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.badscience.net/category/evolutionary-psychology/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.badscience.net</link>
	<description>Ben Goldacre&#039;s Bad Science column from the Guardian and more...</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Feb 2012 15:39:06 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Even&#8230; more&#8230; ludicrous teleology from evolutionary psychologists</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/11/even-more-ludicrous-teleology-from-evolutionary-psychologists/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2007/11/even-more-ludicrous-teleology-from-evolutionary-psychologists/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Nov 2007 13:58:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[evolutionary psychology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mail]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[telegraph]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[times]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/2007/11/even-more-ludicrous-teleology-from-evolutionary-psychologists/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If academic funding was determined by newspaper coverage we would never research anything but MMR and evolutionary psychology. Which is fine. But if you&#8217;re going to tell teleological &#8220;just-so&#8221; stories about human behaviour, then you could at least make an effort, and try to maintain a degree of internal consistency. Today yet another puddle of [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2007/11/even-more-ludicrous-teleology-from-evolutionary-psychologists/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>41</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Imaginary numbers</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/09/imaginary-numbers/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2007/09/imaginary-numbers/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Sep 2007 00:20:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[cash-for-"stories"]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[evolutionary psychology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[statistics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=520</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[This piece got massively cut for space in the paper, fair enough but personally I can't bear to look. Here's the last version I saw, with added email action from Professor Weber at the bottom.] Ben Goldacre The Guardian September 1st, 2007 “Jessica Alba has the perfect wiggle, study says”. You have to respect a [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2007/09/imaginary-numbers/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>41</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Pink, pink, pink, pink. Pink moan.</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2007/08/pink-pink-pink-pink-pink-moan/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2007/08/pink-pink-pink-pink-pink-moan/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 25 Aug 2007 00:26:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[evolutionary psychology]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=518</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Ben Goldacre The Guardian Saturday August 25 2007 I want you to know that I love evolutionary psychologists, because the ideas, like &#8220;girls prefer pink because they need to be better at hunting berries&#8221; are so much fun. Sure there are problems, like, we don&#8217;t know a lot about life in the pleistocene period through [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2007/08/pink-pink-pink-pink-pink-moan/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>107</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>All men will have big willies</title>
		<link>http://www.badscience.net/2006/10/%e2%80%9call-men-will-have-big-willies%e2%80%9d/</link>
		<comments>http://www.badscience.net/2006/10/%e2%80%9call-men-will-have-big-willies%e2%80%9d/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Oct 2006 01:55:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ben Goldacre</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[bad science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cash-for-"stories"]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[evolutionary psychology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[references]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.badscience.net/?p=316</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This article was cut to a deflating wiffle in the paper, 650 down to 400 words, here is the last version I touched. Ben Goldacre Saturday October 21, 2006 The Guardian &#8220;All men will have big willies&#8221;, said the headline of the Sun. This was the story of Dr Oliver Curry, &#8220;evolution theorist&#8221; from the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.badscience.net/2006/10/%e2%80%9call-men-will-have-big-willies%e2%80%9d/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>57</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

