Member Info for Quady

Oh dear Jezzoo read it

It makes it clear.

It's purpose is for ideas to be held up to scrutiny.

So cannot be biased as it's about establishing the facts.

What do you suggest we do abandon science and hold nothing up to scrutiny.

Because everything is biased according to your world view.

The whole point of peer review is it elimates biased by the process.

This is because everyone in that field can input their own studies or historical studies and data.

Now try reading it.

Jezzoo you don't know what peer review is.

However I have posted the description so you can read it.

I will give you the benefit of the doubt and put it down to ignorance.

However after you have read the post and acquainted yourself with the facts, I will not give you the benefit of the doubt in the future.

What peer review is.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peer_review

So Jezzoo the source's I have quoted are NASA and NOAA.

You believe these organisations tell lies to deliberately mislead people.

Also your post shows you have no idea what peer review is.

How on earth do you come to the conclusion that peer review is biased.

It's not, apart from if you think like you slug.

Peer review is based on research that gathers facts.

You know observation that is directly or indirectly observed, then association is formed with other studies or bodies of work and then published with its conclusions.

This is done so that it can be tested and held up to scrutiny and supported or refuted.

How is this biased, you really don't know what you are talking about.

But that is the common amongst people who have a world view and don't let facts get in the way of their delusions.

Again mathersfinger you double down on your lies rather than admit your mistake.

It is you who looks to the internet to support your world view.

Again I challenge you.

Show me a post where I have said peer review is everything.

Instead try reading what I post instead of making it up in your head.

You're an absolute liar.

Mathersfinger I am immune to your gaslighting.

Really low.

You made claims that I said peer review was everything.

You are a liar.

Instead of showing a post which would prove you right, you don't because you cannot as you are an out and out liar.

So you try to change the subject.

Mathersfinger you are a liar.

I have never said peer review is gospel to me or anything like it.

I have asked for peer review as a starting point for taking a scientific claim forward.

Any idiot can post from social media and claim it's true.

But when asked even for a peer review, so the detail can be examined, these idiots arguments soon collapse.

It's a starting point where it can be held up to scrutiny.

I have never said anything different.

You are a liar, please post where I have made such a claim.

Mathersfinger the fact that you show peer review works.

Once people looked at this the truth came out.

Without peer review the claims cannot be investigated, because there is nothing to investigate.

Show me evidence on anything, and I would gladly look at it.

Slug on Co2 I have directed you to NOAA and NASA many times, to read the evidence.

You are just too stupid to even do that.

You would think you wanted the truth.

Let me help you out.

It won't be found on social media.

People who get what they think is evidence from social media really are idiots.

Just when I think slug cannot be a bigger imbecile.

He proves me wrong.

Cancer is a generic term.

There are different Cancers.

Some are genetic, some are from external sources..

All involve mutations in the DNA.

Often within generations of families.

You are not only an imbecile Slug.

You are repugnant to everyone that has lost a loved one or friend to Cancer

Sorry that's ridiculous Mathersfinger.

Peer review is when an idea is held up to scrutiny, so that the ideas can be tested and either confirmed or found to be wanting.

It is only the first stage.

Slug doesn't even understand this part.

A post on x or any other social media is not evidence.

When it's submitted for peer review, than this is only the first step to checking if something is true or not.

Slug cannot even understand the basics of evidence.

This is what makes him the biggest imbecile on here.

Mathersfinger you are agreeing with me.

Yes peer review gets retracted if it doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

Often its amended.

Nothing to do with who funds it.

That's another trope.

Don't be a slug.

Slug you keep telling me that you understand critical thinking.

I do you don't.

If so how did you fact check this claim, please supply the links of what lead you to your conclusions.

I will give you a clue.

Posts on twitter or any social media are not evidence.

We need peer review as a minimum, so that it can be held up to scrutiny and checked, and then it passes onto the next stage, where clinical trials take place.

Please also post the links to these.

Lastly show the final stages that comfirm the clinical trials.

Anything less shows you don't even understand how to assess.

Let about anything about critical thinking.

Slug it's a well known trope, it's a lie.

That's why people like you are so easily fooled.

Think for one minute.

If it was true.

Then it wouldn't be on x.

It would be published.

Hence peer review is the first step.

You really are an imbecile.

Oh dear more lies from Slug.

This would require a minimum of a peer review.

Please provide the link.

I know this is a lie, as I have heard this trope before.

No peer review exists.

Yet again Slug you prove how easy it is to dupe you.

You really are an imbecile.

Slug the only weasel on here is you.

You have said so many times that a deal is imminent you have been wrong every time.

So you are 100% wrong, as you are on everything.

Then you try weasel words to say your not.

A weasel, woman hater, far right extremist and RAC.ist.

This describes you absolutely.

Glad you think that slug as in all things you have been 100% wrong.

My record is better as I have been correct in the Solgold outcome up to now.

Good grief has nobody learnt anything over the years.

We have nobody in the data room and no interested parties.

How do we know that?

Our CEO told us.

We have no bids.

How do we know that?

Our CEO told us.

We have the money to finish permitting and licenses.

How do we know this?

It was announced in a RNS.

We have over 40% of the funding to take us to production.

How do we know this?

Because a RNS told us.

If you do not understand all the communication taking place between company and shareholders, then I cannot help you.

We have all the information, now process it and work out the most likely outcome.

Slug you're doing what you always do.

You are being a weasel and playing with words.

Yet again you show yourself to be an imbecile.

Correct I did say trades showed up on level 2 as people on here who used level 2, said they could see my trades.

It's you who is the imbecile slug.

You make up lies.