Researchers Know their Conclusions Before Even Conducting the Research

[oplholik]

"For those upset because they lost money on Super Bowl bets Sunday, I have good news for you. Next year, you can call a team of UC Riverside researchers for their premonitions about the Super Bowl outcomes before placing your bets. This research team has demonstrated themselves to be able to forecast the future, as they apparently are able to determine the conclusions of their research before even conducting the experiments."

http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2014_02_01_archive.html

 

[AgentAnia]

And a followup today: http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2014/02/anti-smoking-researchers-claim-that.html

....The rest of the story is that this research is making a mockery out of the modern-day tobacco control movement.

But the story also has some serious and possible damaging implications.

One reason why these conclusions are so dangerous is that they may lead smokers to figure that there is no value in their smoking outside the home. If thirdhand smoke is as harmful as secondhand smoke, then why bother smoking outside?

In fact, this is precisely the way some are interpreting these findings.

 

[DrMA]

There must be a mechanism by which the perpetrators of such gross scientific misconduct can be held accountable for their crimes against humanity...

 

[Julie W]

There is....... it's called KARMA !

 

[Julie W]

Passive smoking – another of the Nanny State's big lies – Telegraph Blogs

 

[NorthOfAtlanta]

Passive smoking – another of the Nanny State's big lies – Telegraph Blogs

Love this from the blog, emphasis mine:

Yet between 2006 and 2007 smoking was banned in all enclosed public places throughout the United Kingdom largely on the basis of the claim – widely promulgated by bansturbating politicians and kill-joy activists – that it was necessary to protect the health of non-smokers. On the basis, in other words, of a blatant and scientifically demonstrable lie.

 

[Julie W]

Love this from the blog, emphasis mine:

Yet between 2006 and 2007 smoking was banned in all enclosed public places throughout the United Kingdom largely on the basis of the claim – widely promulgated by bansturbating politicians and kill-joy activists – that it was necessary to protect the health of non-smokers. On the basis, in other words, of a blatant and scientifically demonstrable lie.

Yep that's going straight into my new vaping dictionary

Oh & this too
"freedom of choice is far too dangerous for the little people" syndrome.

 

[rothenbj]

Bansturbating could become the new adjective, with bansturbated becoming the new verb. Example, "Glanton Slantz bantsurbated his new study to be used for tobacco regulation.

 

[AgentAnia]

And another post by Dr. Siegel on this issue: http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2014/02/uc-riverside-scientists-release-results.html

Be sure to check out the comments if you need a good laugh today!

 

[AgentAnia]

Bansturbating could become the new adjective, with bansturbated becoming the new verb. Example, "Glanton Slantz bantsurbated his new study to be used for tobacco regulation.

I believe the term was coined by UK blogster .... Puddlecote (at least that's where I first saw it.) He loves to refer to ANTZ and other public-health control freaks as the "bansturbatory elite."

 

[NorthOfAtlanta]

Since I brought this up and was looking for a reason to put off splitting wood this afternoon i went wandering around GOOGLE and found this term started around mid summer 2007.

http://pubcurmudgeon.blogspot.com/2007/07/bansturbation.html

It then showed up in the urban dictionary in September 2007.

Urban Dictionary: bansturbation

Enough off topic, I'll go split wood before SWMBO catches on to what I thought was important enough to waste 30 min on.

 

[AgentAnia]

Thank you, NoA; well researched! I've correct my vaping dictionary -- credit to you and Urban Dictionary.

(Are you a Rumpole fan?)

 

[spyralspyder]

Not statistically significant! It sure smells though!!!!