Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry Boy  Skeptics, you seem to be avoiding my question: Why do you defend a challenge that claims to be scientific but doesn't conform to scientific standards? (Such as publishing in peer-reviewed journals, using reasonable critera of success, etc.) |
The peer-reviewed journal bit is a red-herring. The criteria of success are mutually agreed to before the tests. The proponent can either win the challenge or fail.
What peer-reviewed journal is going to accept a paper describing yet another water-dowser who can't do what they claim to do? Seriously WTF do you expect? Do you want to see the Journal of Failed Million Dollar Challenges?
If they win the million dollars then scientists would give them the attention they crave and papers in peer-reviewed journals would follow.