Subject: [Tweeters] Ivory-bill website
Date: Mar 21 13:38:56 2010
From: JChristian Kessler - 1northraven at gmail.com


"This, which the website author calls citizen-science, is not science" is a
very different statement than "citizen-science is not science." simply a
matter of the rigor in the conclusion, and they are very different
conclusions.

Chris

On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 1:31 PM, Jim Greaves <lbviman at blackfoot.net> wrote:

> Chris - Not my term. The guy who has the site calls what he's doing
> "citizen-science". So you support my contention? So, yes, from one
> non-scientific [what YOU call a data point] I CAN conclude that it is not
> science - Jim
>
>
> At 02:25 PM 3/21/2010, JChristian Kessler wrote:
>
>> one data point ( being this website) = "Citizen-science is not science" ??
>> never knew you could draw a valid conclusion from just one data point.
>>
>> Chris Kessler
>> Seattle
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman1.u.washington.edu/pipermail/tweeters/attachments/20100321/29a0a8ba/attachment.htm