Quote Originally Posted by tundramanq View Post
I always look for the funding sources for these studies - they are almost always "directed research" with predictable results. The is a ton of junk "science" of there. This one is the NSF - academics with no real world experience or track record.
Whoa, hold on there! Are you claiming that this information is false?

Thus far, I haven't seen them make any suggestions on what should be done, or even say that it's a problem which requires action. They've merely pointed out what they've found. How is this "junk science" with "predictable results"?

I do realize, of course, that a lot of studies are politically motivated, or are easily run away with by people with agendas. But let's not throw the proverbial baby out with the bathwater just yet. These "academics with no real world experience or track record" have done quite a bit of research on this matter, following where the clues lead them. What possible reason should we have to disregard their findings?