Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
Blog / Norton Scientific Journal - Newsvine - Norton Scientific Scam by Gerald Youngster
Blog / Norton Scientific Journal - Newsvine - Norton Scientific Scam by Gerald Youngster
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Blog / Norton Scientific Journal - Newsvine - Norton Scientific Scam by Gerald Youngster

80

Published on

This is a review of Broad and Wade’s Betrayers of the Truth. The author uses a subtitle which is revealing: the loyalist responds to heresy not by seeing that something might be wrong, that there may …

This is a review of Broad and Wade’s Betrayers of the Truth. The author uses a subtitle which is revealing: the loyalist responds to heresy not by seeing that something might be wrong, that there may be some merit to this sort of reassessment, but by defending the ideology.

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
80
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Blog / Norton Scientific Journal - Newsvine - Norton Scientific Scam by Gerald Young Sara Vixen’s Presentation
  • 2. Norton Scientific Scam TumblrNorton Scientific – 4/11/2012 - This is a review of Broad and Wade’sBetrayers of the Truth. The author uses a subtitle which is revealing: theloyalist responds to heresy not by seeing that something might be wrong,that there may be some merit to this sort of reassessment, but bydefending the ideology. Zinder has managed to misread Broad and Wadein several places. There is sufficient misrepresentation to mean that heread the book very selectively. “The authors continually confound sciencewith scientists. And the book not only fails to enlighten us on science butdoesn’t even begin to provide any insight on scientific method.” (p. 94)“Thirty four cases of fraud over a 2,000 year period are documented inthe book, a number roughly comparable to the number of lawyers whowent to jail for Watergate. Despite this small number, the authors implythat scientific fraud is common… read more articles

×