Editing Talk:793: Physicists
Please sign your posts with ~~~~ |
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
::Nobody seriously reads scientific papers all the way through. Most of it is just about conditions used as controls, et cetera. Most people just get by on the abstract and the conclusion whilst seriously interested people get through to the introduction from the abstract before skipping to the conclusion. | ::Nobody seriously reads scientific papers all the way through. Most of it is just about conditions used as controls, et cetera. Most people just get by on the abstract and the conclusion whilst seriously interested people get through to the introduction from the abstract before skipping to the conclusion. | ||
::: I read the above statement in Raj's voice because of the original comment. Not sure why Raj. | ::: I read the above statement in Raj's voice because of the original comment. Not sure why Raj. | ||
β | |||
[[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 15:54, 26 January 2015 (UTC) | [[User:Weatherlawyer| I used Google News BEFORE it was clickbait]] ([[User talk:Weatherlawyer|talk]]) 15:54, 26 January 2015 (UTC) |