Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Evolution -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LLCF who wrote (2915)	9/4/2009 9:32:46 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 69300

<You're raising a bogus issue I didn't. Who cares if its a "scientific journal". > No, it's YOUR bogus issue. The bogus issue is your claim that SA isn't a "scientific journal" as opposed to a science magazine. YOU said Scientific American should not have non-scientists as writers! WHY? What a dumb argument. I do think its strange a non-scientist would have a column in a scientific magazine. Since Science isn't supposed to deal with spirituality it shouldn't raise eyebrows.. Here are a couple articles on spirituality by Michael Shermer in Scientific American: michaelshermer.com michaelshermer.com Scientific American columns promoting atheism: michaelshermer.com michaelshermer.com michaelshermer.com That's actually not true at all... MS has extensive experience with the scientific method and the use of scientific tools. No, he doesn't. <Neither of them write columns in a magazine entitled Science about science.> "Science" is a scientific journal... please keep them straight... ANYBODY can make up a magazine with the word "science" in it... ANYBODY! Once again with the "journal" vs magazine business. Okay, lets just agree Scientific American and Michael Shermer are as scientific as Scientology.