On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 12:36, Luis Ibanez <luis.iba...@kitware.com> wrote: >> 1. The quote extrapolates from research that does not actually address >> the claims made. >> >> 2. The research itself makes claims that, quite possibly, the >> underlying data does not support.
> Your opinions in items (1) and (2) in your email are as > arbitrary as the opinions expressed in the post that they > refer to, and are actually typical of what reviewers > routinely do in today's peer-review process: to express > opinions that are not based on factual data, nor based > on reproducible experiments. > For anyone interested in the real scientific method and in > epistemology, I warmly recommend the reading of the > following books: Thank you, Louis. You seem to have dismissed the entire thread, and instead have suggested we go read your favorite philosopher of science. Do all of your own publications adhere to a Popperian standard of excellence, or do you slum it with the rest of us on occasion? Matt _______________________________________________ tos mailing list tos@teachingopensource.org http://lists.teachingopensource.org/mailman/listinfo/tos
