i agree. there is no such thing as unbiased science. i get that they are using the scientific method--but that isn't conclusive. we must always question science. we can't act like what they found is the gospel. after all, it's likely to be found untrue in a few years. too bad we won't be alive in 2100 to gloat. however, i can't get behind junkscience.com. he debunks stuff that isn't science. the scientific method was set up so that we can keep testintg and retesting. i don't think science should stop. if there's evidence that second hand smoke is bad for us, let's keep testing. it's not time to shut down the world, but we can keep testing and refuting and supporting theories, just as the scientifc method intended. i think the message we take away from junkscience.com is to always think critically. but i wouldn't throw the baby out with the bath water--he gets his money from industries, so it's not exactly unbiased.
You are wise.