There's a strange battle going on in this discussion, but honestly -- I dismiss a lot of quasi-scientific articles that put a lot of importance on correlation without addressing a ton of alternate explanations.
This one, I can't dismiss so easily; I've read into the details of where this theory comes from via a few sources, and the correlations are rather more than just "this line goes up & then down where this other line also goes up & down".
I'd suggest the naysayers read into this one a bit more before dismissing it (though I do understand the reaction).
This one, I can't dismiss so easily; I've read into the details of where this theory comes from via a few sources, and the correlations are rather more than just "this line goes up & then down where this other line also goes up & down".
I'd suggest the naysayers read into this one a bit more before dismissing it (though I do understand the reaction).