markus_jim, I went to Pima County Recorder's office on Wed. and inquired about such a situation. The best thing to do is go downtown (240 N. Stone Avenue), turn right at the door to enter the Recorders office, and talk to any one of those Voter Registration Clerks there. Ask them to see the Images from all of your past Voter Registration cards. I did the same; saw Voter Registration history going back several years, every time I changed addresses. My guess is that there is a software bug or bad design in the MVD servicearizona.com website, and based on my conversations with the Pima County Recorder, they blindly accept whatever data comes from the MVD website without a verification process.
Career Researcher.... when someone devotes 4 years of their life to get the necessary Federal agency approvals to perform the research, they own the study - plain and simple. MAPS stands behind Dr. Sisley, and has communicated their intentions to UofA.
I think that you would be better off debating the results of the study and identifying any bias in the resulting data, than to continue to advocate for Dr. Sisley's replacement.
You choose to hide behind the anonymity of the internet, as is your right. However, everyone reading your comments will begin to question your own intentions and bias. Do you wish for Dr. Sisley to be replaced by someone more aligned with your own beliefs?
Career Researcher.... its called a hypothesis. The purpose of research and the scientific method is to test hypothesis put forth at the start of a study. I have confidence that an FDA-approved, triple-blind study would be more about collecting and interpreting data, not drawing conclusions that are not supported by that data.
In addition, wouldn't the study be peer reviewed so that it is not merely Dr. Sisley's conclusions, but a consensus of the scientific community?
Recent Comments
http://www.maps.org/media/view/press_release_dr._sue_sisley_seeks_new_study_location_ua_denies_appeal_for_/
I think that you would be better off debating the results of the study and identifying any bias in the resulting data, than to continue to advocate for Dr. Sisley's replacement.
You choose to hide behind the anonymity of the internet, as is your right. However, everyone reading your comments will begin to question your own intentions and bias. Do you wish for Dr. Sisley to be replaced by someone more aligned with your own beliefs?
In addition, wouldn't the study be peer reviewed so that it is not merely Dr. Sisley's conclusions, but a consensus of the scientific community?