This is how Konstantin Eduardovich Ciolkovsky, when he wrote about his foolish multi-stage missiles, met with severe criticism in response: where is the reference to the original source? Where is the scientific publication? Where did you get this at all?! to
= = = = = is = is = is = is = is = is = is = is = is
Konstantin Eduardovich published in scientific journals and his articles and were the primary sources. Accordingly, when serious articles were written about his work, they referred to his publications in these journals.
When the article of the journal speaks that scientists have discovered something there, then the article should be a reference to the work of these scientists, otherwise this publication is not worth the money. This is the main way to distinguish serious articles from all nonsense, if there is no appropriate education. Otherwise, you can seriously argue that biologists deny evolution, for example. But you will not find articles confirming this in scientific journals.
When I pointed out at this point that a person was most likely to take another duck for a scientific publication, I was accused of homosexuality, although there was a correlation between monogamy (not orientation) and the brain in the article. Internet warriors are like that.