Forum Menu - Click/Swipe to open
 

Devils Advocate

You have contributed 0.0% of this topic

Thread Tools
Appreciate
Topic Appreciation
To appreciate this topic, click 'Appreciate Topic' on the right.
Rank Image
Offline
Unspecified
549
Brother
-6
#46 [Permalink] Posted on 27th March 2022 18:58
Yasin wrote:
View original post
Quote:
Where is the rule or requirement you posted from?
This is from the publishers of peer reviewed journals such as Wiley, Inderscience, Taylor and Francis, and Elsevier.
Quote:
The peer-review process subjects an author's scholarly work, research, or ideas to the scrutiny of others who are experts in the same field (peers) and is considered necessary to ensure academic scientific quality.
Blocked from replying in this thread.
report post quote code quick quote reply
+1 -0Like x 1
back to top
Rank Image
Asaaghir's avatar
Spinistan Throne
1,137
Brother
748
Asaaghir's avatar
#47 [Permalink] Posted on 27th March 2022 19:04
sharjan8643 wrote:
View original post

Yasin is wasting his time to a self confessed devil's advocate.

Devil’s advocate, defined:
When someone “plays devil’s advocate,” they’re arguing an opinion or taking a side they don’t agree with in order to foster debate.
report post quote code quick quote reply
+0 -0Agree x 1
back to top
Yasin's avatar
UK
6,700
Brother
944
Yasin's avatar
#48 [Permalink] Posted on 27th March 2022 19:10
sharjan8643 wrote:
View original post

According to your requirement, where's the peer reviewed document confirming the documented claiming 3000+ engineers and architects who are united on the cartoon Walt Disney physics that only applied on that day and could never be repeated and the rule of science doesn't apply on that day alone on the issue of 9/11 and the 2 million+ engineers and architects confirming this?

sharjan8643 wrote:
View original post

Are you saying this is the only way to confirm something is valid otherwise it's invalid and unscientific?

sharjan8643 wrote:
View original post

Where's the peer reviewed documents from Wiley, Inderscience, Taylor and Francis, and Elsevier claiming that the ONLY way to validate a fact or basic physics is by peer reviewed documents.
report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
Offline
Unspecified
549
Brother
-6
#49 [Permalink] Posted on 27th March 2022 19:31
Yasin wrote:
View original post
Quote:
Where's the peer reviewed documents from Wiley, Inderscience, Taylor and Francis, and Elsevier claiming that the ONLY way to validate a fact or basic physics is by peer reviewed documents.
It says so in their editorial message, which is obviously peer reviewed because it is issued by the editorial board, which is a group of subject expert peers.
Quote:
peer review ... is considered necessary to ensure academic scientific quality.
Is this what you were asking?
Blocked from replying in this thread.
report post quote code quick quote reply
+1 -0Like x 1
back to top
Rank Image
Offline
Unspecified
549
Brother
-6
#50 [Permalink] Posted on 27th March 2022 19:34
Asaaghir wrote:
View original post
In the message you've quoted me, I've categorically stated that I am not playing devil's advocate in the present discussion.
Blocked from replying in this thread.
report post quote code quick quote reply
+1 -0Like x 1
back to top
Yasin's avatar
UK
6,700
Brother
944
Yasin's avatar
#51 [Permalink] Posted on 27th March 2022 19:35
sharjan8643 wrote:
View original post


Yasin wrote:
View original post


There's 3 questions based on your claims. Answer them first. And no, don't quote your quotes and ask if that's what I was saying.

There's 3 questions in my post based on your claims. Answer them first. Read, understand, then answer only what I'm asking. Don't diverge and change subject.
report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
Offline
Unspecified
549
Brother
-6
#52 [Permalink] Posted on 27th March 2022 19:41
Yasin wrote:
View original post
1. I know of no such document.
2. No
3. I know of no such document.
Blocked from replying in this thread.
report post quote code quick quote reply
+1 -0Like x 1Facepalm x 1Ha Ha x 2
back to top
Yasin's avatar
UK
6,700
Brother
944
Yasin's avatar
#53 [Permalink] Posted on 28th March 2022 00:19
sharjan8643 wrote:
View original post

There we have it. The pinnacle of hypocrisy. All rules and requirements for truths but the same rules and requirements don't apply to falsehood, misinformation and official political lies. I agree with Asaaghir on the devil's advocate. I will no longer waste any time to obvious and proven closed hearts.
report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
Offline
Unspecified
549
Brother
-6
#54 [Permalink] Posted on 28th March 2022 02:19
This post has been reported. It could be due to breaking rules or something as simple as bad use of bbcodes which breaks the page format. We will attend to this soon.
Blocked from replying in this thread.
report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
Asaaghir's avatar
Spinistan Throne
1,137
Brother
748
Asaaghir's avatar
#55 [Permalink] Posted on 28th March 2022 10:04
Please split this thread from post 30 onwards. It's better to leave both threads apart.
report post quote code quick quote reply
No post ratings
back to top
Rank Image
mSiddiqui's avatar
Offline
Unspecified
610
Brother
123
mSiddiqui's avatar
#56 [Permalink] Posted on 28th March 2022 11:40
report post quote code quick quote reply
+1 -0
back to top
Rank Image
abu mohammed's avatar
London
27,453
Brother
9,578
abu mohammed's avatar
#57 [Permalink] Posted on 28th March 2022 15:27
report post quote code quick quote reply
+1 -0Like x 1
back to top