Originally Posted by W*GS
What does "objective" mean, to you?
Was it wrong for the M.D.'s who studied the effect of smoking on health to advocate for restrictions on cigarettes? Why?
What "financial interest"? Do you really believe climate science is chock-full of corrupt scientists, getting rich while spreading lies for money? I know that's what Limbaugh and the other trogs tell you, but they're simply full of crap.
Would you consider it your position that the Government-funded anti-smoking lobby never engages in hype or exaggeration?
Similar to many public debates, you had the Tobacco lobby 'scientists' telling the public that 1 pack a day was A-OK. And you had the government-funded grievance machine telling the public that they had to ban smoking virtually everywhere, because if some hapless wanderer accidentally tripped through a puff of smoke, it would take years from his life.
In reality, right in line with common sense, the truth was (and is) somewhere in between.