Content deleted Content added
Wikiman2718 (talk | contribs) |
|||
Line 33:
::: The only reason it's not debunked is because its practitioners refuse to let scientists study it. They argue that allowing scientific inquiry would "deprive people of their right to communicate", which in this case is a euphemism for "prove it doesn't work". --[[User:Wikiman2718|Wikiman2718]] ([[User talk:Wikiman2718|talk]]) 03:12, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
:::: 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)
| |||