Shattered in what way? I have only seen competing data based on satellite measurements and those have been explained away by scientists. Not credible compared to the alternative measures.
-
-
Peer review by people who are in the same cult is virtually meaningless. For example, a paper by an Ancient Alien Theorists which is peer reviewed by his peers, other Ancient Theorists (some of which are in fact scientist) is not being reviewed honestly.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
But it is persuasive to a non-scientist when a scientist in one specialty agrees with someone in a different specialty. They are scientists. They agree on process and proof. It means something to me. It adds weight.
-
It's better than nothing, but far from persuasive on its own. Half of peer reviewed scientific papers are later debunked. And science knows money/ego/career are bias-makers.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.