Content deleted Content added
Wikiman2718 (talk | contribs) |
|||
Line 34:
:::: What are you talking about? This has been totally discredited. [[User:Sgerbic|Sgerbic]] ([[User talk:Sgerbic|talk]]) 22:03, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
::::: The only review that has ever been published called it pseudoscience based on a pseudoscience checklist, but its practitioners refuse let scientists run tests of authorship. This puts us in the position of being able to label RPM as pseudoscience even though it has never been studied in legitimate scientific experiments. --[[User:Wikiman2718|Wikiman2718]] ([[User talk:Wikiman2718|talk]]) 22:24, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
::::::A methodological or theoretical critique such as this does not yield a conclusion one way or another as to whether the technique works. There is an important distinction between practices which have been scientifically demonstrated not to work, e.g., [[acupuncture]], and practices which simply lack scientifically acceptable evidence. The maneuvering or noncompliance of advocates or opponents may raise questions, but it does not raise scientific answers. The best indications available right now are nonscientific testimonials, both for and against. --[[Special:Contributions/73.13.242.253|73.13.242.253]] ([[User talk:73.13.242.253|talk]]) 22:05, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
| |||