Search Results: liar

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/george-santos-civil-rights-pioneer-claim_n_64abaea1e4b07252cc129b79#
Rep. George Santos Likens Himself To Civil Rights Pioneer And… Just Wow

Serial liar Rep. George Santos (R-N. Y.) raised eyebrows when he likened himself to civil rights pioneer Rosa Parks.

Santos, appearing on conservative talk show host Mike Crispi’s podcast, railed against the criticism he has received since his congressional victory last year when it emerged he’d fabricated multiple stories about his life. Santos also faces federal fraud and money laundering charges, which he denies.

“They come for me, I go right back for them because I think for far too long they’ve gotten away with going along to get along. So no, it’s not going to stay that way anymore,” Santos ranted. “I’m gonna call them out. You want to call me a liar. I’ll call you a sellout.”

Santos then reprised his spat with Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah), who during President Joe Biden’s State of the Union address in February told Santos he didn’t belong in the chamber, and certainly not in a front row position.

“I mean Mitt Romney, the man goes to the State of the Union of the United States wearing a Ukraine lapel pin, tells me, a Latino gay man, that I shouldn’t sit in the front and that I should be in the back,” Santos scoffed.

“Well, guess what? Rosa Parks wouldn’t sit in the back and neither am I going to sit in the back,” he added. “That’s just the reality of how it works.”

Whenever the subject of climate change arises, invariable young people will say that scientists must be trusted. Unfortunately, scientists sometimes lie. Maybe they are lazy and simply fabricate research "results;" maybe they have some unspoken pressures to produce certain results; or maybe they simply have a personal bias that they want to support with "research" results.

Research studies are published in journals that are read by other researchers in the field, and others rely on the published research when they design and analyze their own research. Errors or lies in one study can be perpetuated and infect subsequent research, so the validity of data should always be open to scrutiny instead of the question being shouted down.

Here's a current example of apparently completely fabricated research. . . AT HARVARD UNVERSITY!

https://www.foxnews.com/media/leading-scholar-harvard-accused-fabricating-findings-famous-study-honesty-report

So, do you think research should be blindly accepted or should it be carefully scrutinized and examined for bias or intentional error?