Mike Israetel's PhD: The Biggest Academic Sham in Fitness? скачать в хорошем качестве

Mike Israetel's PhD: The Biggest Academic Sham in Fitness?

Mike Israetel of ‪@RenaissancePeriodization‬ constantly reminds us that he has a PhD. But what does that title actually represent? I decided to read his entire dissertation to find out. What I got was a document so sloppy, shallow and confused, it could only pass in a system that had already failed. Chapters: 0:00 Prologue 1:32 Chapter 1. Introduction 3:14 Chapter 2. An overview of Mike Israetel’s PhD thesis 5:33 Chapter 3. An overview of standard assessment criteria for PhD theses 8:07 Chapter 4. Why Mike Israetel’s PhD thesis would likely fail—or at least be sent back for major revisions—at any high-ranking university 8:25 4.1. Lack of original knowledge and significant contribution to the field 11:57 4.1.1. Lack of independence of thought and approach 13:56 4.2. Ineffective communication of research findings 14:44 4.2.1. Incompetent data entry 21:06 4.2.2. Unnecessarily complicated and pretentious writing 25:49 4.2.3. Persistent grammatical, typographical and formatting errors 26:49 4.2.3.1. Copy-pasting and editorial negligence 29:37 4.2.3.2. Systematic APA formatting and citation failures 31:39 4.2.3.3. Spelling and typographical errors 34:02 4.2.3.4. Grammar, punctuation and awkward phrasing 35:30 4.2.3.5. On and on it goes 36:58 4.3. Poorly justified methods 40:56 4.4. Lack of command and critical assessment of a substantial and complex body of knowledge 41:20 4.4.1. Superficial literature review 42:49 4.4.2. The phantom research gap and distortions of cited works 48:47 4.5. Lack of carefulness, cohesion, rigour and originality 52:39 4.6. Why the thesis fails in total 55:37 Chapter 5. Why this matters 56:02 5.1. Providing a window into a failing discipline 56:51 5.2. Challenging the argument from authority 58:42 5.3. Rethinking expertise in fitness 1:00:39 5.4. Providing a cautionary tale 1:02:07 5.5. Explaining the gap between title and conduct 1:03:41 5.6. Deflating a delusion 1:07:35 Chapter 6. Conclusion Clarification at [18:33]: my commentary at this point refers to figures 5.1 and 5.2. However, tables 5.1 and 5.2 are mistakenly displayed on screen. Apologies for the visual error! (Note added 3 October, 2025.) Online consultations:    • Solomon Nelson Now Offering Online Consult...   Email: solomonnelsonconsulting @ gmail . com Discord: solomonnelsonconsulting (direct message me)