Google and Science

[jackman]

If at any point you feel that someone has google-bated you, you can always just copy paste their responses......into google.

(I share Phils frustration, but I do feel that it is completely the fault of the messenger when gaffs arise, and not whatever message may available in the hallowed halls of the interwebs)

of course. tons of people quote the first thing that validates their belief. shame on them if they really buy it and have the nerve to try to defend an issue with it. my point was lost (therefore irrelevant to continue). so i won't continue to try to make it. i agree, in short.

---

IF that's what they were doing that would be fine. What we see, just look at our current infestation of theistic morons as an example, is that they run around until they find a citation which confirms what they want to hear and then post it as if it is some kind of unassailable truth.

Idiots will always be idiots and jesus-freaks are the worst of the lot but the internet has given them fuel for their delusions.

point taken.

---

See, a degreed scientist (geologist) who should have known better uses Google to come up with a wikipedia stub (and the claim thousands of universities disagree with me) to claim I don't understand beta decay since there are two types not three as I claimed. When he read a PDF from MIT claiming (and proving) otherwise, he suddenly claimed he forgot about the third type. See the danger of thinking Google is science?

you seem to have found a flaw in his argument, so kudos to you. as an engineer by education myself (albeit civil, lol), mit stands as a fairly credible source in my book. please tho, one last time, i do NOT think google is science - tho i feel you were just pointing out the purpose of your OP, more so than showing me the error of MY ways.