Steve, my understanding was that bender was implying that Koutsoyiannis was not acting
in a scientific manner because he had not provided an alternative hypothesis to explain the phenomena.
Not exact matches
«Consequently, methodical research
in all branches of knowledge, provided it is carried out
in a truly
scientific manner and does not override moral laws, can never conflict with the faith,
because the things of the world and the things of faith derive from the same God.
So if I claim 23092039580349582 is a prime number and nobody can be bothered with replying
in a
scientific manner (no, saying it can be divided by 2 doesn't cut it), this claim will hold and everyone
in my community will now celebrate and use this number as evidence that mathematicians are all wrong
because the claim has not been refuted
in a blog's comment section despite obviously being false?
Because tossing around «
scientific misconduct» may be pure something, and indicate simple something, but the unselfconscious irony of doing it
in this
manner, the hypocrisy, the flat out gall, does nothing to improve it.
He is not a risk - taker
because he had complete confidence
in his abilities and financial wherewithal to get the job done
in a
scientific manner, unlike the vast majority of registrants who spin a cheap line, throw it out there over and over again and hope that enough potentials will bite, and that thereafter enough of those will sell, allowing them to continue on with that never - ending old - school behaviour pattern of spin, spin, spin.