3 ms·

Yeah this is the worst kind of nerd bait. "You guys already know that the oil companies are evil and will poison people given the chance. Here's a tiny piece of

Yeah this is the worst kind of nerd bait. "You guys already know that the oil companies are evil and will poison people given the chance. Here's a tiny piece of evidence that you could misinterpret in multiple ways" To the author's credit, at least he pulled back and didn't do the entire ranting, hand-waving ritual. I believe that job is being left for online commenters to complete :) The funny thing is, without the overriding emotional narrative many people have, if you just explained what the study says using other terms, most folks would realize how tenuous and superficial the reporting is. Correlative research is great, but geesh, it's a tiny, almost minuscule part of actually accomplishing anything. Most of the time, it's a waste of time. Medical research, for instance, is full of correlative research that never amounted to a hill of beans.

anon1385 13y ago
>Medical research, for instance, is full of correlative research that never amounted to a hill of beans. Yes like smoking being linked with cancer. I'm glad we listened to the corporate funded libertarians on that one and didn't fall prey to the wishy washy lefty propaganda and emotive narratives about evil tobacco companies wanting to make money from killing people. What a ridiculous, politically motivated caricature that was. I'd like to point out that the Heartland Institute and Cato still deny the link between passive smoking and cancer, so it's not like that kind of lobbying is all in the distant dark past. The very same people writing lies about tobacco are writing propaganda about fracking. They also think climate change is a giant marxist conspiracy.
- CamperBob2 13y ago
  I'd like to point out that the Heartland Institute and Cato still deny the link between passive smoking and cancer, Honestly, that's because the science is a joke. It's arguably sufficient to cite the obnoxious nature of secondhand smoke to outlaw it in public places. If it's constitutional for governments to pass laws that keep people from blaring their car stereos at 3 AM, then it's constitutional to pass laws that keep people from polluting the air that other people have to breathe.

anon1385 13y ago

>Medical research, for instance, is full of correlative research that never amounted to a hill of beans. Yes like smoking being linked with cancer. I'm glad we listened to the corporate funded libertarians on that one and didn't fall prey to the wishy washy lefty propaganda and emotive narratives about evil tobacco companies wanting to make money from killing people. What a ridiculous, politically motivated caricature that was. I'd like to point out that the Heartland Institute and Cato still deny the link between passive smoking and cancer, so it's not like that kind of lobbying is all in the distant dark past. The very same people writing lies about tobacco are writing propaganda about fracking. They also think climate change is a giant marxist conspiracy.

CamperBob2 13y ago
I'd like to point out that the Heartland Institute and Cato still deny the link between passive smoking and cancer, Honestly, that's because the science is a joke. It's arguably sufficient to cite the obnoxious nature of secondhand smoke to outlaw it in public places. If it's constitutional for governments to pass laws that keep people from blaring their car stereos at 3 AM, then it's constitutional to pass laws that keep people from polluting the air that other people have to breathe.