Content deleted Content added
Wikiman2718 (talk | contribs) Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
|||
Line 37:
::::::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)
::::::: You neglect to account for the fact that this technique purports to allow people who can’t speak or sign or even read to write novels. The reviewers were right to call it pseudoscience. In fact, fringe guidelines allow any clearly impossible claim to be labeled as pseudoscience even in the absence of scientific research. —[[User:Wikiman2718|Wikiman2718]] ([[User talk:Wikiman2718|talk]]) 22:16, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
::::::::There is nothing inherently impossible in the idea that a person whose sensorimotor difficulties prevent speech or sophisticated signing may still cognitively understand spelling, and may muster the control to thrust a finger at a chosen letter. It's puzzling to me that this would be dismissed as an impossibility. --[[Special:Contributions/73.13.242.253|73.13.242.253]] ([[User talk:73.13.242.253|talk]]) 22:36, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
| |||