Quote:
Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald
I expected this type of response. I did a straight search and reported the return, because that is the academic approach. No cherry-picking data, just dumping what was there. And yes, some of the titles don't read well, and ultimately may present the subject matter in a negative light. But that data is still valuable. And many times, the data does not reflect the title.
|
Ok, I’ve been following this back and forth and now I’m just even more confused. You said there were peer reviewed articles discussing the physical evidence, Fuzz said show me, and after avoiding it you dumped like 20 random articles you did not even look into to see if they answered his request and you’re calling it “the academic approach”?
If there are articles that actually satisfy Fuzz’s fairly specific request, like you said there were, why aren’t you just linking those ones?