On Monday, July 15, 2019 at 3:30:20 PM UTC+3, fl wrote: > > > If there's a scientific study that proves these claims, then cite it! >> Otherwise, they're simply reasonable opinions. >> > > > Is it evidence-based? Of course not, it is no evidence-based. I'm not the > Food and Drug Administration or NASA. "Evidence-based" has become the > argument for killing any conversation in one shot. >
Sorry for interfering. I think that statement was a bit provocative: science can not *prove* (in logical sense) anything by evidence if it isn't invented, but can only disprove *universal* claims by counter-example. OTOH Wikipedia has a policy which forbids original research, so references to secondary sources are required. I was bitten by this rule several times. But let us not turn personal, please. And there is no reason to appeal to geopolitics or universal evil (whatever that could be that instant), not the least because it's off-topic here and would fall on deaf ears. This is just my humble opinion, of course. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Metamath" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/metamath/6081c817-38ce-44e4-811e-d19f1166a528%40googlegroups.com.
