[E. Pluribus Unum]

Another junk "study."

It it weren't for bad science, we'd have no science at all.

Most Scientific Papers are Probably Wrong

[NOBO2012]

There is almost no real science in today's government funded research. The most important skill for a researcher is writing grant proposals. After that, it is virtually all epidemiology.
No chemistry, physics or biology.
I am a molecular biologist and witnessed the transition from “research to find answers” to “proving a a predetermined outcome with statistics” while in graduate school in the early 70s.
I'm afraid we've crossed the point of no return.

[fuzzylogic]

funny...I tell people this all the time. For some reason people listen to “scientists” without critical thinking, even if only an assertion (no proof) is made people take it as the truth. Nobody ever asks how often scientists have been right vs. wrong? The very nature of science dictates that scientists have been wrong far more than they’ve been right. It is only by the long process of eliminating everything that isn’t true do you get *closer* to the truth. How many “scientific facts” have been later proven false?

You may fail a 1000 theories and eventually find one that seems to hold up, this is what you hear about, not the failures....even then, the theory that appeared true may later be shown to be false.

This is my issue with so-called “consensus” on climate change. There isn’t “one accepted unified theory”, there’s many different computer models and none of them agree. They’re all about to fail on projected temperature ranges, even if you average them. It seems consensus is quite different than fact.