Joined: Sep. 2006
|Quote (Daniel Smith @ Jan. 24 2008,17:53)|
|Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Jan. 24 2008,09:29)|
|Quote (Daniel Smith @ Jan. 24 2008,11:05)|
|Quote (mitschlag @ Jan. 24 2008,02:53)|
Please give citations to PEER-REVIEWED papers.
So, that'll be a no then?
Then why not just say that?
I've cited peer-reviewed papers plenty of times in this thread. I can't help the fact that you won't click on the links.
You seem to think that you have already provided enough documentation to make your case.
If that is so, it would be a kindness and a properly scholarly contribution to this discussion if you would bring together in a single post your list of relevant PEER-REVIEWED PRIMARY* publications. It would be especially helpful if you would comment on each citation to make clear the point or points that you consider to have been made.
*As noted by JAM.
Edited to add: Sorry oldman, I see that you made a similar point already.
"You can establish any “rule” you like if you start with the rule and then interpret the evidence accordingly." - George Gaylord Simpson (1902-1984)