Fran wrote:
You aren't being fair, Their references on the final page clearly list a 1993 publication.
Okay, if they were writing about the human genome, would it be reasonable for them to say, for example, that it has not been sequenced and no one can estimate how much it would cost to sequence it? Or if they were writing about space exploration, would it be okay for them to use sources published before 1960, saying that someday man might go to the moon?
In a description of ongoing scientific research, it is preposterous to use sources that are 17 years out of date and were wrong back when they were written. By 1991 cold fusion had been replicated a over 100 laboratories, yet this report claims it was never replicated.
- Jed
