pourush

3 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by pourush 14y ago

   People don't always research what's important to their beliefs. I'd even go so far as to say it's more common than not that a person hasn't adequately researched their beliefs, whatever they are. So she might not have even read the book she
2. 2.▲
   by pourush 14y ago

   I'll write this before I read the article: Assumptions: I think a lot of what we "know" is going to be wrong. It's just a thing which seems likely to me. Not in a "things fall up now" sort of way, though a little of that, since the laws of
3. 3.▲
   by pourush 14y ago

   Thank you for that explanation. I believed you had said that studying what was different for centenarians - or similar biological anomalies - in a blue zone was quite possibly useless, but it seems that wasn't the case.
4. 4.▲
   by pourush 14y ago

   Could you explain what you mean by "statistical blip"? It seems odd to say that, I mean, wouldn't it imply that there's interference from improper measuring, or interference from variables gone unnoticed, or interference from variables that