off_world_beings wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "curtisdeltablues"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> <snip>
>>
>>> Absolutely not, you are trying to smear the world of science
>>>
> again
>
>>> instead of admitting that only research published in respected
>>>
> peer-
>
>>> reviewed scientific journals holds any weight in the 21st
>>>
> century,
>
>>> and that you believe in that principle. If you do not admit to
>>> believing in that principle, then you belong with the anti-
>>>
> science
>
>>> fundamentalists like Ted Haggard, George Bush, Ayatollah
>>>
> Khomeini,
>
>>> Gerry Falwell, etc. You belong in the dark ages with them.
>>>
>> I'm gunna guess that you don't understand how the scientific method
>> fits into the broader questions of epistemology. You are
>> demonstrating a lack of understanding of how peer reviewed studies
>>
> are
>
>> used to draw conclusions. As Turq pointed out, it is the
>>
> replication
>
>> of studies that is far more important than getting into a magazine
>> after getting a "review" of the methods used. You are using the
>>
> terms
>
>> with the innocence of a TM teacher at an intro lecture holding up
>>
> the
>
>> collected papers and letting it drop and hit the ground for effect.
>> As far as my beliefs go, I understand the value of peer review as a
>> piece of the methods of science. A piece.>>
>>
>
>
> On the contrary you and Turq's understanding of the world is naive
> and flawed, has no basis, and is no different than the Spanish
> Inquisition that denounced Galilleo. You are a anti-science
> fundamentalist Curtis, who wants to push his own personal opinion
> over science.
>
> If we are to go by your view in the 21st century then anything goes,
> just because they believe it is true. just like Jerry Falwell, Ted
> Haggard, George Bush, Osama Bin Laden, Billy Graham, Fox News, The
> Pope, and the other medieval nuts that are trying to destroy science.
>
> Any other of you anti-science freaks on FFL want to join Larry, Ted
> Haggard, Ann Coulter, Bill O'Rielly and on your fundamentlaist anti-
> science agenda?
>
> If you cannot state clearly:
> "Only research published in peer-reviewed respected scientific
> journals, replicated 3 times, should be taken seriously in the 21st
> century", then you are an anti-science fundamentalist, and belong in
> the dark ages with the Spanish inquisition, and the Taliban. If you
> don't state this above statement, then you ARE stating that you are
> against science.
>
> That's a challenge to all you anti-science nuts here on FFL, that
> cannot bring themselves to make that statement.
>
> This has nothing to do with TM, this has to do with the future of
> science and humankind which is threatened by you people's anti-
> science fundamentalism -- Curt, Turq, Lurk, Vaj, Sal, Larry, Shemp,
> Peter, Boo, and others.
>
> OffWorld
Lay off the egg nog! You still haven't answered my question as to what
you teach at college. Surely not a science as you speak like someone
who isn't a scientist. Real scientists know that we've only scratched
the surface of knowledge and have a long way to go. There are certainly
those who believe that science has all the solutions but no real
scientist takes them seriously.
