- Dec 16, 2003
- 269
- 37
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Pentecostal
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Upvote
0
Your theory is incorrect as I have been researching since before O was placed into office.
Your theory is incorrect as I have been researching since before O was placed into office.
There are at least two sides to every story. I really could care less that you love peer review. I love people...you love peer review. Fine...dismiss every link I post. Try reading the following FACTS before you do though...and it doesn't take much thinking to draw a logical conclusion...which I think you may be capable of:
Vaccination Debate
CC
Hmmm thanks for the heads upNote to those that don't know. NOT EVERYTHING YOU SEE AND READ ON THE INTERNET IS TRUE OR REAL.
Going to conspiracy theory websites does not count as research!
Then again we could switch that around and say if it is print or a journal with impressive names and studies done by people with multiple degrees it must be true. I am sometimes reminded of the line in Charlotte's Web were the spider tells Wilbur the pig "People are gulliable. They will believe anything in print".If it's on the Internet, it must be true...
It may seem foolish to some to keep crying "wolf" but that does not mean that the "wolf" does not exist. He will appear when he knows that he has an excellent chance of getting away with it. The "wolf" always has a plan B.
Then again we could switch that around and say if it is print or a journal with impressive names and studies done by people with multiple degrees it must be true. I am sometimes reminded of the line in Charlotte's Web were the spider tells Wilbur the pig "People are gulliable. They will believe anything in print".
The only way to know the truth is to pray and seek the Lord's answer on such matters as nothing is hid from Him. Thank the Lord. Some of what I've found I would find hard to believe except for the fact God kept pressing me to study this or that issue.
If you do not do something at Plan A, the people will be use to being herded like sheep, and I would not think it safe to be herded by those who are not interested in your well being.The "Wolf" gets away with it because people get tired of the little boy crying "wolf."
As long as you help him with plan A, the "wolf" doesn't need a plan B.
If you do not do something at Plan A, the people will be use to being herded like sheep, and I would not think it safe to be herded by those who are not interested in your well being.
It's not a matter of loving peer review vs. loving people. I love people too. The difference is I understand that in order for a piece of evidence to be valid scientifically peer review is a necessary but not sufficient criteria for being valid.
If you were paid by xyz drug company to show the effectiveness of xyz drug. Do you think your research will be show positive results, because you know where your bread is buttered. Playing with statistics until they show favorable results is not unheard of in the research field. Thinking that xyz drug company is going to pay you for any other results, means you have not shook hands with the contractor.According to what rule? Who made that rule? A piece of evidence is valid scientifically because it is true...not because people say or think it is true. A piece of evidence doesn't go from invalid to valid just because a group of "smart" people says so...
That is my opinion...you have yours.
CC
No, the first and most immediate way of checking out the truth of things is to apply rational logic and reason.
And guess what - one side of this debate lacks it in spades.
If you were paid by xyz drug company to show the effectiveness of xyz drug. Do you think your research will be show positive results, because you know where your bread is buttered. Playing with statistics until they show favorable results is not unheard of in the research field. Thinking that xyz drug company is going to pay you for any other results, means you have not shook hands with the contractor.
Then again we could switch that around and say if it is print or a journal with impressive names and studies done by people with multiple degrees it must be true.