Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 01/09/2012 in all areas

  1. I get the idea parn, in that the refinement of analysis can benefit from the input of peers. I think this is why there are other authors of the paper, plus plenty of published work to use as examples and references towards interpretation of the data. I just don't see that this has to occur at some sort of science conference. I think wild speculations would still be prevalant prior to actual peer review and publication. You've participated in that yourself, so you'll have to excuse my perceptions about some of you scientist types.
    1 point
  2. But she said she doesn't care if people believe her or not & good luck to her with that attitude, it's a good one to have.
    1 point
This leaderboard is set to New York/GMT-04:00
×
×
  • Create New...