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 : Politics of Energy -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: russet who wrote (62248)	12/17/2014 9:13:57 AM
From: Eric	Respond to of 86356

It is not necessary to peer review anything to propose a scientific fact or theory. Yup, that's correct. Much has been published on Mann's scientific bloopers by many scientific experts. Then why are they not published in any of the major scientific journals? "Peer reviewed" science is the method we use today to test new discovery's. That was not true 150 years ago. The fact you can't see the problems with Mann's treatment of the data suggests you have little understanding of the science behind the debate, or you seek to deceive the scientifically illiterate, just like Mann. The fact that you think scientific facts are only valid if they appear in peer reviewed journals, show you know nothing about how science has progressed throughout the ages. I know a lot more about the subject than you seem to. But keep trying. We don't need to go back to the dark ages.