So this is what happens when you exaggerate the power of your science. The U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation announced last week that it's going to review 2,100 cases it solved between 1985 and 2000 to see if forensic analysts overstated their evidence or reported their evidence inaccurately.
The cases all have to do with microscopic hair analysis, in which analysts examine hairs under a microscope for characteristics such as color and thickness. The cases up for re-examination include ones in which defendants already have execution dates, McClatchy reports.
Forensic analysis techniques have come under fire over the past decade, as scientists have have questioned whether analyses are truly as ironclad as they may seem on the witness stand. Now, we're finally seeing several different efforts from federal agencies to fix the flaws in forensic science. In 2012, the Department of Justice announced it would review at least 21,000 cases that went through the FBI's hair and fibers unit. This February, the department created a commission that will set certification standards for analysts.
In the hair microscopy cases, the FBI will offer free DNA tests to those defendants whose cases have errors. The Department of Justice has agreed not to raise certain objections, such as the statute of limitations, against defendants who want to challenge their convictions based on a microscopic hair analysis.
It isn't clear how accurate non-DNA hair analysis is. In its 2009 report, the National Academy of Sciences found no good studies of the technique's error rates. The academy concluded that it has "limited probative value" and isn't able to pinpoint individual defendants.
The FBI isn't ready to give up on the analysis just yet, however. "There is no reason to believe the FBI Laboratory employed 'flawed' forensic techniques," FBI Special Agent Ann Todd, a spokeswoman for the bureau, told McClatchy. It's still used in labs, she said. Todd emphasized that the review is about analysts' testimony.
And they still try to claim that “science” is reliable. When no one questions it, they will declare that “science” has solved the final secrets and provided absolutely infallible proof. When you start to question, they weasel out by sating, “Well, you know, 'science' can't provide absolute proof! It just provides something that you can test by 'experiment'.” It should be mentioned that, among other things, the Michelson Morley Experiment shows seasonal variations in the speed of light that devotees of “relativity” say don't exist. The fact is, this is only one area where “science” is nowhere near as reliable as shills would have the public believe. It's not even the only case in forensics.
A notorious case is DNA. Everyone proclaiming that DNA is the absolute evidence, that it erases the need for any other proof in crime fighting. People pretending to be “experts”, lecturing about how “Everyone's DNA is distinct, therefore only one person could possibly be the suspect with a DNA profile!” But, while humans have millions of genetic markers, in fact, “DNA analysis” only examines 11! But shills say that that's more than enough, because the likelihood of two people having the same set of 11 markers is one in a number larger than the population of the earth.
Except that, even with only 11 markers open for analysis, most cases look at no more than 9.
And, in a spectacular case of flummery, “science” performed an absolutely unjustifiable stretch in determining the probability of individuals' markers matching. They treated the markers as all occurring with independent likelihood, meaning the probability of having a set of markers is just the straight product of the probabilities of having each individual marker! And that has never been proved to be the case! In fact, there has never been a full and complete analysis of the genetic makeup of even a consistent statistically modeled collection of the human race! They do not know the profile of each separate marker and its likelihood of occurrence and whether the presence of one marker changes the likelihood of another marker being present! It's all a scam! And they've been releasing killers based on tainted DNA, innocent DNA from other sources and illegitimately calculated probabilities!
And, don't forget, for all the back slapping of “setting things right” now, “science” was equally as confident in the rightness of its statements years ago! And those statements are now being challenged! How long before they declare that the “corrections” today aren't worth the paper they're written on?