lone dragon wrote:the t-test and p-test confirm validity this is why I disagreed with it.
In addition meta analysis's are a good resource.
There is good and bad research out there if there is research out there that contradicts you would be amazed the research that agrees with me. You can always find conflicting data even I can find it, but you will have to make your mind up all I ask is that you research heavily and with out bias, but good luck...
p-value with less than .05 good above bad..
t-test well don't worry about that one..
So you are saying that my sources and links are not credible resources because they don't have any of these "t-values" or "p-values". You have not provided any sources, any links, or anything to even support your claims other then your word. You have no "t-values" or "p-values", so how can you scrutinize others links and web articles if you fail to provide anything that is contradictory. You keep claiming that we should look on web data bases, I linked several. You then claimed they were not satisfactory, I suspect that you said that because they disagreed with you.
You also completely ignored my above statement so I will repost it.
Around 2.5 million people diagnosed with schizophrenia, of that 2.5 million around 500 "got it" from heavy marijuana use. That leaves 2,499,500 people give or take. Is it then not logical to conclude that it is more likely that the 500 heavy smokers got the disease from something other then marijuana use? That instead they became ill with the disease due to some sort of other mental imbalance along with their life experiences.