Category Archives: Uncategorized

The Ending of the CIA’s Covert Operation in Syria Will Not Bring the Syrian Tragedy to an End

The Ending of the CIA’s Covert Operation in Syria Will Not Bring the Syrian Tragedy to an End
globalresearch / Adeyinka Makinde

syrianarmy.jpg

Reports by major Western news outlets such as the Washington Post regarding US President Donald Trump’s undertaking to end the covert CIA operation to arm rebels in Syria are essentially misleading. It assumes that there is truth to the

Original Article: http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-ending-of-the-cias-covert-operation-in-syria-will-not-bring-the-syrian-tragedy-to-an-end/5600342

Codex Alimentarius and Monsanto’s Toxic Relations

Codex Alimentarius and Monsanto’s Toxic Relations
globalresearch / Colin Todhunter

monsanto-400x400.jpg

“Our soils are sick from greed-based, irresponsible agricultural practices, pesticides, chemical fertilizers, erosion and mineral depletion, all of which stop or reduce adequate microbial activity in the soil, rendering them sick and/or dead and sterile. Sick soils make for sick

Original Article: http://www.globalresearch.ca/codex-alimentarius-and-monsantos-toxic-relations/5600356

Hidden History: The Secret Origins of the First World War

Hidden History: The Secret Origins of the First World War
globalresearch / Antony C. Black

British_Empire_in_1898.png
Of the many myths that befog the modern political mind, none is so corrupting of the understanding or so incongruent with historical fact as the notion that the wealthy and the powerful do not conspire.

Original Article: http://www.globalresearch.ca/hidden-history-the-secret-origins-of-the-first-world-war/5600090

The “Salaries” ISIS-Daesh Terrorists Get for Their Atrocities

The “Salaries” ISIS-Daesh Terrorists Get for Their Atrocities
globalresearch / Sputnik

1055469012.jpg

According to the document, payments differ depending on the family status of a Daesh militant as well as the number of children in the family.

Single militants receive the lowest salary, about 72 dollars, or 95,000 Iraqi dinars.

By contrast, …

Original Article: http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-salaries-isis-daesh-terrorists-get-for-their-atrocities/5599745

Fairy Tales and Globalisation: Bringing Up the Young in the Values and Virtues of Great Civilisations

Fairy Tales and Globalisation: Bringing Up the Young in the Values and Virtues of Great Civilisations
globalresearch / Prof. Yakov M. Rabkin

bigstock-boy-watching-television-400x266.jpg

Introduction

Globalisation affects children’s values, self-images and world outlook through targeted marketing of fairy tales, games and assorted media products. This article analyses these effects and proposes a number of measures to counteract them. Pro-active, grassroots approaches on the part

Original Article: http://www.globalresearch.ca/fairy-tales-and-globalisation-bringing-up-the-young-in-the-values-and-virtues-of-great-civilisations/5599713

Neocons Have Been Destroying Sovereign Nations for 20 Years

Neocons Have Been Destroying Sovereign Nations for 20 Years
Syria Solidarity Movement / insania

August 7, 2017, Defend Democracy Press – Neil Clark A resource-rich, socialist-led, multi-ethnic secular state, with an economic system characterized by a high level of public/social ownership and generous provision of welfare, education and social services. An independent foreign policy with friendship and good commercial ties with Russia, support for Palestine and African and Arab …

Original Article: http://www.syriasolidaritymovement.org/2017/08/07/neocons-have-been-destroying-sovereign-nations-for-20-years/

How many scientific papers just aren’t true? | The Spectator

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2016/10/how-many-scientific-papers-just-arent-true/#

How many scientific papers just aren’t true?

Enough that basing government policy on ‘peer-reviewed studies’ isn’t all it’s cracked up to be

Donna Laframboise

We’re continually assured that government policies are grounded in evidence, whether it’s an anti-bullying programme in Finland, an alcohol awareness initiative in Texas or climate change responses around the globe. Science itself, we’re told, is guiding our footsteps.

There’s just one problem: science is in deep trouble. Last year, Richard Horton, editor of The Lancet, admitted that “much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue.” In his words, “science has taken a turn toward darkness.”

Medical research, psychology, and economics are all in the grip of a ‘reproducibility crisis.’ A pharmaceutical company attempting to confirm the findings of 53 landmark cancer studies was successful in only six instances, a failure rate of 89pc. In 2012, a psychology journal devoted an entire issue to reliability problems in that discipline, with one essay titled “Why science is not necessarily self-correcting.” Likewise, a 2015 report prepared for the Board of Governors of the US Federal Reserve concluded that “economics research is usually not replicable.” Its authors were able to verify the findings of only one third of 67 papers published in reputable economics journals. After enlisting the help of the original researchers, the success rate rose to a still dismal 49pc.

Government policies can’t be considered evidence-based if the evidence on which they depend hasn’t been independently verified, yet the vast majority of academic research is never put to this test. Instead, something called peer review takes place. When a research paper is submitted, journals invite a couple of people to evaluate it. Known as referees, these individuals recommend that the paper be published, modified, or rejected.

If one gets what one pays for, it’s worth observing that referees typically work for free. They lack both the time and the resources to perform anything other than a cursory overview. Nothing like an audit occurs. No one examines the raw data for accuracy or the computer code for errors. Peer review doesn’t guarantee that proper statistical analyses were employed, or that lab equipment was used properly.

Referees at the most prestigious of journals have given the green light to research that was later found to be wholly fraudulent. Conversely, they’ve scoffed at work that went on to win Nobel Prizes. Richard Smith, a former editor of the British Medical Journal, describes peer review as a roulette wheel, a lottery, and a black box. He points out that an extensive body of research finds scant evidence that this vetting process accomplishes much at all. On the other hand, a mountain of scholarship has identified profound deficiencies.

Sign up to The Best of Coffee House

A round-up of the best articles from Coffee House from the past week

Peer review’s random and arbitrary nature was demonstrated as early as 1982. Twelve already published papers were assigned fictitious author and institution names before being resubmitted to the same journal 18-32 months later. The duplication was noticed in three instances, but the remaining nine papers underwent review by two referees each. Only one paper was deemed worthy of seeing the light of day the second time it was examined by the same journal that had already published it. Lack of originality wasn’t among the concerns raised by the second wave of referees.

Anyone can start a scholarly journal and define peer review however they wish. No minimum standards apply and no enforcement mechanisms ensure that a journal’s publicly described policies are actually followed. Some editors admit to writing up fake reviews under the cover of anonymity rather than going to the trouble of recruiting bona fide referees. In 2014, a news story reported that 120 papers containing computer-generated gibberish had nevertheless survived the peer review process of reputable publishers.

Politicians and journalists have long found it convenient to regard peer-reviewed research as de facto sound science. If that were the case, Nature would hardly have subtitled a February 2016 article: “Mistakes in peer-reviewed papers are easy to find but hard to fix.” Over a period of 18 months, a team of researchers attempted to correct dozens of substantial errors in nutrition and obesity research. Among these was the claim that the height change in a group of adults averaged nearly three inches (7 cm) over eight weeks. The team reported that editors “seemed unprepared or ill-equipped to investigate, take action or even respond.” In Kafkaesque fashion, after months of effort culminated in acknowledgement of a gaffe, journals then demanded that the team pay $1,700 in one instance and $2,100 in another before a letter calling attention to other people’s mistakes could be published.

Which brings us back to the matter of public policy. We’ve long been assured that reports produced by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) are authoritative because they rely entirely on peer-reviewed, scientific literature. A 2010 InterAcademy Council investigation found this claim to be false, but that’s another story. Even if all IPCC source material did meet this threshold, the fact that one out of an estimated 25,000 academic journals conducted an unspecified and unregulated peer review ritual is no warranty that a paper isn’t total nonsense.

If half of the scientific literature “may simply be untrue,” then half of the climate research cited by the IPCC may also be untrue. This appalling unreliability extends to work on dietary cholesterol, domestic violence, air pollution – in short, to all research currently being generated by the academy.

The US National Science Foundation recently reminded us that a scientific finding “cannot be regarded as an empirical fact” unless it has been “independently verified.” Peer review does not perform that function. Until governments begin authenticating research prior to using it as the foundation for new laws and huge expenditures, don’t fall for the claim that policy X is evidence-based.

Donna Laframboise is the author of Peer Review: Why Scepticism is Essential, a report published by the Global Warming Policy Foundation. This replaces an earlier version of this article that had been published in error.

John Plumridge
Mobile: 07392047871

‘Without Putin, Syria Would Have Ceased to Exist’: Interview With Flemish Priest Living in Syria – Eric van de Beek

‘Without Putin, Syria Would Have Ceased to Exist’: Interview With Flemish Priest Living in Syria – Eric van de Beek
Russia Insider Daily Headlines

ericimg_4097-1.jpg

According to the Flemish Father Daniel Maes, who has lived in Syria since 2010, the coverage of the Syrian war is based on lies. President Bashar al-Assad is not the problem, but our own politicians, who support ISIS and Al Nusra, in order to topple the Syrian government. “The real terrorist leaders are in the West and Saudi Arabia.”

Original Article: http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/without-putin-syria-would-have-ceased-exist-interview-flemish-priest-living-syria/ri20084