Nel post precedente ho segnalato a blog whose title speaks for itself:
CICAP control of the allegations.
As mentioned above, I consider it a good idea because no one is exempt from criticism, and careful control, independent and rigorous is always helpful.
The author of the blog, Dario, was shown to accept the debate, and unlike so many others who decry the CICAP, has the honesty not to censor the comments, whether favorable or critical. In a post
Dario says he knew the scientific method. Despite the explanation that it is truly to be minimum wage, considering how difficult it is to express this clearly I I believe that while not an expert at least knows the basics.
But let the criticism, but that is an important Dario wants to control the statements of CICAP (legitimate purpose) and claims to know the scientific method.
But then, why the posts are full of statements isuoi easily smentibili CICAP really reading what he says? Why Dario reported statements that were never made by CICAP - at least not in the terms he used? Why make 'assumptions', 'hypothesis', 'opinions' and not criticism aimed at specific points? In some cases it does, but it seems without actually having read what the CICAP says. At least I've read the same things coming to conclusions very different, but it may well be a different assessment of the available data.
Dear Dario, the scientific method should be rigorously enforced, especially in the study of sources and evaluate them.
I am very pleased to speak with you, every opinion counts and is important. But please, if you criticize, to see them on objective data and not on 'feelings', 'assumptions', and 'opinions'.
Good luck.
. Wikio
0 comments:
Post a Comment