On 1/28/2010 8:57 AM, Scott Stroz wrote: > I am not so sure I agree with you completely. > > The fact that these boneheads broke the law does not automatically > invalidate any of their research, but it sure does bring a lot of > their work into question. If the 'scientific consensus' is based, even > in part, on some of their work, then the consensus itself is > questionable. >
It think the point is that *their* research is the be all and end all of all the research. It takes a lot more then invalidating _one_ source of data to over come something this large. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:311291 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
