Posted on 08/28/2024 4:08:48 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
As long as cnn and New York Times are up and running it will be very hard for republicans to win again
That’s my opinion
CNN needs to be held accountable and the people working for cnn also.
I don’t know how though
Well, John, of course Bobby is going to cite studies that
backup his arguments...........why would he do otherwise?
“Authorities” say autism is not increasing. The increased numbers only reflect “increased awareness” and “changing criteria”.
If there is an actual rise, it’s due to aging parents giving birth.
BS.
I’ve always seen Kennedy as a mixed bag of nuts.
There are some things I agree with him on. There are other
things I haven’t really studied, but I’m pretty sure he’s
a few screws short of a full build it yourself dinette set.
I say use the guy on the things he’s sound on, and tell him
you’ll get to the other things about the time hell freezes
over. At least he’ll have gotten some of his agenda across.
He wouldn’t have otherwise.
The dems are scared to death of him.
No, I'm afraid that's not how it works in our blessed "representative democracy." The only people who can, and should, be "held accountable" are the people themselves. Those who imbibe political and ideological propaganda. Those who choose to believe lies. Those who vote on the basis of that propaganda and those lies.
I’m not going to get into the weeds on these particular RFK Jr. examples that Stossel is “fact checking”.
Suffice it to say that governments agencies are thoroughly corrupt and captured by the industries they were created to regulate. Suffice it to say that criticism of those industries and regulatory agencies are being routinely silenced. Suffice it to say that RFK is open to debate and his antagonists are not.
We need to listen to what RFK Jr. has to say and stop censoring dissenting voices - and I think that is John Stossel’s bigger point.
This is why Kamala hides.
If you hide, and say almost nothing, it’s hard to fact check you and it’s harder to tell the world: “She says crazy stuff!” Sure, there is some of that coverage, with her word salads, but the more she hides, the less bad coverage she is likely to get.
But a politicians who sits for an interview? Who debates? Who cites scientific studies backing up his contentions? Oh, you can attack that guy all day! You can refute him! You can say how crazy he is!
The end result is that politicians who hide, and who campaign without policies have a better shot at getting elected.
Stossel pretends to be an neutral journalist but he always strikes me as a secret Democrat. He’ll be voting for Harris.
I beleive him when he says Kennedy cites some studies and ignores other which were better done.
It is a common practice. I see it all the time in medical journals, where they do very bad papers pushing for more regulation of firearms.
The problem is: How do you separate out the good from the bad science? It is not easy. The administrative state has used up all the credibility it had in order to push the agendas they want.
Just because you disagree with a paper's results does not mean the paper is wrong.
That is the problem. As a career scientist, now retired. I can say most papers published today are terrible. A huge number are politically motivated, agenda motivated.
There were standards.
1. Raw data must be published or available. Many papers on contentious issues (Climate for example) refuse to release the raw data. No one should give any credibility to any paper where they refuse to release the raw data.
2. The results should be repeatable. If the results are not repeatable, it is not science.
It has become the "norm" to rely heavily on "models". Many computer models are used to obfuscate rather than illuminate. Models make it easy to influence results by changing model parameters. Models, in general, are a bad way of testing hypothesis. It is much harder to challenge a model than a straightforward comparison of data.
Combine complex models with an unwillingness to publish raw data, and no one should find the results credible.
Hypocritical Democrats did everything they could to keep RKFjr. off the ballot - now they’re doing everything they can to keep him on the ballots in swing states like Wisconsin and Michigan.
They tried to get Cornel West off the ballot - they won in Pennsylvania and lost in Wisconsin.
Does Stossel support the Libertarian platform — where abortion and unmitigated immigration should be a right?
Stossel identifies the desired outcome, and then weaves a path to get there.
Just cause RFK Jr supports Trump doesn’t mean we have to believe his bullshit.
How do you define raw data? By what I consider is raw data, the articles will be book length. Even back in the sixties, when I consider the last time the majority of articles were decent, did not publish raw data.
Just because you disagree with a paper's results does not mean the paper is wrong.The opposite is also true.
The question is: Which one is the lie?...And why?
EVERYONE does it.
The left did it to scam people into taking an experimental medical injection.
yup
If a paper is going to be published as 'scientific' then the raw data doesn't need to be published, but it should be made available. Along with the details behind the collection, sample/s, and validation methods.
If the author's analysis is to be believed, then it should stand the test of additional analysis. There is always the risk that false and/or incorrect conclusions were drawn, hence the phrase, "Lies, damned lies, and statistics."
The author’s #1 point MIGHT be valid.
The #’s 2 & 3, Are weak arguments at best.
For #2, the author had to go to Samoa to prove his point? Not buying it.
Likewise, for #3 in that the data needed to be adjusted to show no correlation to autism.
The Lancet? The same one that's lied about other peer reviewed papers?
I agree with you. And in the same manner their conclusions should not be claimed invalid without the data being examined and record in a publication how the data shows the conclusions are wrong.
The accuser needs to be exposed to the same risk as the original author.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.