--[][][]--[][][]--Put This
--[][][]--[][][]--
--[][][]--[][][]--On Your
--[][][]--[][][]--
--[][][]--[][][]--Profile If
--[][][]--[][][]--
--[][][]--[][][]--You Believe
--[][][]--[][][]--
--[][][]--[][][]--9/11 Was
--[][][]--[][][]--
--[][][]--[][][]--An
--[][][]--[][][]--
--[][][]--[][][]--INSIDE JOB


☻/
/▌
/ \




°¨ ¸„ø¤º°¨„ø¤º°¨°º¤ø„¸¨°º¤ø„¸¸„ º¤ø„¸
¨°º¤ø„ ¸NASSIM HARAMEIN ...º¤ø„¸
¸„ø¤º°¨¸„ø¤º „¸¨°º¤ø„¸¸„ ¸„ø¤ºBRAVO


"Ad hominem" argument is most commonly used to refer specifically to the ad hominem abusive, or argumentum ad personam, which consists of criticizing or attacking the person who proposed the argument (personal attack) in an attempt to discredit the argument. It is also used when an opponent is unable to find fault with an argument, yet for various reasons, the opponent disagrees with it.

ALL TROLLS AND SPAMMERS (harpy's) WILL BE OSTRACIZED

"The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence"


Just looking like everyone else for some answers.

If I find something that I think is interesting and needs to get out...
I will upload it on my site. Lots
of goodies out there.
Keep an open mind but always ask
questions and research the sources.

"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge."

Stephen Hawking



Let us look at the word "credible"

Credibility refers to the objective and subjective components of the believability of a source or message.

Traditionally, credibility has two key components: trustworthiness and expertise, which both have objective and subjective components. Trustworthiness is a based more on subjective factors, but can include objective measurements such as established reliability. Expertise can be similarly subjectively perceived, but also includes relatively objective characteristics of the source or message (e.g., credentials, certification or information quality). Secondary components of credibility include source dynamism (charisma) and physical attractiveness.




Scientific credibility

Scientific credibility has been defined as the extent to which science in general is recognized as a source of reliable information about the world.[1] The term has also been applied more narrowly, as an assessment of the credibility of the work of an individual scientist or a field of research. Here, the phrase refers to how closely the work in question adheres to scientific principles, such as the scientific method.[2] The method most commonly-used to assess the quality of science is peer review and then publication as part of the scientific literature.[3] Other approaches include the collaborative assessment of a topic by a group of experts, this process can produce reviews such as those published by the Cochrane Collaboration,[4] or the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.[5]

The general public can give a great deal of weight to perceptions of scientific authority in their decisions on controversial issues that involve scientific research, such as biotechnology.[6] However, both the credibility and authority of science is questioned by groups with non-mainstream views, such as some advocates of alternative medicine,[7] or those who dispute the scientific consensus on a topic, such as AIDS denialists.


☆┌─┐　─┐☆
　│▒│ /▒/
　│▒│/▒/
　│▒ /▒/─┬─┐
　│▒│▒|▒│▒│
┌┴─┴─┐-┘─┘
│▒┌──┘▒▒▒│
└┐▒▒▒▒▒▒┌┘
　└┐▒▒▒▒┌┘


╔╦╦╦═╦╗╔═╦═╦══╦═╗
║║║║╩╣╚╣═╣║║║║║╩╣
╚══╩═╩═╩═╩═╩╩╩╩═╝

Please...

╔═╦╗╔╦╗╔═╦═╦╦╦╦╗╔═╗
║╚╣║║║╚╣╚╣╔╣╔╣║╚╣═╣
╠╗║╚╝║║╠╗║╚╣║║║║║═╣
╚═╩══╩═╩═╩═╩╝╚╩═╩═╝.....