Quote:
Originally Posted by aerohead
contextual.
manipulative.
inaccurate.
not only cherry-picked, but a 'paid to publish' paper, simply to imply to the audience, the appearance of consensus and validation within the broader scientific community.
extreme confirmation bias.
audacity to attempt to reduce a required 10,000-hours of study, down to a 10-minute sound bite.
completely lacking in scientific rigor.
failure to defend premise.
easy to understand why broadcasts would repeatedly come under fire.
I don't see any real science demonstrated, only effective marketing attempts towards an audience which is more uninformed than the author.
an un-regulated, non-juried internet is a double-edged sword.
|
Spoken like a true hater.
See haters be like attack, attack, attack.
At least I can agree with the global warming shrills that pollution is bad and electric cars are generally better than gasoline ones.
You're a comic now too?
__________________
1984 chevy suburban, custom made 6.5L diesel turbocharged with a Garrett T76 and Holset HE351VE, 22:1 compression 13psi of intercooled boost.
1989 firebird mostly stock. Aside from the 6-speed manual trans, corvette gen 5 front brakes, 1LE drive shaft, 4th Gen disc brake fbody rear end.
2011 leaf SL, white, portable 240v CHAdeMO, trailer hitch, new batt as of 2014.
|