<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Judging Credibility Online</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.webpublishingblog.com/judging-credibility-online.htm/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.webpublishingblog.com/judging-credibility-online.htm</link>
	<description>Internet publishing, a multidisciplinary approach.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 May 2011 08:47:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael</title>
		<link>http://www.webpublishingblog.com/judging-credibility-online.htm/comment-page-1#comment-211343</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Aug 2008 15:38:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.webpublishingblog.com/judging-credibility-online.htm#comment-211343</guid>
		<description>The Secret may or may not be a scam but the idea behind it is not- the idea that thoughts impact physical reality. I can give you peer reviewed empirical scientific evidence to support this but you would probably brush it off.
Thats because coming in with preconceived beliefs, you are looking to fit your current model of reality into a new paradigm. And you simply can&#039;t so you choose to disavow it. Actually, Its pretty easy to find evidence for any kind of beliefs we want to support. If you really want to test if something is true or not... you must suspend your disbelief first and be open to the possibility of it working otherwise you are simply out to prove your version of Reality. Suspend disbelief and thoroughly try it and see if it works. You really have nothing to loose except 10 minutes per day in visualization? If it works you&#039;ve just possibly been introduced to a life transforming paradigm. Don&#039;t knock it until you&#039;ve tried it. Like you say: &quot;Third, be able to test what you hear.&quot; and it certainly is testable experientially.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Secret may or may not be a scam but the idea behind it is not- the idea that thoughts impact physical reality. I can give you peer reviewed empirical scientific evidence to support this but you would probably brush it off.<br />
Thats because coming in with preconceived beliefs, you are looking to fit your current model of reality into a new paradigm. And you simply can&#8217;t so you choose to disavow it. Actually, Its pretty easy to find evidence for any kind of beliefs we want to support. If you really want to test if something is true or not&#8230; you must suspend your disbelief first and be open to the possibility of it working otherwise you are simply out to prove your version of Reality. Suspend disbelief and thoroughly try it and see if it works. You really have nothing to loose except 10 minutes per day in visualization? If it works you&#8217;ve just possibly been introduced to a life transforming paradigm. Don&#8217;t knock it until you&#8217;ve tried it. Like you say: &#8220;Third, be able to test what you hear.&#8221; and it certainly is testable experientially.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Marc</title>
		<link>http://www.webpublishingblog.com/judging-credibility-online.htm/comment-page-1#comment-191853</link>
		<dc:creator>Marc</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Jun 2008 05:18:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.webpublishingblog.com/judging-credibility-online.htm#comment-191853</guid>
		<description>I was right there in that WW thread when he first put it out. My first thoughts gave me no reason to doubt him at the time. I couldn&#039;t understand why there were so many naysayers. He wasn&#039;t promoting anything and kept himself pretty anonymous for the most part. He hadn&#039;t posted a check or anything. Basically in that thread he just started offering advice to other adsense publishers.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was right there in that WW thread when he first put it out. My first thoughts gave me no reason to doubt him at the time. I couldn&#8217;t understand why there were so many naysayers. He wasn&#8217;t promoting anything and kept himself pretty anonymous for the most part. He hadn&#8217;t posted a check or anything. Basically in that thread he just started offering advice to other adsense publishers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeremy</title>
		<link>http://www.webpublishingblog.com/judging-credibility-online.htm/comment-page-1#comment-190344</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeremy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 May 2008 23:27:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.webpublishingblog.com/judging-credibility-online.htm#comment-190344</guid>
		<description>Hey man, good to see you&#039;re posting stuff again.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey man, good to see you&#8217;re posting stuff again.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Keith</title>
		<link>http://www.webpublishingblog.com/judging-credibility-online.htm/comment-page-1#comment-190234</link>
		<dc:creator>Keith</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 May 2008 18:33:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.webpublishingblog.com/judging-credibility-online.htm#comment-190234</guid>
		<description>Ah yes, Markus. I remember Shoemoney was talking crap about him sometime ago, pure link bait but still</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ah yes, Markus. I remember Shoemoney was talking crap about him sometime ago, pure link bait but still</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

