Changes

:::::::::You are correct that the truth does not require acceptance.  Kallium is not quite correct in in saying that it requires empirical support.  It does not, the truth is the truth is the truth and that’s an end to it.  The ''search'' for truth, however, requires certain actions and, in this case, Stitch75’s advice should be welcome.  Following Stitch75’s advice will not alter the truth one little bit, but will aid the search for it.  According to you the truth is that this was a flawed paper that was published, demonstrating flaws in the peer review process.  It gets science nowhere, the public scrutiny of science nowhere and the use of public money nowhere for this simply to ''be'' the truth.  The scientific community would need to see your objections in the "correct" format before it would do anything about it.

:::::::::You are correct that the truth does not require acceptance.  Kallium is not quite correct in in saying that it requires empirical support.  It does not, the truth is the truth is the truth and that’s an end to it.  The ''search'' for truth, however, requires certain actions and, in this case, Stitch75’s advice should be welcome.  Following Stitch75’s advice will not alter the truth one little bit, but will aid the search for it.  According to you the truth is that this was a flawed paper that was published, demonstrating flaws in the peer review process.  It gets science nowhere, the public scrutiny of science nowhere and the use of public money nowhere for this simply to ''be'' the truth.  The scientific community would need to see your objections in the "correct" format before it would do anything about it.

You may say that the scientific community should be doing this already.  (We might also question whether the format stipulated by the scientific community really is "correct").  Whether they should or should not is moot: the simple fact is that they aren’t and are unlikely to start anytime soon without a “correctly” prepared objection.  Stitch75’s advice is designed to help you prepare the objection “correctly” and, in doing so, aid the search for truth.--[[User:YoungA|YoungA]] 09:26, 24 July 2008 (EDT)  

:::::::::You may say that the scientific community should be doing this already.  (We might also question whether the format stipulated by the scientific community really is "correct").  Whether they should or should not is moot: the simple fact is that they aren’t and are unlikely to start anytime soon without a “correctly” prepared objection.  Stitch75’s advice is designed to help you prepare the objection “correctly” and, in doing so, aid the search for truth.--[[User:YoungA|YoungA]] 09:26, 24 July 2008 (EDT)