Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
622 bytes added ,  00:58, February 14, 2008
Line 128: Line 128:     
:::::::::::::::: Thanks, that's what I thought.  --[[User:HMayo|HMayo]] 19:47, 13 February 2008 (EST)
 
:::::::::::::::: Thanks, that's what I thought.  --[[User:HMayo|HMayo]] 19:47, 13 February 2008 (EST)
 +
 +
::::::::::::::: It is a good article and it cites a [http://www.jpands.org/vol8no2/malec.pdf solid study] in its references. However, there is something I've noticed about many controversial issues: for every study strongly asserting one thing, there'll be another asserting just the [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15051280 opposite]. Perhaps one is a legitimate study and the other is merely [[junk science]] [[propaganda]] - but if I assume as much, what am I to base that conclusion on? Other studies of the same nature? My personal [[ideology]]? [[User:Feebasfactor|Feebasfactor]] 19:58, 13 February 2008 (EST)
 +
    
==Suggestion for Item 11==
 
==Suggestion for Item 11==
nsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO, nsTeam1_talkRW
902

edits

Navigation menu