Morris Dovey wrote:

On 1/24/2010 8:54 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
Morris Dovey wrote:
On 1/24/2010 4:36 PM, Mark& Juanita wrote:

Putting someone trustworthy to gather more evidence to determine
whether or not the paranoid person is really in danger might be
prudent.

This is the way I see it.

Destroying the economy to prevent what is most likely paranoid
delusions is not.

Agreed. (Is this /really/ Mark I'm responding to?) ;-)

Perhaps we have reached a point where science is too important a matter
to be left to the scientists?

I don't think there's a choice, other than to remake those "scientists"
who cook data and/or publish conjecture-as-fact into lab rats.


Pretty good suggestion -- strong negative feedback loop that should reduce
the shenanigans

--

There is never a situation where having more rounds is a disadvantage

Rob Leatham