RE: [fw-wiz] Wired article on the scientific method
From: Melson, Paul (PMelson_at_sequoianet.com)
Date: 09/02/04
- Previous message: Abe Singer: "Re: [fw-wiz] Re: Flawed Surveys [was: VPN endpoints] (Paul D. Robertson)"
- Maybe in reply to: Tina Bird: "[fw-wiz] Wired article on the scientific method"
- Next in thread: hermit921: "RE: [fw-wiz] Wired article on the scientific method"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
To: "Tina Bird" <tbird@precision-guesswork.com> Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2004 09:16:05 -0400
Fascinating article. But in light of this thread, I ran across this
line on the second page and had to laugh:
"A recent study of work published in Nature and British Medical Journal,
for example, found that 11 percent of papers had serious statistical
errors."
PaulM
> -----Original Message-----
> Talk about good timing:
>
>
<http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.09/rugg.html?pg=1&topic=rugg&topi
c_set=>
_______________________________________________
firewall-wizards mailing list
firewall-wizards@honor.icsalabs.com
http://honor.icsalabs.com/mailman/listinfo/firewall-wizards
- Previous message: Abe Singer: "Re: [fw-wiz] Re: Flawed Surveys [was: VPN endpoints] (Paul D. Robertson)"
- Maybe in reply to: Tina Bird: "[fw-wiz] Wired article on the scientific method"
- Next in thread: hermit921: "RE: [fw-wiz] Wired article on the scientific method"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|