ORIGINAL: R.S.B.
In other words, the study results don’t show what you want them to show and instead disprove your nonsense rankings so you have to make every attempt to discredit those scientific facts somehow. Right?
R.S. Bodenhorn
How can it be scientific facts when it was not in a controled setting? It can't be accurate if something altered the outcome of the experiment that wasn't thought out and added to the equation before the experiment for the outcome to be accurate? Hunters sees collars on deer,Hunters don't shoot deer, Experiment allready screwed up and data not accurate. Reason, Hunters afraid of shooting collared deer along with undetermined number of hunters in the area where the deer was collared and released. Not to accurate for data to be collected I would say to get an accurate or even close to accurate outcome of the experemint. Scientists would be proud along with your school science teacher when they see what you consider scientific facts.
