Total Pageviews

Thursday, March 7, 2019

The Rise of Junk Science -- Because the Mainstream Media Loves It !

"The whole aim 
of practical politics, 
  wrote H.L. Mencken, 
is to keep 
the populace alarmed 
(and hence clamorous 
to be led to safety) 
by menacing it with 
an endless series 
of hobgoblins, 
all of them imaginary." 




Newspapers, politicians 
and activist groups
love apocalyptic forecasts.

Climate change is one 
in a long series of fake
boogeymen, that the media 
published without question:
  DDT, nuclear power, 
acid rain, the hole 
in the ozone layer, 
global cooling,
global warming.
mad cow disease,
genetically modified 
crops, etc.

The predictions of doom 
have been 100% wrong !




In 2010, Dr Andrew Wakefield's
1998 study was refuted by the
General Medical Council.

His 1998 study in the Lancet,
claimed a link between 
the MMR vaccine and autism.

But his study was 
found to be a fraud.

In spite of that, Wakefield is 
a celebrity anti-vaccine activist 
in the United States !




The claim that 
bisphenol A, 
found in plastics, 
acts like a 
‘endocrine disruptor’, 
interfering with 
human hormones,
started with a 
fraudulent study 
that has since
been retracted. 

It was refuted by a
high-quality analyses, 
included in a recent 
US government study, 
called Clarity, ignored 
by the media, and the 
anti-BPA activists.




People who promote 
apocalyptic claims
know that even if a
 story of impending doom 
is thoroughly refuted, 
the correction comes 
too late. 

The mainstream media 
will have published the claim, 
without checking, and
gullible people will believe it




Last month a study claimed 
that ‘insects could vanish 
within a century’, featured
on the BBC in Great Britain.

The claim was nonsense.

The authors of the study, 
Francisco Sánchez-Bayo 
and Kris Wyckhuys, 
claimed to have reviewed 
73 different studies to 
reach their conclusion
that 41% of insect species 
are declining and 
‘unless we change 
our way of 
producing food, 
insects as a whole 
will go down the path 
of extinction 
in a few decades’. 

The pair started by putting 
the words ‘insect’ 
and ‘decline’ 
into a database, 
completely ignoring 
all papers finding
insect increases, 
or no change 
in their numbers.

They misinterpreted 
source papers to blame 
insect declines on pesticides, 
when the original paper 
did not know the cause, 
or found contradictory results. 

They also relied heavily on 
two recent papers claiming 
to have found fewer insects today, 
than in the past, one in Germany, 
and one in Puerto Rico. 

The Germany study did not compare 
the same locations in different years, 
so its conclusions are meaningless !

The Puerto Rico study 
compared samples 
taken in the same place 
in 1976 and 2012, 
finding fewer insects 
in 2012, and arbitrarily 
blaming this on 
rapid warming
in the region.

In fact there was no warming: 
 The jump in the temperature,
recorded by the local weather station, 
was caused ONLY by the thermometer 
being moved to a different, warmer
location in 1992 !




Last month, there was a study
on glyphosate, the active ingredient 
in Roundup weedkiller, claiming 
a 41% increase in the incidence 
of a very rare cancer, 
non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL).

This was based on a review
of six other studies. 

Epidemiologist Geoffrey Kabat 
said the paper combined 
one high-quality study, 
with five poor-quality studies.

To reach statistical significance, 
the authors had to choose the 
highest of five risk estimates 
reported in just ONE of the 
poor quality studies, and then
ignore all the other estimates,
to make their obviously phony
41% claim.