Block, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, Check users, delete, edit, Moderators, move, oversight, protect, rollback
19,323
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 48:
Line 48: +
→Wind Turbine Syndrome: re
==Wind Turbine Syndrome==
==Wind Turbine Syndrome==
The Wind Turbine Syndrome paragraph contains a completely false assertion about the reference used to validate wind turbine syndrome. The reference only states the author of the report trained at Johns Hopkins. [http://www.windturbinesyndrome.com/wind-turbine-syndrome/] Nowhere in the reference is it claimed the peer review was done by Johns Hopkins. In fact the book in question was printed by a micro-press. If in fact the contents of this book were actually peer reviewed, then why was it not printed in a peer reviewed publication?--[[User:GinnyS|GinnyS]] ([[User talk:GinnyS|talk]]) 17:31, 23 July 2017 (EDT)
The Wind Turbine Syndrome paragraph contains a completely false assertion about the reference used to validate wind turbine syndrome. The reference only states the author of the report trained at Johns Hopkins. [http://www.windturbinesyndrome.com/wind-turbine-syndrome/] Nowhere in the reference is it claimed the peer review was done by Johns Hopkins. In fact the book in question was printed by a micro-press. If in fact the contents of this book were actually peer reviewed, then why was it not printed in a peer reviewed publication?--[[User:GinnyS|GinnyS]] ([[User talk:GinnyS|talk]]) 17:31, 23 July 2017 (EDT)
:I'd never heard of this before, so I don't have much knowledge on the subject. What I saw after some quick research was that most mainstream scientists just haven't studied it. Some have, though, and most of those agree that this is nonsense. However, some other still hold that is is verifiably true. I would be interested in reading more on this later, but it sounds like neither side has conceded to the other and both claim the evidence supports their stance. I do know that certain sound waves and patterns can affect the human brain, but I don't know if this specific application of that reality is true. Sometimes, peer reviewers do not review as well as they should, and therefore are not likely to accept anything they believe to be outrageous, even if the evidence supports it. It can therefore be sometimes difficult to get things published in some peer reviewed journals, even if they are true. I'm not saying that's what happened here, but it could be. I'm not ready to discount the possibility that this could be a genuine issue. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 18:19, 23 July 2017 (EDT)