Bloke Refutes Studies

Research consisting of literally hundreds of detailed studies from the 1930s to the present has been refuted today by a bloke.

According to the bloke, who is a normal bloke, the findings, amassed by researchers at the forefront of their fields in some of the world’s leading institutes and universities, and published in the most highly regarded peer-review journals of their day, are codswallop.

Experiments carried out over 74 years, including several long-term studies into the metabolisms of humans, rhesus monkeys, mice and rats and a range of invertebrates, were dismissed by the bloke as “bloody typical,” while the careful elimination of biases in much of the boffins’ work was felt to be so irrelevant that the bloke didn’t bother to mention it.

“Who are they kidding?” wrote the bloke in the comments section of his favourite news-outlet’s website. “If it’s not this, it’s something else.”

In fact, the bloke, who is understood to have only just heard of the data, and to have been unaware of the wealth of anecdotal evidence it appears to confirm, considered the whole lot so far-fetched that he didn’t even consult Wikipedia, or look for actual papers online to skim the abstracts of, before posting his damning verdict. It seems he could see the research for what it was just by reading a journalist’s confused witterings about it.

Speaking passionately about the need to inject a modicum of common sense into the debate, the bloke said: “Next they’ll be telling us that breathing is bad,” and added, “I could get run over by a bus tomorrow.”

It is unclear, at this stage, what the bloke’s criticism of the data is exactly.

“But we’d love it if he could get in touch,” said Doctor Mary McCready of the Salk Institute for Biological Studies, La Jolla, California. “This bloke clearly knows something we don’t.”

“It’s so important that he contacts the scientific community and shares his insight,” agreed Professor Jo Vogelein of Cornell University. “It’s obvious the bloke has found some sort of methodological flaw in all of this work conducted by the world’s experts over the better part of a century. I can’t for the life of me guess what it is, but it’ll surely be a scientific revolution when he tells us.”