[hempcamp]

Quote:

Originally Posted by viggen /img/forum/go_quote.gif Also, statistcs is numeric data that measures relevancy of two events. Both events are true with the relevancy being hypothetical. With no clear knowledge of testing procedures and METHODOLOGY of testing, it's useless to bring up statistics such as DBT. It's neither here nor there.

Sorry, I'm prohibited from responding to your nonsense.

--Chris

 

[bigshot]

It's my understanding that you can discuss the results of objective testing, just not the methodology.

See ya
Steve

 

[hempcamp]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigshot /img/forum/go_quote.gif It's my understanding that you can discuss the results of objective testing, just not the methodology.

That's the problem! The minute one reports objective results from a test, someone else questions the methodology and one wouldn't be able to defend the methodology.

It's OK though, I'm not bitter, I'm amused. You and I know well that the entire physics, engineering, and psychology faculties of MIT could stand behind said methodology and many people around here would still cry foul, question the results, and (as in the other thread related to this issue) question knowledge itself just to "prove" what they can hear.

--Chris

 

[viggen]

That's the biggest load of sock I've read in a long time.

Science is about being proven wrong when methodologies ill designed is brought to light. You guys are just hiding behind your high school text books blathering on and on about measurements this and parameters that.

If you have anything objective to say, that is anything based on reality, empiricism, and not regurgitated Bill Nye science, then spew it out.

 

[hempcamp]

Quote:

Originally Posted by viggen /img/forum/go_quote.gif That's the biggest load of sock I've read in a long time. Science is about being proven wrong when methodologies ill designed is brought to light. You guys are just hiding behind your high school text books blathering on and on about measurements this and parameters that. If you have anything objective to say, that is anything based on reality, empiricism, and not regurgitated Bill Nye science, then spew it out.

This is a very incoherent post. I have no idea about what or to whom you are talking?

--Chris

 

[monolith]

Quote:

Originally Posted by viggen /img/forum/go_quote.gif That's the biggest load of sock I've read in a long time. Science is about being proven wrong when methodologies ill designed is brought to light. You guys are just hiding behind your high school text books blathering on and on about measurements this and parameters that. If you have anything objective to say, that is anything based on reality, empiricism, and not regurgitated Bill Nye science, then spew it out.

I have to agree with the previous poster. Most of that seems to be nonsense.

 

[Vul Kuolun]

Don't bother.

He's just trying to get the thread closed.

 

[bigshot]

I think the title of the thread is the reason some folks want to see it closed. It's a shame too, because there's some interesting stuff here.

See ya
Steve