factsvsfiction wrote:
"Ok MOrgan, if someone goes to you, hey that theory of yours has some limitations. Then someone gives a dataset to backup their assertion, you have a duty to listen.
Decidedly not the case.
Datasets are meaningless without being connected with the validity of the dataset and without being connected to a method of analysis that is verifiable. And without all being subject to peer review.
Anything less is the equivalent to asking Paris Hilton to weigh in on the nuclear cross section of Niobium.
factsvsfiction wrote:
"Well if someone produces a dataset that asserts you have the stress levels on the wings of the airplane incomplete you listen."
Nonsense. You could produce such a dataset ... it would be of zero value. I could produce such a dataset ... it would be of zero value. If you believe what you wrote ... interpret this:
10 61.18222 -149.863
1028 32.7578 -117.0778
1028 32.6958 -117.1122
1028 32.755 -117.1133
1028 32.7011 -117.0672
1028 32.7636 -117.0186
10 61.13806 -149.883
1028 32.7475 -117.2447
1028 32.6339 -117.0822
16 29.4526 -95.039
10 61.11222 -149.8667
16 29.4095 -95.2566
1028 32.7028 -117.1428
10 61.195 -149.945
1028 32.7919 -117.0882
16 29.6999 -95.6135
146 33.1678 -97.1114
146 33.0539 -96.9897
5 32.93583 -96.7203
5 32.89444 -96.7192
146 32.8686 -96.9872
146 32.7256 -97.4703
146 32.905 -97.2561
146 32.8364 -97.1631
146 32.7097 -97.2931
146 32.8144 -96.9897
146 32.8231 -97.2378
146 32.735 -97.2272
146 32.6483 -97.3961
146 32.66778 -97.3536
146 32.715 -97.4158
Knock yourself out.
Then stop confusing values with value.
