EdLee wrote:
A search for the term "peer review" returned nil from the article.
The word "peers" only appeared once.
The word "peers" only appeared once.
EdLee wrote:
Hi DrStraw, I apologize. I over-reacted. Please see also Understanding .
I did not read that article in great detail,
but I got the sense that none or little of their research
was peer reviewed, and that may have been part of the problem.
It was not a complaint. I was not looking for an argument, nor was I trolling.
I was not saying the article should've been peer reviewed, not at all.
I was simply stating a fact -- the term "peer reviewed" was not mentioned in the article.
This goes to show the risks and dangers of posting on a public forum. The assumptions.
If I read something I don't quite understand, I ask -- I'm sure sometimes I forget to do that, as well.
I try not to jump to conclusions, but I'm sure I fail at that, too.
I did not read that article in great detail,
but I got the sense that none or little of their research
was peer reviewed, and that may have been part of the problem.
It was not a complaint. I was not looking for an argument, nor was I trolling.
I was not saying the article should've been peer reviewed, not at all.
I was simply stating a fact -- the term "peer reviewed" was not mentioned in the article.
This goes to show the risks and dangers of posting on a public forum. The assumptions.
If I read something I don't quite understand, I ask -- I'm sure sometimes I forget to do that, as well.
I try not to jump to conclusions, but I'm sure I fail at that, too.
[making a point]
A search for "helpful" returned nil from your posts.
As a matter of fact, it was not even mentioned once!
It is not a complaint. I am not looking for an argument, nor am I trolling.
I am not saying the posts should've been helpful, not at all.
I am simply stating a fact -- the term "helpful" was not mentioned in the posts at all.
[/making a point]
Now, why would I write something like that?
Other than this, I fully agree with you, Ed.
