Science Confirms the Obvious: Ten Studies That Make You Say "Duh"

Sure...anything that confirms what we THINK we already knew may seem silly to study, BUT what if people didn't look at the following?

- Does the sun revolve around the Earth?
- Is the Earth flat?
- Do heavier things fall faster than lighter things?
- etc...

The "answers" were thought to be "YES" in all of these cases until someone actually looked at them with a critical eye. If the real answers did come back "YES", then everyone would have said it is SO OBVIOUS. But of course, the answers were all "NO."

Asking obvious questions is the sometimes the best way to climb out of ignorance.

Sincerely,
RainyDayInterns
http://www.rainydaymagazine.com
"We Entertain When It Rains"

I could only get three "duh"'s to display..
From what I could glean, it appears that the studies reflect a societal trend - the result of chronic litigation.

Most any thing is permitted, embraced and/or exalted in the absence of any negative consequences. If one can't establish clinically the negative effects of an action, a drug, a toy, etc. - then it must be - ok. Beneficially consequences are assumed - negative consequences must be proven - especially if someone is making money out of the process. Courts require proof (aka expert opinions) What better way to certify an experts opinion - other than with a gummint funded "Duh" Study.

Based on that premise, I conclude that the purpose of most “Duh” studies are “not” to contribute to purposeful knowledge – but, to establish grounds for litigation - Litigation for the purpose of wealth redistribution. If I ever get to read the other 7 “Duh”s, I would expect a trend where by the greater the “Duh” – then the greater the potential for redistribution of wealth.

Duh’s don’t just happen. Some body is after some thing. The something is usually money. If one is cleaver, one can get the gummint to fund the study – then one can sell the results to the potentially aggrieved – then score a slice of the settlement.

In Obamaland, it’s one small step for full employment. (admittedly, this has been going on for more than two years)

Robert1234: Actually,NASAWFF, I took a real hard look at medical malpractice litigation and was surprised. The fact is that we don't have to much litigation, we have WAY to much malpractice! American's medical profession is essentially dysfunctional. The level and frequency of of major errors is absolutely astounding. The problem isn't that doctors get sued to much, its that they remain in practice after being sued for poor performance, so they do it again and again and again. If we got rid of the habitually error-prone doctors, the malpractice and the litigation would both drop dramatically. Think about your own medical and dental experiences. I'd wager that every single reader of this post has at least one experience of medical malpractice... that they didn't do anything about!

goood