So you're saying any studies that show formula yields better results (not that Tanya was making such claims) would be due to the impossibility of developing a fair sampling / testing method, but you have no problem extolling the virtues of breast feeding, not to mention perpetuating this modern day phrenology of head circumference as a determination of future IQ, based on
the same flawed science?
Not exact matches
As such, and since the God of Islam is the
same God of Christianity and Judaism (according to the Quran that just been certified), Christianity and Judaism are true religions of God with text that has been corrupted (another reason you find contradictions with
science because ordinary humans changed the word of God so you can see the
flaws in it).
On the other hand, the
same issue had a Pielke Jr. article in it, in which he once more trots out the claim that because virtually the whole mainstream climate
science community (which Pielke refers to loosely as «pro Kyoto» lambasted the
flawed Baliunas et al Climate Research article, we all must be letting our political convictions over-ride our scientific judgement.
The
same can not be said of M&M who keep adapting their attacks, making fundamental
flaws, and publish in non-peer reviewed journals on social aspects of
science.