
Originally Posted by
DB_Hunter
Dude... this isn't scientific! At best its a correlation (and I use the word loosley here) of some observations. There is no control sample, no repeated results, no controlling of surrounding conditions, no varying of one variable whilst controlling others etc etc etc. You can't analyse something like this scientifically.
Besides, even if we were to agree on this being a generalisation, the article is still wrong as it is asserting this the norm worldwide. Thats like saying condition x applies to everyone in the world, except anyone who does not live in a certain town in a certain state in a certain country. Its absurd.