the best place to start is wikipedia:
Pluckrose described herself and her collaborators as being "left-wing liberal sceptics." She stated that a core reason for why they wanted to carry out the project was to convince other "leftist academics" that there was a problem with "corrupted scholarship" in academic fields that were "based on identity politics and postmodernism."[4] She argued that in rejecting modernism, much postmodernist-derived scholarship was also rejecting science, reason, and liberal democracy, and thus undermining many important progressive gains.[4] Pluckrose also expressed concern that, in both foregrounding the importance of group identity and facilitating the growth of post-truth by claiming that there is no objective truth, this postmodernist theory was contributing to "the reactionary surge to the right" seen in many countries during the 2010.
There is no doubt that the three do not agree with post-modernism. As someone loosely trained in the scientific method - I concur - I am a fallibilist --as are most scientists and serious researchers. (Though please note, I am neither! Just trained a little 
Edit history
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
= new reply since forum marked as read