One of the advantages of reading old papers is you can find some hilarious insults. Here's one from Bakan, David, “The test of significance in psychological research,” Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 66 (1966), pp. 423-437:

"I playfully once conducted the following "experiment": Suppose, I said, that every coin has associated with it a "spirit"; and suppose, furthermore, that if the spirit is implored properly, the coin will veer head or tail as one requests of the spirit. I thus invoked the spirit to make the coin fall head. I threw it once, it came up head. I did it again, it came up head again. I did this six times, and got six heads. Under the null hypothesis the probability of occurrence of six heads is (1/2)^6 =.016, significant at the 2% level of significance. I have never repeated the experiment. But, then, the logic of the inference model does not really demand that I do! It may be objected that the coin, or my tossing, or even my observation was biased. But I submit that such things were in all likelihood not as involved in the result as corresponding things in most psychological research."

This is an even better burn than it looks because Bakan is also illustrating optional stopping (he would have broken off the flipping if he hadn't kept getting heads), which is routine among psychologists and makes his p-value incorrect; naturally, no one computes their p-value correctly to account for optional stopping...