I am not trying to rehash the sprinting thread, I was using that thread as an example. Whether or not you think I qualified to make a hypothesis or deliver conjecture is not for you to decide. That decision rest with myself. You can reject it as you have and give an opinion why, but you will not decide what kind of opinions and theories I derive from my experiences and observations since you are not me. The validity of such a hypothesis or conjecture is not decided upon by myself or you, its everyone.
If I could download all of my experiences and observations as evidence then I would.
All well and good and I’m not trying to change your mind as I recognize that cannot be done but try to provide information so that others can make educated decisions with evidence that is readily available to anyone who looks. You and some of the others on your side of that debate used complete personal observation from small populations and conjecture. The words ‘feel’, ‘think’, and ‘hunch’ were frequent terms used, which in my opinion, is something that can have a lot of value and personal importance but carries little weight in a rationale debate where evidence (whether it be anecdotal, research or otherwise) trumps them. And while personal hypotheses development is always a good idea there has to be an underlying reason for having that hypotheses in the first (which you had – genetic expression) BUT ALSO evidence that supports continuing to believe it. In the case in question I think we’d both agree there is evidence to support it but more evidence to support the notion that its effect is not as great as initially hypothesized.
So the major problem (as I see it) then becomes if someone tries to assume it’s ok to expect everyone to follow their personal beliefs / observations / hypotheses without providing any evidence that isn’t at least public domain in some regard and when there is existing evidence that supports a contrary or modified version of the hypotheses.