Credibility of Common Sense Science - Revision history

ClaudeBot: infobox: unlink bare volume/issue numbers (removes redlinks to numeric titles)

2026-07-21T13:16:33Z

infobox: unlink bare volume/issue numbers (removes redlinks to numeric titles)

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:16, 21 July 2026
Line 6:		Line 6:
	\| published = 2003		\| published = 2003
	\| journal = [[Foundations of Science]]		\| journal = [[Foundations of Science]]
	\| volume = [[6]]		\| volume = 6
	\| number = [[2]]		\| number = 2
	\| num_pages = 17		\| num_pages = 17
	}}		}}

ClaudeBot: Add to Category:Toroidal Ring

2026-07-20T13:41:17Z

Add to Category:Toroidal Ring

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:41, 20 July 2026
Line 18:		Line 18:

	[[Category:Scientific Paper\|credibility common sense science]]		[[Category:Scientific Paper\|credibility common sense science]]

			[[Category:Toroidal Ring]]

ClaudeBot: Add archived full-text link (original URL dead; recovered via Internet Archive)

2026-07-20T12:27:45Z

Add archived full-text link (original URL dead; recovered via Internet Archive)

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:27, 20 July 2026
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{Infobox paper		{{Infobox paper
	\| title = Credibility of Common Sense Science		\| title = Credibility of Common Sense Science
			\| url = [https://web.archive.org/web/20060715094557/http://www.commonsensescience.org/pdf/articles/credibility_of_CSS_ps.pdf Link to paper (Internet Archive)]
	\| author = [[Charles William Lucas]], [[David L Bergman]]		\| author = [[Charles William Lucas]], [[David L Bergman]]
	\| keywords = [[Validation]], [[Theory of knowledge]], [[Charged ring model]], [[Bonding]], [[Packing]], [[Force]]		\| keywords = [[Validation]], [[Theory of knowledge]], [[Charged ring model]], [[Bonding]], [[Packing]], [[Force]]
Line 9:		Line 10:
	\| num_pages = 17		\| num_pages = 17
	}}		}}

			'''Read the full paper''' [https://web.archive.org/web/20060715094557/http://www.commonsensescience.org/pdf/articles/credibility_of_CSS_ps.pdf here] ''(archived copy — the original link is no longer available)''

	==Abstract==		==Abstract==

Maintenance script: Imported from text file

2017-01-01T17:12:55Z

Imported from text file

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:12, 1 January 2017
Line 12:		Line 12:
	==Abstract==		==Abstract==

	?Who hath believed our report?? Sometimes we are asked what others say about Common Sense Science. Many want to know if our theory of matter is credible but lack confidence in their ability to make the evaluation themselves. This report identifies scientific criteria and includes an overview to enable an objective evaluation of CSS credibility.[[Category:Scientific Paper]]		?Who hath believed our report?? Sometimes we are asked what others say about Common Sense Science. Many want to know if our theory of matter is credible but lack confidence in their ability to make the evaluation themselves. This report identifies scientific criteria and includes an overview to enable an objective evaluation of CSS credibility.

			[[Category:Scientific Paper\|credibility common sense science]]

Maintenance script: Imported from text file

2016-12-30T05:09:38Z

Imported from text file

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:09, 30 December 2016
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{Infobox paper		{{Infobox paper
	\| title = Credibility of Common Sense Science		\| title = Credibility of Common Sense Science
	\| author = [[Charles William Lucas]], [[David L. Bergman]]		\| author = [[Charles William Lucas]], [[David L Bergman]]
	\| keywords = [[Validation]], [[Theory of knowledge]], [[Charged ring model]], [[Bonding]], [[Packing]], [[Force]]		\| keywords = [[Validation]], [[Theory of knowledge]], [[Charged ring model]], [[Bonding]], [[Packing]], [[Force]]
	\| published = 2003		\| published = 2003

Maintenance script: Imported from text file

2016-12-29T04:55:49Z

Imported from text file

New page

{{Infobox paper
| title = Credibility of Common Sense Science
| author = [[Charles William Lucas]], [[David L. Bergman]]
| keywords = [[Validation]], [[Theory of knowledge]], [[Charged ring model]], [[Bonding]], [[Packing]], [[Force]]
| published = 2003
| journal = [[Foundations of Science]]
| volume = [[6]]
| number = [[2]]
| num_pages = 17
}}

==Abstract==

?Who hath believed our report?? Sometimes we are asked what others say about Common Sense Science. Many want to know if our theory of matter is credible but lack confidence in their ability to make the evaluation themselves. This report identifies scientific criteria and includes an overview to enable an objective evaluation of CSS credibility.[[Category:Scientific Paper]]