en:misc:talk-qa-saine-schwarcz
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision Next revision Both sides next revision | ||
|
en:misc:talk-qa-saine-schwarcz [2013/02/07 12:11] legatum [DOCUMENT DESCRIPTOR] |
en:misc:talk-qa-saine-schwarcz [2013/02/08 08:10] 80.86.255.130 [QUESTION 6] |
||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
| **In the debate, you said of Professor Rustum Roy of Penn State University, "Rustum Roy, who was referred to, is not highly regarded in the scientific community. He is one of those outliers. And there are many such." On what basis do you base your opinion that Professor Roy is not highly regarded in the scientific community? Are you aware that in 2003 the ISI (Phila) rated his lab the #1 in the world on the basis of highly cited scholars[(Roy R. Interdisciplinary materials research: the reluctant reformer of Western science. //Facets// 2005; 4: 18-21. )] and that he has published over 1,000 papers in peer-review journals? Which ones of his results are therefore not trustworthy? How do you decide whether a scientific article published in a peer-reviewed journal is trustworthy, such as the one of Roy in Materials Science[(Roy R, Tiller WA, Bell I, Hoover MR. The structure of liquid water; novel insights from materials research; potential relevance to homeopathy. //Materials Research Innovations// 2005; 9: 577-608.)] in 2005 or the one of Chikramane in Langmuir[(Chikramane PS, Kalita D, Suresh AK, Kane SG, Bellare JR. Why extreme dilutions reach non-zero asymptotes: a nanoparticulate hypothesis based on froth flotation. //Langmuir// 2012; 28: 15864-15875.)] in 2012?** | **In the debate, you said of Professor Rustum Roy of Penn State University, "Rustum Roy, who was referred to, is not highly regarded in the scientific community. He is one of those outliers. And there are many such." On what basis do you base your opinion that Professor Roy is not highly regarded in the scientific community? Are you aware that in 2003 the ISI (Phila) rated his lab the #1 in the world on the basis of highly cited scholars[(Roy R. Interdisciplinary materials research: the reluctant reformer of Western science. //Facets// 2005; 4: 18-21. )] and that he has published over 1,000 papers in peer-review journals? Which ones of his results are therefore not trustworthy? How do you decide whether a scientific article published in a peer-reviewed journal is trustworthy, such as the one of Roy in Materials Science[(Roy R, Tiller WA, Bell I, Hoover MR. The structure of liquid water; novel insights from materials research; potential relevance to homeopathy. //Materials Research Innovations// 2005; 9: 577-608.)] in 2005 or the one of Chikramane in Langmuir[(Chikramane PS, Kalita D, Suresh AK, Kane SG, Bellare JR. Why extreme dilutions reach non-zero asymptotes: a nanoparticulate hypothesis based on froth flotation. //Langmuir// 2012; 28: 15864-15875.)] in 2012?** | ||
| + | |||
| + | Test | ||
| {{anchor:schwarcz_answers}} | {{anchor:schwarcz_answers}} | ||
| Line 58: | Line 60: | ||
| ^ Source: | http://www.homeopathy.ca/debates_2012-11-27_FromDrSaine-to-DrSchawrtz.shtml | | ^ Source: | http://www.homeopathy.ca/debates_2012-11-27_FromDrSaine-to-DrSchawrtz.shtml | | ||
| - | ^ Description: | Debate about Homeopathy: Mere Placebo or Great Medicine? | | + | ^ Description: | Questions posted by Dr. André Saine to Dr. Joe Schwarcz as a follow-up on the [[en:misc:talk-saine-schwarcz|Debate held at McGill University]] on November 27, 2012. | |
| ^ Year: | 2013 | | ^ Year: | 2013 | | ||
| ^ Editing: | errors only; interlinks; formatting | | ^ Editing: | errors only; interlinks; formatting | | ||
| ^ Attribution: | http://www.homeopathy.ca | | ^ Attribution: | http://www.homeopathy.ca | | ||
en/misc/talk-qa-saine-schwarcz.txt · Last modified: 2013/02/08 15:57 by legatum
Page Tools
Except where otherwise noted, content on this wiki is licensed under the following license: CC Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported
