Comments on: Only the gay die young? Part 5 – Morten Frisch responds to Kirk Cameron

By: Joey Tranchina

Joey Tranchina — Sat, 28 Feb 2009 01:19:31 +0000

The Cameron’s pseudo-science is a text-book example of the misuse of statistics. They disgrace the values of the science that they pretend to practice. We, virtually all of us here, have known that for decades. The problem is that they do not depend upon the peer-reviewed and verifiable annals of science, they pitch to the dirty curtains where ignorance, bigotry and blind-faith house fear, desperation and spiritual chaos. These demagogues do not seek colleagues but shock-troops who they arm with nonsense that passes all the tests it’s put to. “Gobbledegook” is good enough for their intended market. Their contribution must be measured not by its academic defects but by the harm it does in the hands of those who enter the world armed with slings and arrows of toxic disinformation. There must be a greater and more-immediate price to pay for malpractice when practiced in the name of science.

In the name of science, there must be a higher profile of public humiliation for pandering faux interpretations of data lacking in integrity. We need an international prize for bad science, that comes attached with notoriety. Call it “The Benedict Arnold Prize, for flexible integrity in pseudo-scientific research.” it doesn’t matter what it’s called. What is important is that public scorn echoes outside professional circles and is attached to the miscreants so that it limits the impact of the suffering they inflict in the name of “science.”

By: Michael Bussee

Michael Bussee — Wed, 25 Apr 2007 14:39:44 +0000

“As a consequence, any report on human sexuality originating from this institution will by definition be devoid of objectivity and of questionable scientific value.”

Couldn’t the same thing be said of NARTH?

By: Timothy Kincaid

Timothy Kincaid — Tue, 24 Apr 2007 17:47:44 +0000

Although the Cameronsâ€™ report has no objective scientific value, the authors should be acknowledged for providing teachers with a humorous example of agenda-driven, pseudo-scientific gobbledygook that will make lessons in elementary study design and scientific inference much more amusing for future epidemiology students.

Ironically, the Camerons may well achieve fame for their efforts – as just such an illustration. In much the same way the Baron von Munchausen has become well known for his tales of adventure, the Camerons could become known for their approach to statistical analysis.

Perhaps it could be called the Cameron Method.