41 ms·
How so? It was published in peer-reviewed journals. The modern debunker was unaware of the previous experiments, and they messed up the protocol, so their debun
by rsheridan6 17y ago
How so? It was published in peer-reviewed journals. The modern debunker was unaware of the previous experiments, and they messed up the protocol, so their debunkings are illegitimate. What's dubious about it?
- rsheridan6 17y agoBTW, that last question would be better answered with a comment that has an actual argument rather than a bare assertion with no evidence, or moderation. Facts are facts. They don't give a shit which arrow you click.
- tdoggette 17y agoYou pointed to a previous discussion, about a point on which there was disagreement, and then said, "tl;dr - the side of that argument that I was on is right." That's not a good summary of what you linked to.
- rsheridan6 17y agoActually, it is, because I was right. At least nobody tried to make a rebuttal.