User Profile: HonorTheOath


Member Since: April 18, 2013


123 To page: Go
  • February 26, 2015 at 2:11pm

    People who are having strokes tend to sleep a lot. It’s not the same thing at all.

    Sick people need a lot sleep. Healthy people need less sleep. That’s what their study ACTUALLY shows.

    Of course, “sick people need more sleep” would not make a click-catching headline, now would it?

    So instead we CHOOSE to say “sleep causes you to be sick!” See how that works?

  • February 26, 2015 at 2:09pm

    The research only APPEARS to contradict itself if you don’t understand the actual underlying studies.

    Like this “study.” Does it really contradict earlier research? How?

    Just because the author (and their journalistic running buddies) choose to “interpret” the findings a certain way to market “ground breaking blah blah blah” does NOT mean the ACTUAL underlying data and SUPPORTED conclusions are wrong . . . just “spun” way too far beyond what the data actually show.

    “Showbiz Science” thanks Dr. Oz . . .

  • [1] February 26, 2015 at 2:05pm

    First of all, as a research scientist please let me apologize for how far the discipline of science has fallen. From Anthropogenic Climate Change to Good Foods, Bad Foods nonsense I understand why my friends and neighbors distrust and disrespect “the scientific community.” That having been said . . .

    On the other hand, the way their study was designed, the whole kerfluffle might be the (already well known) fact that sick people need more rest.

    Yep- whenever two things say “A” and “B” are “Correlated” (like length of sleep and health) there are four possible explanations (to anyone who actually understands and uses the scientific method):

    1. A causes B
    2. B causes A
    3. C causes both A and B
    4. It’s just a coincidence (statistical artifact)

    Now we ALL use sophisticated tools to rule out #4 (well at least most of us do), but NOBODY is intellectually honest about 1-3.

    And, to add insult to injury, “journalists” don’t have the highest SAT/ACT scores on campus either . . .

    Responses (1) +
  • [4] February 26, 2015 at 1:52pm

    KILLED a calf.

    The dog owners are at fault. In some states, murdering cattle used to be a FELONY.

  • [4] February 26, 2015 at 1:50pm

    The asshats letting their dogs terrorize the innocent and slaughter cattle are the bad guys here.

    The dogs were just being dogs.

    The owners are 100% AT FAULT.

    Responses (1) +
  • [1] February 26, 2015 at 1:49pm

    People who refuse to accept that dogs are animals are the root of the problem.

    Where I live we have a STOOPID leash law: “all dogs must be on a leash or under positive voice command at all times.”

    The rate of complaints/attacks/property damage etc. SKYROCKETED when this was passed.

    Wanna guess why? Ignorami who don’t have a clue about “their babies” and what drives them.

  • [7] February 26, 2015 at 1:41pm

    Why oh why is getting this administration to simply do the right thing – on any topic or situation – so darned hard?

    Criminies it’s like pulling teeth just to get them to NOT screw something up constitutionally, legally, or on any basis!

    Responses (1) +
  • [2] February 26, 2015 at 1:37pm

    “The problem with totalitarianism is the inescapable fact that the power to control your fellowman attracts more Hitlers than Ghandis.”

    The problem with Common Core is NOT any particular flaw in this curriculum or that curriculum.

    Nice try in changing the subject. Dissimulation and misdirection are, of course, part and parcel of selling progressivism . . . actual logic, reason, and fact take away from “the messaging.”

  • February 20, 2015 at 9:40am

    Bloomberg is an entire industry built NOT on providing value to the marketplace but instead on RENT SEEKING and REDISTRIBUTION BY FORCE (taxes).

    So yeah . . . The whole coal burning vehicle thing is right in their wheelhouse. This article is just another advertisement for a carbon credit scam. With wheels.

    As to Apple quality . . . if the latest crop of dreck (the new iOS is PAINFULLY craptastic; right now forced to type at 1 wpm on my iPad) is any indication, Apple died with Steve. The new Klown King at Apple is bulletproof- came out of the closet just as the board was getting ready to cashier his sorry, incompetent azz . . .

    A coal burning Apple car? No thanks. This is all about capturing tax dollars anyhow. Like all of Bloomberg’s crony socialism scams.

  • [1] February 20, 2015 at 9:31am

    Note the story has been ginned up by a “service dog activist group” . . . College campii are full of bogus “causes” . . . and any “ism” you can spool up is worth huge street cred for these utes.

  • [1] February 20, 2015 at 9:27am

    Maule (great acft OBTW):

    The Auburn story is another case of butt-hurt over what constitutes a “service animal.” This is a “comfort dog” that the “veteran” takes into class with her to “soothe her anxiety.”

    I for one am gettin a little bit fed up withthe fact that ALL MY STUDENTS ARE DISABLED AND GET SPECIAL TREATMENT nowadays.

    Look, one of the reasons a 4year degree is damn near useless is because there are no standards any more.

    Maybe- if this “veteran” needs a pet to sit in her lap eveywhere she goes- she just isn’t ready to go to college yet?

    Analogy time: every false rape charge, every case of phony “racism” perpetrated by the self-proclaimed victims themselves- and yes, every boundary-pushing case of “disability” – erodes the impact of TRUE cases of rape, racism, and “acommodation” that need to be addressed.

  • [8] February 20, 2015 at 9:17am

    Eggs scrambld in BACON GREASE!

    Rollin Old School . . .

  • [3] February 20, 2015 at 9:09am

    So add this to the “why does pocorn pop” type stories about how rapidly we are approaching the dystopian future of “Idiocracy.”

    Yes, these are the same manganese nodules we all learned about in high school. No, there is really nothing new or even interesting about this.

    However, real science is hard work, and the results of real science frequently challenge our cherished nostrums and make us uncomfortable. Real science is politically dangerous, and funding for real science is unavailable.

    Therefore, what we are left with is gravy train riding, rent seeking charlatans who need to frequently “discover” kewl neuw know-ledge to keep the ride going. And they rely on the sorry state of government schoos and the low SAT/ACT scores of journalists . . . and general ignorance . . . to peddle this “research.”

    The plummeting respect that the public holds for “scientists” like these is well-deserved. If more of us exposed thse charlatans for who they really were, the contempt of thepublic might rise to a level where this could change.

    PSYCH! Yeah, right.

    Responses (1) +
  • February 20, 2015 at 7:06am

    Plenty of gratuitous assertions, easily disputed.

    Looking forward to entering high school next year?

  • [3] February 20, 2015 at 7:05am

    Al F’ing Franken? That election-cheating, vote fraud poser illegally sitting on a Senate seat? Is he one of those ethical Democrats being held to a higher standard?

    Good God you are n idiot. Hope OFA isn’t paying you Level I wages for thisinsipid trolling. Not even worth minimum wage at any price point.


  • [3] February 20, 2015 at 7:01am

    See how MysteryMeat does that? Rhetorical judo. Take something you yourself are guilty of, and accuse the other side of doing it (they must be right?).

    It’s a form of psychological transferrence (the left needs this to be true, so it is) that is sadly widespread on the left. It’s institutionalized. They can’t help it.

    The degree of ludicrosity actually helps- The “Big Lie” from 1940s era socialism.

  • [56] February 20, 2015 at 6:49am

    A-a-a-nd once again The Blaze misses the REAL story here.

    “Environmentally friendly dietary guidelines?!” WTF, O?

    So our health doesn’t matter as much as placating the CP-USA dominated environut movement goobs?


    Responses (5) +
  • [1] February 19, 2015 at 2:41pm

    Ummmm . . . .the switch to high fructose corn syrup was payola to the sugar cane producers in the USA. We slapped a “twice the market price” tarriff on imported sugar in order to save 50 jobs in Louisiana and Hawaii. To this day, the american consumer pays TWICE THE WORLD SPOT RATE for refined sugar.

    Yep. Political payola to big money donors in Louisiana and Hawaii.

    You can look it up . . . we are doing similar things with steel and ethanol also; with similar results. Less steel in US products and worse gas mileage in our cars . . . all to “save american jobs” doncha know.

  • [1] February 19, 2015 at 2:32pm

    Mewnani- since discovering the gene that actually causes lung cancer, the scholarship (well, outside the AMA-controlled US) on lung cancer has changed dramatically.

    The second-hand smoke research was always based on the (now found to be flawed) presumption of the causal link between smoking and lung cancer. The 80% figure is bogus; in any case, correlation and causality are very different levels of evidence.

    Do people with the gene for lung cancer smoke more than the general population? Yes they do. Do people who never smoked at all get lung cancer? Yes they do.

    Inconvenient truths indeed . . . however, it will take an actual genetic “cure” for lung cancer before the medical establishment int he USA to admit they jumped the gun a wee bit back when they drew the causal arrow between smoking and lung cancer. Kinda got it backwards.

    Responses (2) +
  • February 19, 2015 at 2:23pm

    Sigh. According to the actual research, they asked men to self-describe their behavior in social situations. Men with a longer ring/index finger combo CLAIM that they listen better, laugh more, are more supportive, etc. etc. Men with shorter ratios DO NOT CLAIM that they listen better, are more supportive, etc.

    ONE explanation is that the ratio can predict actual performance. Another, equally likely (but much more plausible) explanation is that men with the longer ratio (higher exposure to testosterone) are arrogant, self-absorbed lying delusional a-holes.

    But hey . . . doing REAL science that actually ANSWERS interesting questions is hard. It’s a lot of work. And your findings generally won’t bring you either fame (popular media repeating your dubious conclusions) nor fortune (government funding for more research).
    So yeah- people toss together sketchy research and then claim broad, sweeping, important conclusions.
    Y’All realize that journalism majors don’t exactly understand any of the things they report on, right? Especially when it comes to interpretating “scientific research results.”

    Responses (1) +
123 To page: Go
Restoring Love