(2017-09-17, 09:47 PM)Dante Wrote: Go reread your post. Your suggestions are not realistic in my opinion... if that's what is required in order to establish that in your mind, so be it. I am not certain that your suggested methods are remotely applicable to almost any of the cases. I am openly and directly disagreeing with you about those being realistic explanations for the body of research as a whole.I agree with Dante. Which is why I am asked for a description of what you WOULD consider valid. I think it's important that those of use who are taking the time to try and discuss this from the "pro" side feel that we are having a conversation "in good faith", and not just being run around in circles, which I must admit, is often how it feels.
I personally don't mind taking the time to get down to details on this stuff, but I won't, if I feel like I am dealing with someone who is being disingenuous. I am not accusing anyone of such, at the moment.