Has anyone else noticed how much the press will pander
to the whims of qualified people?

I was just thoroughly appalled by the article at
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_600000/600481.stm

If you can't be bothered to read it, I'll summarise; it's
stating statistical evidence for the theory that women prefer 
tall men.
"Researchers believe the figures clearly show that taller men
 are reproductively more successful than shorter men,"
This much is fair enough. The figures are based on heights of
men who have one or more children.

"indicating that women are actively selecting for tallness 
when they go looking for male partners."
How many foolish assumptions are made here? Perhaps it's only
women who want children who want tall partners. Perhaps the
sperm of tall men have a higher success rate. Perhaps tall men
hate condoms more. There are loads of alternative conclusions
that can be made from the data, any of which explain it as well
if not better.

"I suppose one of the important consequences of these results 
is really to show up that human behaviour is driven, at one 
level at least, by evolutionary processes." the article says,
quoting Professor Dunbar of Liverpool University.
Again, how many stupid assumptions are made to read these
"important consequences" in the study?
I would argue that human behaviour is driven by the media.
The media implies that tall is better for men.
Evolutionary processes are driven by human behaviour.
Quite the opposite of their conclusion, but at least as valid,
if not more so. At least my version is consistent with
standard evolution theory.
(next generation is based on survival and breeding of traits
in the previous generation, as opposed to his statement that
the current generation breeds specifically to cause certain
traits in the next generation)

And he is quoted as though his every word is fact.
Because he's a _Professor_. He must know what he's talking about.

I also find it quite fearsome that Professors who talk to
the media are almost invariably people who make up spurious
trite conclusions, because that gives it a sort of "snap value"
for the mindless layman to gobble up.
Or rather, Professors who get /used/ in the media. I suspect
reasonable ones will talk, and not be quoted because their
answer to most things is true, ie. "we're not really sure".

Sigh,
--RavenBlack