> If you have not dealt with a skeptic lately, here is a reminder of what they > are like: > > http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=1940 > > Scroll down to the bottom and you will see that this person absolutely > rejects any paper not published in a U.S. peer-reviewed journal. He will not > even glance at a paper in a Japanese, Italian or Indian journal. He rejects > anything published in an electrochemical journal: > > "If you don't get the fact that it's meaningless and irrelevant unless it's > in a reputable peer-reviewed journal, then you're quite hopeless." > > He does not consider JJAP or Fusion Technology "reputable." > > Note also that he asks repeatedly for proof and papers, and then refuses to > look at them. This is classic full blown "skeptical" behavior > > - Jed
I disagree on one crucial point. Skeptics are not bad. We need skeptics. I would also say that you are, in fact, a healthy skeptc since you aren't willing to accept the conclusions of any experiment unless they have been independently replicated. This individual, on the other hand, is not a skeptic even though I would bet he often self-congratulates himself and truly believes he is pursuing a skeptical line of inquiry. The individual is behaving more like a debunker. Debunkers repeatedly show no interest in investigating any other line of inquiry or conclusion other than the one they carved into their own minds for all to gaze upon in abject awe. The UFO community has had it's fill of debunkers. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
