(January 3, 2018 at 4:05 pm)alpha male Wrote:(December 28, 2017 at 11:08 pm)Astreja Wrote: I work in medicine, and regularly read abstracts when looking for information for correspondence I'm typing. Sometimes I speed-read the whole paper. There are also a few conditions where for my own interest I'm constantly on the lookout for new developments -- in particular, treatment of lymphedema and fibromyalgia.
It's comparatively easy for me to access journals without a personal subscription -- if I can't just pull them up on my browser at work, I can pop over to the local medical library and read them there. (In fact, many years ago, I had a temporary position where I regularly pulled journal articles that my boss needed for her own research. I know how to find these things.)
I only use "pop" science as a starting point. If I have no need to dig deeper I just use those articles as mental bookmarks so that I can track down the good stuff later. I have enough competence in the basic sciences to determine whether an article is a plausible new development, a rehash of something I was already aware of, or flat-out nonsense.
Yeah, you know how to find these things, yet no links follow.
Admit it, the vast majority of what you think you know about abiogenesis or evolution didn't come from reading peer-reviewed studies.
For me it isn't about the strength of peer reviewed research regarding abiogenesis. Maybe we someday demonstrate how it could happen, maybe we don't. But, whatever the mechanism/secret sauce, non-supernatural means is the operative assumption until we find even one non-controversial instance of supernatural causation.
