In response to the comment on ammateur vs professional
contributions to the list, i appreciate the opportunity to
ask "stupid" (?) questions and receive informed answers from
those who are well read in a particular area. the problem
really comes in expressing opinions under the guise of being
"expert" when in fact one is ignorant. And there is
definitely a lack of rigour in the research/opinions that
christians sometimes express (we would not get away with
such lack of rigour in a grant application/publication etc.)
So, for my three ha'penny worth, I would like to be able to
ask questions of the experts; but endorse Paul Averson's
request for rigour and appropriate references in the
responses, or an appropriate acknowledgment of ignorance.
Assistant Professor in Medicine
Harvard Medical School
Thanks, Jonathan. This expresses what I tried to say originally, when
I recommended, rather excessively, that respondents should be familiar with
peer-reviewed knowledge of a field.
I certainly did not mean that you have to have some kind of 'professional'
status to write; by now we know that sometimes those with credentials are
not worth hearing, and sometimes those without credentials are.
As far as I am concerned, I would never contribute to this list if I had
to wait for my professional subject to come up, which is underwater acoustics.
My intent is to reduce the signal-to-noise ratio that often jams and spams
e-mail lists, making them difficult to use. Then the busy people from whom
we wish to read will stop coming here.
Just let your conscience be your guide, and your words be few.
Paul Arveson, Research Physicist
Code 724, Signatures Directorate, NSWC
9500 MacArthur Blvd., Bethesda, MD 20817-5700
(301) 227-3831 (W) (301) 227-4511 (FAX) (301) 816-9459 (H)