🎓 Dr. Freemo 🇳🇱 @freemo@social.cleverlibre.org

@average_random_joe

Anyone, take IEEE, or ACM as examples. Membership is open to anyone who wants it, no restrictions. All members then have a vote.

@ohellno @MrMaxPowers247

@average_random_joe

Try listening.. people are voted to the peer review board when they faithfully carry out the peer review process.. That means they need to understand the material to do that, but thats different than saying they have"credentials".. get a clue.

@ohellno @MrMaxPowers247

@average_random_joe

What fallacy? you really have no clue what your talking about wen you refer to fallacies. We are talking about the difference between acute exposure and chronic exposure. These are standard medical concepts.

@MrMaxPowers247

@average_random_joe

The credentials of the peer review board are hardly relevant.. the point is if you can demonstrate you did the experiment and it didnt replicate, or can otherwise show why the experiment is faulted, the paper gets rejected. The peer review process is also accessible for anyone to see so if the peer review board does not faithfully act by rejecting papers that have been debunked they wont be **democratically** elected next run around and there is a record of their behavior regardless.

Moreover because the review board is elected and open to a vote it is not their credentials that are the authority, they have simply proved their abilities in the past to conduct the peer review process fairly.

@ohellno @MrMaxPowers247

@average_random_joe

ye there are lots, i gave one of the easiest examples for you to understand.

And yes if there is a very small amount of anthrax (which occurs naturally int he environment by the way)you might be ok with a face mask since the exposure is only slightly above background, particularly if its for a short period of time. However if you happen to work in a place where there is an only slightly above background presence of anthrax, but youll be around it 24/7 then greater measures are likely to be taken.

So yes, the length of exposure is as much a factor as the level of threat. Why do you think it is hazmat clean up crws use full hazmat suits when they deal with things day after day, yet the same chemicals for short term interaction are often ok with a more minimal protections? such as when working with it in a lab.

I dot use full hazmat when i work with mercury, but a hazmat cleanup crew would if dealing with cleanup of mercury because they are exposed all day everyday doing various cleanups whereas im just exposed in short bursts if at all.

@MrMaxPowers247

@average_random_joe

Well thanks you just proved you have 0 clue.. I regularly contribute to peer review across multiple scientific journals in my free time. Never once have they had credential requirements nor have they ever asked me to verify my credentials.

@ohellno @MrMaxPowers247

@average_random_joe

Lots of reasons. For example if you are going to be exposed more often to the same level of threat for example.

@MrMaxPowers247

@average_random_joe

"in which the authorities" - wrong, and clearly you've never contributed to peer review. Peer review is usually an **open** process that anyone, regardless of authority, can contribute to.

@ohellno @MrMaxPowers247

@average_random_joe

Sort of.. one is where you need 99.99% protection the other is where you need 99%. It isnt so much about one hazard being more threatening, its about how important it is that it be effective.

@MrMaxPowers247

@average_random_joe

peer review isnt a person, it is a process.. thats like saying "I trust double blind studies more because they eliminate bias"... hurp derp thats appeal to authority!

Appeal to authority doesnt apply to processes.

@ohellno @MrMaxPowers247

@average_random_joe

For the exact same reason people use hazmat suits while others use face masks (thus the point).. because one is used in a more threatening environment than the other (where greater measures must be taken). Both are effective, one is just more effective.

@MrMaxPowers247

@average_random_joe

What the hel are you talking about. Asking for a source that has been checked by others and has not been debunked is not an appel to authority. People who peer-review articles are not an authority peer-review is open to **anyone**.. if you for example, even without a PhD or any authority, could show in a peer review that there is an experiment that debunks an assertion then you would be able to get a paper rejected...

What your really saying is "I object to the fact that people actually try to replicate experiments and double check if the results are correct"

@ohellno @MrMaxPowers247

@trinsec as long as it has extra chunks :)

@trinsec I morally object to everything you just said.

@louiscouture yup, and the people who use something else shit on both... its your usual flamewar dynamic, nothing new.

@trinsec I'm not sure i can be friends with someone who doesnt like mushrooms, they are amazing!

@cwebber I do the same, get excited about the daily when its low and ignore it when its high :)

@trinsec why, what did mushrooms do to you that caused you to hate them?

@trinsec probably a mixup with the mushrooms in your last meal :)

@trinsec nah thats just the drugs your on, not the image :)