|
Welcome to the Australian Ford Forums forum. You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and inserts advertising. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features without post based advertising banners. Registration is simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. Please Note: All new registrations go through a manual approval queue to keep spammers out. This is checked twice each day so there will be a delay before your registration is activated. |
|
The Pub For General Automotive Related Talk |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
04-01-2014, 02:31 PM | #11 | |||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 2,252
|
Quote:
Given the scenario where 1-2 tonne projectiles manned by people whose skills range from 'Stunt driver' to barely competent shoe lace tiers hurtle across our vast road system whose opinion are we to listen to. The stunt driver who states speed limits are unconstitutional impediments to progress, the internet knob hiding behind a keyboard and online avatar or an 'Academic' whose job it is to research the cause and effect of societies actions, utilising the best in data gathering science and research abilities. Yes Lies, damn lies and Statistics can be skewed tp prove almosrt anything, hence the peer review system in place on all University published papers. Now I don't recall this thread starting as a result of a published paper, more so on the back of 'sensationalist' reporting of an opinion. Yes the Reported author has a history of publishing documents that call for speed reductions amongst other topics, it does not mean the 'Academic' is wrong. Lastly, Its all well bitching and moaning about what someones researched opinion is, but they have managed to get themselves into a position of influence. They are obviously regarded as experts by those that need experts, and they may just use that influence to push their own agenda or that of their financier, should the peer review also agree, leaving the interweb heros, bandits and experts stand no chance of being heard. If 'Academia' really are halfwits, then get your act together and provide a counter argument, peer review their findings, and counter their argument with science and better research. C'mon, its not hard even people with no real world experience are doing it. Imagine what you lot could do with your degrees and Doctorates from the school of life or school of hard Knocks or wherever you 'went' could achieve. Im not an Academic either but value good research and regarded findings. JP |
|||