Quote:
Originally Posted by Actor
No, I am not. Peer review and appeal to authority are not the same thing. Google it.
|
Of course it is the same thing otherwise you would not always appeal to peer reviewed studies. The whole purpose behind "peer reviews" is to get the opinions of
experts in the submitter's given field. And by definition, an "expert" is one with special skill or knowledge that represents mastery of a particular subject. And it's this mastery which makes their opinion
authoritative. It's what makes the peer reviewers
authorities in their field. Therefore by submitting a work to be peer reviewed, the scientist is seeking the collective opinion of his work by authorities in his own field.
Quote:
|
Meanwhile, if you can tell me which of Dr. Ross's books contains this calculations and data I just might read it and make my own contribution to the peer review. Or perhaps you could provide me with said calculations and data.
|
Yeah...okay.
Don't know which of his books were involved in his study. But Ross has his own website. That may give you a clue and/or his contact info.
http://old.reasons.org/explore/type/todays-new-reason
Meanwhile, quit stalling and answer my question about the Big Bang Bang and how an orderly universe could have been a consequence of that explosion.
