Share Tweet Google Share.
CargoLogic Germany gets approval to start 'route proving flights'. Port of Virginia joins coalition to promote more use of LNG as marine fuel. Maersk looks beyond box shipping to boost turnover.
Mixed ocean freight rates performance across major trade lanes. Beijing raises highest security alert for vessels using the Malacca Strait. Aeroflot expands route network for summer Amazon Air starts cargo flights to Anchorage airport.
Flawed Findings: How NYC's Approach to Measuring Displacement Risk Fails Communities
Air cargo volumes drop globally in May against The story went global and the reputations of the respected professors, no longer alive to defend themselves, were damaged. Its worrying effect is to cast serious debate and the genuine science behind it into the shadows just when science-based illumination and debate is most needed. But the authors have chosen to interpret this suggestion in the darkest possible light. Despite not even knowing Knowles, his organisation, his work, or his motivations, the authors present his support of evidence-based discussion as being some kind of Machiavellian food industry plot.
This is unfair and not substantiated by the evidence. What follows below is a detailed analysis of the academic paper. You may wish to first read the email and the academic paper. Both men have strong qualifications and are still passionately involved in positive global food and beverage discussions. An unknown graduate researcher could not expect to gain such traction.
The authors make such evidence sound much grander than it is by using phrases that minimise the fact that this is one email from two former industry executives. A few examples where the authors have well and truly over-egged the pudding with grand talk:. One innocuous email between learned colleagues reasonably suggesting that science underpin food discussions cannot make a conspiracy of Watergate proportions.
Most people would say yes.
- Sex, Death and Religion in Philip Pullmans Trilogy His Dark Materials A Critique!
- Join Kobo & start eReading today.
- Diamantes de pasión (Bianca) (Spanish Edition)!
- (253) 573-7800?
How this paper managed to get published by such a respected journal is for the journal to justify. The use of institutional affiliation, disciplinary qualification, and historical reputation does not constitute nor deserve to be treated as independent verification of otherwise unsupported assertions and allegations.
Cursed 21st Founding | Warhammer 40k | FANDOM powered by Wikia
This sin is three-fold: where his words and sentiment have been inaccurately summarised, presented out of qualifying context, or edited so the message is changed to create a negative impression. The sentence has been clipped and is not presented accurately.
- The History of Oral Traditions in Central Africa?
- Most clinical studies on vitamins flawed by poor methodology -- ScienceDaily.
- Product | Flawed Foundings;
Under ILSI, Knowles reasonably says that contentious issues need to be addressed by all stakeholders i. The context is important because it goes on to explain what Knowles means. Only the most sinister interpretation would lead to the suggestion that this is evidence of a dark strategy to manipulate global food policy. But again, this is a partial quote that misleads readers as to what Mr Knowles actually said, which is here: ILSI was formed by you for the very reason that such contentious issues need to be addressed by all stakeholders i.
He then goes on to emphasise that work should be done in the traditional manner of ILSI — in a transparent manner with the best international experts and the full proceedings published…. No references are given. Basing a claim of tactics by food industry leaders to influence scientific evidence base and global debate on this one, perfectly reasonable solitary email is ridiculous.
The authors have packaged up one email between two retired colleagues, selectively clipped comments and presented them with all the fury and outrage of Watergate. Michael Knowles deserves an apology, and the paper should be retracted. Right to Know, a c 3 nonprofit organization.
The major funders of U. No funding was provided specifically for this study. So what is this email, which is treated like a food industry Watergate tape, all about? The smallest database possible.