You are uninformed about what science is. You refuse to acknowledge my definition. You know literally nothing about my research capabilities. Maybe I’m terrible at research but you wouldnt know one way or the other.
Which makes your opinion uninformed and therefore irrelevant.
Erowid are opinions of people who use recreational drugs. It’s not written by scientist. Or researchers.
And research can be misunderstood by lay people.
As I said. Some of the information may be accurate. Doesn’t matter. It’s still not a scientific resource.
I, as a scientist, would not tell people to use lemmy or reddit to learn about neuroscience. I definitely wouldn’t advise using erowid for the same reasons.
Citing a resource does not make the text a resource.
I love how you’ve moved the goalpost on what a resource is. Erowid being the collection point of many valid, peer reviewed sources doesn’t meet your specific criteria, that ridiculous. That link went directly to a retirement of your argument and you just changed your argument. You are a bad researcher.
Because erowid does not meet the definition of a resource.
Again.
Links to resources is not itself a scientific resource.
I defined for you multiple times what “scientific resource” means.
Unlike erowid, maps actually conducted scientific research.
That’s why they are listed as a resource.
Even Wikipedia has people review the material.
Erowid does not.
You are uninformed about what science is. You refuse to acknowledge my definition. You know literally nothing about my research capabilities. Maybe I’m terrible at research but you wouldnt know one way or the other.
Which makes your opinion uninformed and therefore irrelevant.
Erowid are opinions of people who use recreational drugs. It’s not written by scientist. Or researchers. And research can be misunderstood by lay people.
As I said. Some of the information may be accurate. Doesn’t matter. It’s still not a scientific resource.
I, as a scientist, would not tell people to use lemmy or reddit to learn about neuroscience. I definitely wouldn’t advise using erowid for the same reasons.
Citing a resource does not make the text a resource.
I love how you’ve moved the goalpost on what a resource is. Erowid being the collection point of many valid, peer reviewed sources doesn’t meet your specific criteria, that ridiculous. That link went directly to a retirement of your argument and you just changed your argument. You are a bad researcher.
I repeatedly clarify the definition.
Have any luck finding peer reviewed papers with erowid references. ?
Maybe it’s cause it’s not a scientific resource.
Being a smartass is a bad look when so much of what you’ve confidently stated is incorrect.
I never claimed it did. I already asked you once to show me where I said it did.
I haven’t even made a comment about your definition because it doesn’t have to do with anything I said. I accept your definition.
I know that you have made multiple claims that erowid is
Despite multiple links showing that it also has other things.
It even has a collection of resources on the topic at hand. A collection that you claimed did not exist, prompting this whole conversation.
This is pretty compelling evidence that you are unwilling or unable to change your incorrect thoughts on something that is both obvious and objective.
I literally can’t think of a worse trait in a “scientist”
EDIT: I guess being deliberately misleading is worse, but I am giving you the benefit of the doubt that you are just bad, not malicious.