ONE Canadian scientist says something. Oh my.
I imagine that all his "research" was totally UNBIASED, used a million women of ALL socio-economic strata, all races, all cultures and so on so the results would have SOME meaning. Lol. NOT.
ONE scientist says this. Wow. He must have used his crystal ball and ouija board along with all his "scientific evidence."
The truth is the truth. If this scientist's experiment was valid, then other scientists can duplicate the experiment and demonstrate statistically equivalent results. True science has the characteristic that it can be used to make predictions.
The results of this experiment predict a similar outcome if the experiment is duplicated. This is very unlike so-called "global warming" which has not been able to predict ANYTHING. Will the earth be warmer in 15 years or colder? Can't predict. Will we have more hurricanes or fewer? Can't predict.
This scientist's experiment predicts that there is a statistically significant brain chemistry response when certain subjects are exposed to certain objects. If his experiment is not reproducible, it is not good science. If it is reproducible, then it has predictive value.
Einstein, one man, theorized that light rays will bend in a gravitational field. He suggested an experiment to verify that result using the apparent position of stars during a total eclipse. The experiment has been performed and, when done exactingly, verifies the theoretical claim.
It is the ability to perform the experiment and achieve predictable results which constitutes good science, not the number of scientists who make the prediction.