So... and I'm not trying to make this a pi$$ing match... but you don't understand how to tell a reputable article from one less respected? You don't know where to go to determine if the webpost is supported by primary, legit research?
That's exactly my point.
I can Yahoo or Google any topic and find "legit" looking sites with PhD's and MD's as authors.
I can buy a book off the stands that talks about anatomical structures as if they are present and solidily supported.
The truth is it takes more work than this to understand the reality of the situation... and even if every word you post is true... if you don't understand the source and the supporting evidence, then you are just propagating whatever fell in front of you with a simple online search.
Peer reviewed journals are not perfect, but it offers the harshest criticism and scrutiny... and most people don't know how to find them.
Its like asking about complex tax law, doing an online search, and posting the answer as fact. Unless you have training to understand the source and the supporting evidence, you are just spreading words around, not knowing whether its true or not.
Again... I'm not saying you are propagating lies... I just cringe when people cite internet cites as adequate "evidence" of anything. If it was harvard or johns hopkins online... id give you a break... but she-squirts.com just doesn't constitute reliable, primary work.
