Difference between revisions of "Credibility of Common Sense Science"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Imported from text file) |
(Imported from text file) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Infobox paper | {{Infobox paper | ||
| title = Credibility of Common Sense Science | | title = Credibility of Common Sense Science | ||
| − | | author = [[Charles William Lucas]], [[David L | + | | author = [[Charles William Lucas]], [[David L Bergman]] |
| keywords = [[Validation]], [[Theory of knowledge]], [[Charged ring model]], [[Bonding]], [[Packing]], [[Force]] | | keywords = [[Validation]], [[Theory of knowledge]], [[Charged ring model]], [[Bonding]], [[Packing]], [[Force]] | ||
| published = 2003 | | published = 2003 | ||
Revision as of 22:09, 29 December 2016
| Scientific Paper | |
|---|---|
| Title | Credibility of Common Sense Science |
| Author(s) | Charles William Lucas, David L Bergman |
| Keywords | Validation, Theory of knowledge, Charged ring model, Bonding, Packing, Force |
| Published | 2003 |
| Journal | Foundations of Science |
| Volume | 6 |
| Number | 2 |
| No. of pages | 17 |
Abstract
?Who hath believed our report?? Sometimes we are asked what others say about Common Sense Science. Many want to know if our theory of matter is credible but lack confidence in their ability to make the evaluation themselves. This report identifies scientific criteria and includes an overview to enable an objective evaluation of CSS credibility.
