So one can skim-read data and reach reliable conclusions? Good, then we can skim-read all of your subsequent posts.
You can skim read whatever you like, but you completely missed the point of my statement. My point was that you don't even have to read the article closely to see that the author was distorting and misrepresenting the parts of the book he was criticizing. From paragraph to paragraph, the argument had no continuity.
Scientific journals. Scientists and scholars can be biased and publish bullshit too. Perhaps more effectively than can laymen.
Once again, you completely missed the point of my statement. I know scientists can be biased. This post was in regards to a "scientific" book which I considered to be biased. I was pointing out that other scientists had criticized the book for not following standard scientific method.
Respected newspapers. For 'respected' (everyone's favourite word) to mean anything, we must look at who's doing the respecting. Here in the UK, we have 'respected' journos and broadcasters like Trisha Goddard, Lorraine Kelly, Jeremy Kyle, none of whom knows arse from elbow. But they have a huge audience. Funny, that.
Once again, you completely missed the point of my statement. I didn't claim that if an article contained errors, that they should be overlooked. I said that simply because an article was on that site didn't mean it should be considered completely fictitious. The poster I responded to quite specifically compared the accuracy of Wikipedia to that of Britannica. I showed that the accuracy of the two has been compared and they are actually pretty similar.
Furthermore, your statement is simply wrong. Every journalist, author and informational body has at one point or another printed something that wasn't entirely accurate. Most newspapers have daily corrections pages. Just because an article contains an error, doesn't mean every other fact is rendered untrue or irrelevant. Just as the author is not a machine incapable of mistakes, the reader is not a machine incapable of independent thought. It is up to the reader to analyze all available facts and determine articles credibility. This was my point to begin with.
You can't dismiss all facts in an article and expect to be taken seriously. Whyever not? If even a single statement is found to be nonsense, surely that tarnishes the author's credibility?
Independent studies. That's just more words. Independent of whom or what? How can 'independent' be verified? Quick answer is, it can't.
DAMY
This is simply wrong. Independent can easily be verified. The journal cited in that article is over 100 years old and does not accept advertising. The methods used to conduct the study were published in the magazine.It is, in fact, extremely easy to verify whether or not a study is independent.
