Junk Science gets the big research bucks.

I just read an article about the AHA, yes, the American Heart Association releasing their paper on diet and heart disease. They tell us to cut the saturated fats and eat the manufactured, (never in the history of human life eaten) polyunsaturated fats. These are seed oils like canola, corn, that have been pressed and treated with chlorine to kill the rotten taste because these oils rot fast; whereas, saturated fats almost never go bad! Rancidity takes years in many cases. So this stuff is good for you? And it’s based on cherry picked research when most other research does not show what the AHA wants to prove. Now, THAT’S GOOD SCIENCE! not

Gary Taubes responds to the AHA presidential advisory on dietary fats.

 

Next thing this morning I received this video that shows in your face lies presented as research by ‘scientists’.  The lies we are told on a daily basis are really unbelievble and it’s always due to research bucks paid from your tax dollars. Watch this and weep, succkas.

~tannngl

Also, just received this research report:

On the Validity of NOAA, NASA and Hadley CRU Global Average Surface Temperature Data
&
The Validity of EPA’s CO2 Endangerment Finding

Result:

“The conclusive findings of this research are that the three GAST data sets are not a valid representation of reality.”

 

https://junkscience.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/ef-gast-data-research-report-062717.pdf



Categories: General, Political

Tags: , , , ,

7 replies

  1. CW, I must respectfully disagree with you. Any company or corporation that pays for or performs research to test its own product is most likely engaging in fraud.
    In addition, when a university is funded to research a product (think drugs) you will almost always find a researcher doing the research on the company or corporation payroll.

    Read Nina Teicholz’s book (and there are others): The Big Fat Surprise. She exposes the so called research that goes into the food and drug industries.

    Never underestimate a companies non-integrity when researching the benefits and risks of their product. There’s always money/sales at risk.

    Like

    • Maybe there’s something I’m not understanding because I don’t know how people, whether individually or in corporations, develop and improve products without testing. Of course there will always be the temptation to manipulate the results, but that can only go on so long before the truth is discovered. A product that claims to be 98% effective per testing but that only has a real effective rate of 50% is going to be exposed eventually, and they’ll pay a steep price for their deceit. The long term reward of getting it right far outweighs the short-term fraud, which is why we have so many companies that stand the test of time.

      I’m going to have to read “The Big Fat Surprise.” It sounds like a fascinating book!

      Liked by 1 person

  2. Great post, Tannngl.

    Like Kathy I discount what many of these groups say and let common sense be my guide. My husband’s aunt is 98 and still pretty sharp. Her husband lived to be 92. Her mother lived to be 101. They were all Kansas farmers who ate bacon and eggs for breakfast and fried chicken for lunch nearly all their lives. They weren’t skinny but they lived long and didn’t suffer many health problems.

    Government funding corrupts anything it touches, and it must be stopped if we want to have any hope of seeing truth in science again. Obama appointed another of minions to head up NASA while he was POTUS, and if he’s still there Trump needs to get rid of him yesterday. Put someone in charge who has complete dedication to the truth and to restoring the reputation and mission of NASA. That would be a big step in tearing down the era of climate alarmism that’s corrupted everything it touches.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Thank you, CW.

      Government funding of research is not the way to go. Government does NOT do anything very well. Government funding of science has been on going since the middle of the last century. Before that scientists looked for funding from patrons, people whom they could convince they had a great theory. Today, government has pet theories and funds them. I think I read $5 BILLION has been down the drain in climate research. What. A. Waste.

      I’d like to see individuals funding research again. And NOT drug companies or food companies or any company that has a product on the line. That just leads to fraud.

      Like

      • A company is just an entity made up of individuals, Tannngl. You wouldn’t eliminate greed by restricting research just to individuals. You would reduce the potential for research, good and bad. Individuals with the financial backing of corporations have invented marvelous things, including life-saving medical products and technology that extends and improves the lives of people around the world. The way to counter fraud, whether it be in corporations or individuals, is to enforce laws against fraud in advertising and encourage robust competition.

        Liked by 1 person

  3. Ever since they told us, years ago, that eggs were bad for you, then later changed their mind and said they’re good for you, I have discounted a lot of what they say and just followed my own instincts along with advice from other sources. I trust them about as much as I do the CDC.

    Anyone who supports this climate change garbage loses my attention immediately. There’s simply way too much solid proof that it’s just not true. That this has gone on for soooo long proves how easy it is to guilt people into believing it’s their fault, plus it’s a great money-making scam. Just look at the Al Gore Gang.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Anytime some one says “the science is settled.” I just laugh. Science is never settled! It keeps changing!
      The collection of temp data is staggeringly UNscientific. They’ve got temps from back in the 1930’s through now. But the data collectors have changed their collection methods in the late last century. How can it jive?
      Then they say satellite temps are better because some of the thermometers are on asphalt which causes more heat or at the air exhaust of air conditioners. That’s no quality control of the data! Then the satellite temps didn’t show the increase in temps they expected so they went back to the thermometers on earth but never corrected the placement errors. It’s really a sham. Then there was the email fiasco where the scientists’ emails were hijacked and we found they had been purposely faking higher temps because the real temps weren’t going up. It was in the emails. But a science agency investigated and said there was no fraud…
      All of this has made me deaf to any decent conversation on man made climate change.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: