> Findings from scientific studies are not immutable truth. Nor does citing them automatically make your interpretation of the cited study to be truth. But nob

> Findings from scientific studies are not immutable truth. Nor does citing them automatically make your interpretation of the cited study to be truth. But nobody said that scientific studies were immutable truths, did they? No, that's not the issue here. The person that you're responding to said that the issue is with the wording used by the reporter, not the findings of the studies. If the reporter wanted to bring into question the findings of the linked studies then they should have addressed the studies directly like you are attempting to do here. Instead, they used weasel wording to make it seem like the studies might not even exist.