On 1 Mar 2007 04:24:33 -0800, jeremyrh.geo@yahoo.com wrote:
>On 1 mrt, 13:10, Martin wrote:
>> On 1 Mar 2007 02:41:08 -0800, jeremyrh....@yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >On 1 mrt, 11:43, Deeply Filled Mortician
>> > wrote:
>> >> Let is be knownst that on Thu, 1 Mar 2007 06:59:08 +0100,
>> >> m...@privacy.net (Mister Bartlett) writted:
>>
>> >> >Deeply Filled Mortician
>> >> >wrote:
>> >> >> Seems to me sometimes people like to slap a label on in a bid to end
>> >> >> reasonable debate.
>>
>> >> >"Reasonable debate"? Seems to me that this "debate" is characterised by
>> >> >Mary presenting a hypothesis and backing it up with published research,
>> >> >while you, iReid and Martin reply by shouting "not listening, not
>> >> >listening, not listening" like any toddler having a tantrum.
>>
>> >> 'Seems' being the operative word here. It 'seems' to me that you are
>> >> convinced, and don't want to question the study.
>>
>> >I don't have a problem with quetioning the study. I have a problem
>> >with questioning it without even having read it, which is what you
>> >did.
>>
>> Since the study has yet to be published, how can we read the published research?
>
>Didn't you give a link to it on the Elsevier site[1]? I know yesterday
>is a long time ago, but still ...
I gave a link to the abstract.
Is there a way of merging McD, Helmets and the Macs are best threads?
I have tried to combine these threads under one subject so that they can be
ignored by bona fides travellers.
--
Martin
|