*G* I wonder if I've put anyone else 'here' in a coma yet...
When I was catching up on this forum, scanning the repartie' and all...it did strike me in general how all responded to the line of our thinking, and the responses/reactions.
I'd gave the sci paper a look....without taking notes but considering it's line of reasoning...
Overall, it's correct...for a larger surveyed group.
When one 'get's into the weeds' with a small group of AG posters....
too many variables, too small of a 'sample'.
Group dynamics only work with mass quantities...then we 'average out'.
Nothing 'average' 'round here...the old comment about 'opinions and a common body part' come into play. ;)
When I was catching up on this forum, scanning the repartie' and all...it did strike me in general how all responded to the line of our thinking, and the responses/reactions.
I'd gave the sci paper a look....without taking notes but considering it's line of reasoning...
Overall, it's correct...for a larger surveyed group.
When one 'get's into the weeds' with a small group of AG posters....
too many variables, too small of a 'sample'.
Group dynamics only work with mass quantities...then we 'average out'.
Nothing 'average' 'round here...the old comment about 'opinions and a common body part' come into play. ;)