The return to lane feature only works if you start to drift into the other lane, not if you actively turn into the other lane, or supply any other common control input to let the system know you are in fact paying attention.

Its not too hard to distinguish an alert driver at the wheel from someone nodding off, because a normal driver supplies 10 to 30 small control movements to the steering wheel per minute (Steering Reversal Rate), and these are typically Greater than 2 degrees and less than 6 degrees regardless of road curvature or lack there of. Once this rate falls to less than 5 reversals per minute, the car's computer can assume from this single measurement alone that the driver is getting drowsy, and when there are almost no reversals at all, that the driver has fallen asleep.

So the mere presence of control frequent movements on the wheel would sufficient to distinguish an intentional lane cross from an unintentional one.

There is a large amount of research already available on the web about his stuff. Google steering wheel reversal rate. This stuff has been known and measured for decades.

Your ignorance proves you're too lazy to google "climate change raw data", but doesn't prove that the IPCC broke some as-yet-unspecified law.

Why not? Who is more authoritative, and why?