Originally Posted by Ringman
Originally Posted by smokepole
Originally Posted by Ringman
In a lecture I heard last week about epistemology, the guys said many profound things. Maybe the most profound was "pear reviewed" almost guarantees no new ideas. Some of the great men of science mentioned here would not have passed "pear review".


Hey ringy, you know how much the findings of a "scientific" paper are worth when the "scientific" paper can't stand up to examination and questions from the peer group?

As an old school well driller once told me, "best print it on some nice soft paper so at least it'll be useful for something."

The lecturer said something that applies here. He said most people, including scientists, ignore data that does not support their presupposition. It challenges their "reality".

Does this speaker have a name?

Of wait, you have me on ignore because I say things that do not support your presuppositions.

You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.

You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell