Slashdot Mirror

i think you've used the completely wrong example

the radioactive boyscout is dying, he's got kaposi's sarcoma all over his face, and he is still trying to steal fire detectors. he's an obsessed maniac, a danger to himself and others, and soon he will be prematurely dead from the effects of radiation

this is a sobering picture form last year when he was arrested

in other words, if you are defending the hobbyist scientist against 9/11 fearmongering, the radioactive boyscout is the LAST person you want to mention

because the radioactive boyscout is the very worst example of the hobbyist scientist: very much a danger to himself and others, and obsessed to the point of lawless behavior

do NOT mention the radioactive boyscout, unless you wish to enforce draconian measures

Let's say someone makes 5 million a year. Now, let's say there's some really strict things in place to stop them dodging taxes (which most rich people are actually really good at). They get taxed at 50% of their income. They now make 2.5 million a year. Do you really think they're "less powerful" than they would have been at 3, 4 or even just under 5 million?

Lets say that my family makes 250k/year. I think that's acheiveable in my lifetime, although I'm currently not even at 1/3rd of that. I can expect to be taxed MORE than what people at 250k are already taxed at. Frankly, working harder to be taxed more doesn't seem very attractive, but working less to get something for nothing DOES seem attractive. This goes along with keeping the poor, poor. Give hand outs to people, and they'll keep voting for you.

"Fairness" does not advocate the removal of free speech.

Learn what the fairness doctrine is and come back when you can have an educated conversation. And what's being proposed is not the soft rules of '49-'85. The new proposals are much stronger. There's nothing "fair" about it. It violates your 1st amendment rights. Think of it like this... If it was reinstated and inforced, the owners of this site would have to make sure that there would be no more liberal posts than there are conservative posts. We all know that there's probably a 80/20 split here... That would be eliminating quite a few peoples' 1st amendment rights.

just place some sensible restrictions on them.

Yeah, like restrict them from being made? http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=03FA375F-3048-5C12-00CC7D33B6E8E59E http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,347690,00.html And do you know he's already said he wanted to ban all semi-automatic weapons? That's just about every pistol sold today. If he got his way, the only guns allowed would be black powder muskets and single shot rifles. Good luck defending yourself from a carjacker with one of those. Even pistols of the 1800's were 'semi-automatic'

And as far as welfare... The more people get it, the more depend on it. People who decide to work to get off welfare do it because they want a better standard of living than what they can have on welfare. By increasing the amount of welfare people get, you increase that standard of living thereby increasing the amount of people who are content to stay there. http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/indicators06/ch1.htm

Welfare should be supplemental, it should not be something people can depend on. It should be given as a factor of what they are acheiving themselves, and it should reduce as time goes on to give an incentive to get off. When a woman see having babies as getting a raise, and by giving extra benifits to stay unmarried the system is fucked. They should get the same benefits if they are married right now. The current system is a disincentive to marraige.

PURE flamebait here

PURE speculation there. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Please forgive my misuse of blockquote, I am not as proficient as you.

Well, they do have the best looking news-chicks!!

Megyn Kelly yowza!!

"Every time I have heard him talk, he has talked about how gun regulations at a federal level are completely infeasible"

Except the Assault Weapons Ban that he thought Bush should have renewed right? I mean did you miss that one?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,289373,00.html

In the end, I couldn't care less about the creation myths others have, even our President. After 6 Republican Presidential terms, they still haven't managed to overturn Roe.v.Wade.

On the other hand, taxes are never found unconstitutional, and rarely reduced significantly. The only way to avoid them is to never increase them.

I vote my financial self interest, and regardless of what the Obama propaganda is it has nothing to do with $250k

It's the uploader's job to figure out if something they want to distribute is covered under copyright. They're the ones getting taken to court.

how soon you forget..

I mean the Rashid Khalida, the director of the PLO Wafa, yes: http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10/29/mccain-slams-la-times-double-standard-withholding-obama-khalidi-tape/ Yes, terrorist sympathizers and terrorists are the darling of the anti-semitic left.

While CNN, MSNBC, and Faux News, are all likely to have live streaming feeds of election results, it might be more worthwhile to head to your local sports bar. They'll very likely have the election results on, and they have a reasonable supply of alcohol as well, which will come in handy no matter who wins (if your candidate of choice wins, you celebrate; if the other guy wins, you drown away your sorrows),... ;-)

Are you senile or just drunk? Please be informed the U.S.
provides money TO the P.L.O.

Your ignorance is why you need Joe The Plubmer.

Cordially,
Kilgore Trout

Florida!

What's funnier is the Faux News spin on the dispensing of placebos. "About half of American doctors in a new study regularly give their patients placebo pills without telling them."

Wow. You've sure demonstrated a firm grasp of the 'placebo effect', Faux news! What's next, "Half of all bank robbers aren't told the police will respond when the alarms are tripped?" Freakin' geniuses over there.

Depends on the society. The Department of Vice and Virtue or The Department of "Well, that was unexpected"

Punishment will fit the crime, only if society demands it. I doubt the CRTC will even investigate the matter, let alone throw half million dollar fines for what can be seen on regular airwaves after midnight in Toronto.

Sadly, this is not a troll post.

.

19-year-old CutoutDissection.com has changed her name to CutoutDissection.com, to protest animal dissections in schools. CutoutDissection says she began opposing dissections in middle school after a class assignment to cut up a chicken wing made her uncomfortable. She is of course interning for PETA, since no teenager could think up an idea this stupid on their own without a team of people helping. .com said, "I normally do have to repeat my name several times when I am introducing myself to someone new. Once they find out what my name is, they want to know more about what the Web site is about."

http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/WorldBankDoc1.pdf

Why would anybody authorise installing Skype in a Bank environnement? How many organisation instal Skype in a closed environment? Since when a Lotus Notes Admin account gives you access to a physical server? When did Microsoft start forensics?

can you support the position that they are not a reputable news source?

Yes

citations + evidence please.

http://www.foxnews.com/

http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,435681,00.html

We stopped being angry about that when Obama voted for it.

When you see stories like these: http://embeds.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/10/08/the-cindy-mac-attack/, you understand why Obama had no reason to vote against a bill that had a majority anyway in the senate and that only would be taken out of context and used to attack Obama as being "different" than white McCain.

Oh, if you wonder, Obama never voted for cutting the funding to the troops.

Orin Kerr, Professor of Law; George Washington University Law School, who is a supporter of John McCain, questions the legality of the indictment:

Here's the indictment. And here's the potential problem with the indictment. In order to charge the case as a felony rather than a misdemeanor, the government needed to claim that the intrusion was committed to further criminal or tortious activity. The statute, 18 U.S.C. 1030, states that the intrusion is a felony if the intrusion "was committed in furtherance of any criminal or tortious act in violation of the Constitution or laws of the United States or of any State."

Oddly, though, the indictment doesn't exactly state what the crime or tort is that the intrusion was designed to further. It just states that the intrusion was "in furtherance of the commission of a criminal act in violation of the laws of the United States, including 18 U.S.C. Section 2701 and 18 U.S.C. Section lO30(a)(2)" But Section 2701 and Section 1030 are the intrusion statutes themselves! It makes no sense to allow a felony enhancement for a crime committed in furtherance of the crime itself; presumably the enhancement is only for intrusions committed in furtherance of some other crime. Otherwise the felony enhancement is meaningless, as every misdemeanor becomes a felony.

Orin Kerr, "Is the Palin E-Mail Hack Indictment Legally Flawed?, Volokh Conspiracy, October 8, 2008

Texas.

There are some states with 75 mph limits, too. With the way many rural speed limits are set, I'd guess 50% of traffic is not in compliance with the limit, so it looks like Ford is giving you a few MPH over to keep up with traffic and pass at a reasonable pace.

Second, without copyright reform, the new association will become as corrupt as the first.

Only if listeners let them. If listeners were to stop buying, and attending concerts, if the new association becomes corrupt then it won't last long. There are other artists who remain uncorrupted or became open. The Grateful Dead allowed concert attendees to record concerts and share those recordings. After angering fans they allowed a nonprofit website to continue to offer downloads of their music. John Perry Barlow, a cofounder of the EFF, wrote songs for the Dead.

The only real solution is copyright reform.

As copyright is in the US it's a big problem. I'm not ready to abolish copyrights yet but I'd like to see the copyright term reduced to several years at most.

Falcon

Yep. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,197072,00.html

Texas:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,197072,00.html

http://www.houstonfreeways.com/modern/2007-01-07_80mph_west_texas.aspx

And Utah is considering it as well:

http://www.impactlab.com/2007/01/18/utah-considers-80-mph-speed-limit/

"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism, since it is the merger of state and corporate power"-- Mussolini

OK, if we are going to quote Mussolini as a great political scientist, let's extrapolate on this a bit. Who created Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the true "merger of state and corporate power" in this crisis? Democrats. Who further extended this by creating the CRA? Democrats. Who expanded its mission into accusing bankers of racism ("redlining") and extorting them to make more bad loans, or else be investigated? Democrats. Who ignored warnings and blocked efforts at reform in 2003? Who killed efforts at GOP reform of the FMs in 2005? Democrats. What party was Chris Dodd, Chairman of the Senate Banking Committee who took millions in lobbying money from the financial services industry and got sweetheart loan deals a member of? Democrats. What party was the guy who was boning the assistant director of Fannie Mae while he was on the House Financial Services Committee a member of? Democrats.

Funny, I see a lot of suspects that your oh-so-insightful post left out.

But don't worry. help is on the way. Barack Obama, who also got a sweetheart loan deal, will be sure critics can't speak out against him. He will define truth, just as Orwell predicted, since the media is asleep at the switch. What party is he from?

Whoever modded parent as "insightful" are all so busy slamming Fox News that you don't even know who is responsible for all of this. But don't let the truth get in the way of a good story.

They can't accept the fact that the free market is what caused this mess.

Wait, what? What a stunning display of ignorance of how the whole subprime lending system worked. In a "free market" the government does not intervene. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, government sponsored enterprises (AKA, "ATMs"), are no more "free market" than the post office. In this "free market," both FMs artificially inflated both credit and housing markets (just as government student loan programs have done to tuition) by pouring money into the system, and representing to the banks "don't worry, we are backed by Uncle Sam, what could go wrong?". In a "free market", government regulations like mark-to-market, which caused massive bank paper losses, don't exist. In a "free market," you don't have a CRA telling lenders how they have to loan their money. In a "free market" you don't have corrupt senators like Chris Dodd and Barney Frank, who are on important congressional banking oversight committees (which themselves wouldn't exist in a "free market"), leaning on lenders to make subprime loans, and fighting attempts to reign in these out-of-control Government-Sponsored Monstrosities..

Here's what Chuck Schumer said back in 2003, when Republicans wanted more oversight of said Government-Sponsored Monstrosities:

Senate Banking Committee, Oct. 16, 2003:

Sen. Charles Schumer (D., N.Y.): And my worry is that we're using the recent safety and soundness concerns, particularly with Freddie, and with a poor regulator, as a straw man to curtail Fannie and Freddie's mission. And I don't think there is any doubt that there are some in the administration who don't believe in Fannie and Freddie altogether, say let the private sector do it. That would be sort of an ideological position.

Source.

So Schumer himself opposed reform on the grounds that the "free market" is the wrong approach. Massive government intervention and regulation was the status quo. But now it is the "free market's" fault? WTF?

Yeah, sounds like a "free market" alright. Just like public housing is a free market.

They're not dumb, they're just evil.

This is the difference between conservatives and liberals. Conservatives think libs are well-meaning but horribly misguided. Liberals think conservatives are evil (and this gets modded as insightful rather than flamebait!). And it's the conservatives who are "intolerant."

For the record, it was Democrats who got us in this mess, not Republicans. Democrats created these government-sponsored ATMs (Freddie and Fannie), the CRA, and your fair-and-balanced media won't report on Chris Dodd's and Barney Frank's (sorry, only Fox News is reporting this one, so had to use them) ties to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, how those government sponsored enterprises acted as ATMs, and how Dems forced banks to lend to those with bad credit. And how they fought John McCain's 2005 home mortgage reform bill. But now it's Republicans' fault? THIS IS A GOVERNMENT-CREATED PROBLEM that Republicans tried to regulate and Democrats wanted unregulated. But don't let the facts get in the way of a good story.

The lack of reporting on what really caused this scandal is a scandal in itself. Reading these threads shows me how the media has not done its job.

The problem isn't who is being asked questions or giving the reporters the answers. It is the over tones of the reporting from the reporters themselves.

But what you describe has nothing to do with left/right bias. It's all about - as you say - creating controversy and selling papers.

They rolled over on it because for the previous 10 to 15 years, the exact same saber rattling stuff had been said but the previous administration and administration officials. I suspect you were too busy popping zits and chasing Suzie Shallowthroat around to have been paying attention.

Excuse me, sonny, but I marched against the first Gulf War. (I'm not saying I did a lot, that I was some great activist. But I was there.) The Congressional fsck-up that authorized it occurred on my 21st birthday. By the time Clinton came along, my zits were pretty much cleared up.

And I watched with dismay (and did a little minor activism) as Clinton pulled the Democratic party to the right and into an aggressive, brutal, and stupid foreign policy in the GOP mode. (It's not just on economic issues that "Bill Clinton was the best Republican president we've had in a while.")

The real opposition to the invasion didn't start becoming apparent until after it.

Bullshit. Millions of people demonstrated against W's war before the invasion. I was one of them. (Again, I'm not saying I did a lot. But I was there, and probably got my name on a list somewhere when I organized an anti-war poetry reading and sent recordings of it to Baltimore's congresscritters.)

Coverage of the pre-invasion protests in the corporate media: diddly-squat.

Don't even TRY to tell me I wasn't paying attention, when you apparently didn't even know that there was a significant anti-war movement until after the invasion.

And why didn't you know? Because the conservative MSM was totally on board with the war.

Yes, and it's "Show Solidarity with Our New Messianic Overlord" Day

I saw this in the Chicago Tribune (and submitted it to slashdot, still pending) =/

There are links from the AP, UPI, the Salt Lake City paper; the news is all over. Why does the summary link to an international paper and a snarky British IT rag (the Register)?

I mean, if it's a story about something they found in Antarctica then IHT is a good link. If it's something about a British hacker then El Reg is a good link. If it's about Australia then an Australian paper os a good link.

Google News has this on its front page; since this news item is seemingly in every newspaper in the world right now, perhaps that's a good link.

Hell, even Fox is better link than IHT or the Register on this story, and it's on their front page like everyone else.

Do the submitters work for IHT and the Register or something?

Looks like the found his plane today!

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,431605,00.html

yeah that would be nice but, government is part of the problem. Because selling gas to cheap is a Crime. No joke.

fter all this time, I still hold a small, bitter place in my heart for that mental prison.

Agreed. This Onion piece resonated with me:

6-Year-Old Stares Down Bottomless Abyss Of Formal Schooling

As a conservative with strong libertarian leanings, I agree that compulsory education has some serious problems. But an uneducated populace is expensive as well. Promise me I won't have to pay more for those dumbass dropouts (prison, welfare, low wage redistribution, and other pathologies) than for their education, and I'd agree.

I'm not sure if increasing the current dropout rate would actually create a better society. Just as the idea of drug legalization has some merit, the actual practice in Nanny America might just lead to government-funded drug treatment, if not drug subsidies. I can see it now, Obamacare paying for medical marijuana with my tax dollars. But I digress. High school dropouts are expensive. If I could bury them with nuclear waste, great. But I doubt that would past constitutional muster either.

While your point about trying to present a more pithy message is valid, your bullet quote is incorrect.

Barack Obama strongly supports the principle of network neutrality

The difference might appear minor, but this is what the pols do. They get you to believe they support something, but then come back later with BS like "well, what I said was I believe in the principle of foo" - which gives them plenty of room to claim that they never really supported foo, or that you just have a difference of opinion on what foo is, and what you think of foo, s/he never really understood it to mean bar.

Whether it is drilling for domestic fuel, bailing out people who took out loans for homes they couldn't afford (it isn't a tax-payer-funded "bail-out" my senator claims), bridges to nowhere, peanut museums, etc pols will always, always find a way to spin it and make us seem like we don't know what we we're talking about. How often has Sen. Obama said something like "Well, that's not the person (Rev. Wright, William Ayers, Tony Rezko, etc) I knew"? He isn't alone in this two-facedness, it comes from both sides, but the expediency of disassociation from notorious Chicago politics in this case is interesting at least.

It just appears to me as someone who is trying to objectively evaluate the options, that his supporters have drunk the kool-aid. He can't do anything wrong, and any criticism of him, his proposed policies, his past, or the company he keeps, is shouted down or met with cries of racism. It isn't about the exchange of ideas with this guy or his campaign. There is no debate, no discussion. If you don't like the direction he wants to take the country, you're a racist, and that is the only possible reason he might lose. Really sad, and makes me very wary of his administration might do to free speech in this country. From what I've been able to gather, WGN inviting on someone from the left to argue for Obama wasn't good enough. The campaign made an obvious effort to muzzle speech they didn't like - instead of arguing against the content and making their case why it was wrong.

Yesterday I saw Sen. Shumer (D-NY) and Sen. Kyle (R-AZ) on one of the talking heads programs. They obviously disagreed on current events, yet it was civil, respectful, and they both made their arguments well.

To the original point, when you quote a pol, quote them exactly - because every word matters, and they'll use that to play the people and the tax payers like a fiddle. To state flat out that Sen. Obama supports net neutrality is simply not correct.

Are you seriously quoting Arthur Kellerman? I'll see your link to a partisan anti-gun website, and raise you four links that discredit his research. http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcdgaga.html http://home.comcast.net/~dsmjd/tux/dsmjd/rkba/kellerman.htm http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,7217,00.html Arthur Kellerman also thinks you shouldn't be allowed to have an automated defibrillator in your home. http://www.webmd.com/heart-disease/news/20040806/lifesaving-machine-over-counter He doesn't give a rat's ass if you live or die, as long as you aren't allowed to take care of yourself. Have you ever noticed that these anti-gun groups are all about preventing gun violence, but they never cry about any other type of violence? I've decided that they really don't care if you get murdered or raped or mugged, as long as it's not done with a gun.

Any hockey mom who calls her husband First Dude is white trash

How is that relevant ? Does that make these massacrers any less nuts ? Does it make their support of obama any less ?

No ...

The worst "shoot-everything religious nutcases" support Obama. That was the statement I made and I do believe it stands proven.

Terrorists in the US, who aren't foreignors, e.g. Bill Ayers, has also clearly stated his preference (when he's not pissing on the flag). Take a wild guess.

What is it that these people see in Obama ? A chance, a chance to expand their power, to kill, maim and terrorize. That is, after all, all they see in anything.

Actually shoot-everything religious type people are on the side of Obama, actually :

There are also muslims in this world you know. They combine the religious fanatics and shoot-everything properties you so complain about ...

And ... they're obamatons too

Unless you disagree with the facts that hamas shoots or claim the "islamic resistance" is not religious.

Terrorists in the US, e.g. Bill Ayers, has also clearly stated his preference. Take a wild guess.

Hell, if Osama were still alive, we'd probably see a video of him threatening to destroy all other manhattan towers if americans choose mccain.

Must be a strange world you live in, where "redneck" and christian "religious fanatics" are the worst problems. Tell me, after the second star it was to the right, correct ?

The GGP was in response to her being a creationist, thus my reply if you had concerns because she is a pentecostal then that is a different issue.

Maria Comella, a spokeswoman for the McCain-Palin campaign, has said Palin attends different churches and does not consider herself Pentecostal.

from http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/09/04/palins-pentecostal-church-membership-questioned/

No fan of celebrities either, but have you you ever seen Sean Hannity's America? Check out his bits on Holy Water and weeping statues. If you're not laughing hysterically, then you're his target audience. God help you.

"The surge escalation has failed."

It didn't succeed? Funny. Even your beloved political messiah now says that it has.

Ive already said its succeeded beyond our wildest dreams. - Barack Obama, Sept. 4th

It appears that the Bush administration did see a train wreck coming:

New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae

So see why the free market couldn't correct earlier check this commentary out:

Financial Markets Are in a Mess

Hmm, I don't believe its fair to tie the Democrats to the entertainment industry.

Uhm, with all due respect, what planet are you f-ing from?!

Both the recently deceased Jack Valenti and the current MPAA chairman Dan Glickman are loyal Democrats.

This is the point, where an honest man in your shoes either commits suicide or promises to vote for a Republican as a penance...

The problem seems to be that in this particular case, the mass-killer *didn't* lie. But Bush didn't get his information directly from Saddam, did he ? He can't just make a phonecall or something. Instead, he had to rely on the CIA, who also doesn't ask Saddam directly, but instead (as it seems to be now) is pushed by Cheney's office to produce damning evidence.

Actually, WMD's WERE FOUND IN IRAQ! Just not in large enough numbers for our media to deem newsworthy.

But, hey! Don't let the facts get in the way of preconceived notions and talking points.

Reminds me of the "privacy feature", Microsoft has introduced into Internet Explorer, which will allow users to "hide" their browser history from other users, but will still be "acccessible by law enforcement" in case it is needed.

Internet Explorer 8 to Include So-Called 'Porn Mode' Privacy Feature

How difficult would it be, not to collect the data in the first place?

Such as?

such as Aligarh , Deoband, Bengal, Western Gujarat. In contrast, areas in Pakistan with large Hindu populations in Sindh have been completely cleansed of them.

We've always known you wanted our country. India is an expansionist power that has swallowed up huge territories including Hyderabad, Junagarh, Siachen, Sikkim, Goa, Daman, Diu, and Kashmir. But you will never get Pakistan except over our dead bodies - and yours, once the gamma-radiation-emitting isotopes fall on your land, making it uninhabitable and poisoning it for centuries. Never, as long as we have the strength to fight and defend our beloved country, you will not not get it. Never!

Pakistan is a genocidal Islamic theocracy, combined with a Punjabi-dominated racist ethnocracy that has murdered 3 million Hindus in Bangladesh

http://www.genocidebangladesh.org/

and presently institutionally engages in horrific levels of persecution of Hindu and Christian minorities in their savage little Islamofascist country

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/6367773.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/1625976.stm
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,273075,00.html
http://www.domini.org/openbook/pak20020925.htm
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/24/nyregion/24missionary.html?_r=2&%20%20%20%20%20%20%20oref=slogin&oref=slogin

The USCIRF denotes Pakistan as a "country of particular concern" for precisely this (well, primarily for the Sangla Hill genocide of Pakistani Christians carried out by the Islamic fascist regime in 2001), as well as charming "Huddood Laws" that let rapists of women go free in the name of Islam, and Hasba bills that allow for public floggings and stonings.

We do not want to have anything to do with this failed genocidal state run by Punjabi Sunni Muslim ethnocrats who have captured and murdered hundreds of thousands Sindhis, Baloch and Pashtun minorities, not to mention Hindus, christians and Sikhs. We just want to watch these people kill each other in the name of a violent totalitarian religion that teaches 3 year old children to hate Jews Christians and Hindus before they teach them math.

The excuse of blaming the "dumb mainstream media" is getting pretty thin. Maybe the scientists should point out the limits of their findings and what they mean by "junk" or "dark", etc., if only so to shut up slashdot smarta**es. Fat chance - marketing principle applies everywhere?

Your timing is incredible! How, exactly, would scientists communicate with the public? What do they do when the mainstream media intentionally misrepresents scientific quarrels?

Fear Looms Over Scientist's Experiment to Uncover Secrets of 'Big Bang' was a front page article on FoxNews.com today. Aside from the title, which implies "Arrogant Scientist Thinks He Knows It All", the text of the article is 100% misleading. Here are some good quotes, emphasis mine:

A British physicist has claimed he can explain the secrets of the Big Bang Theory, but his controversial experiment has scientists believing he could bring about the end of the world, the U.K.'s Daily Mail reported.

Evans' ambitions, however, have brought widespread concern among scientists who say the experiment could create a shower of unstable black holes inside the Earth, and subsequently bring destruction to the planet.

The Daily Mall then went on to make some indirect ad hominem attacks on the lead researcher because he "is so relaxed about his job, he wears shorts to work".

Anyone who has been watching the story or knows anything about it knows that the crackpot doomsday theories have been thoroughly debunked ad nauseum.

Perhaps "dumb mainstream media" should focus on reporting the actual facts, as already reported by scientists in their published, peer-reviewed papers, rather than intentionally distorting them to create sensationalist headlines to further their ideological goals? Since we know they won't do that, people like you should turn your criticism on those who deserve it.

Disclaimer: FOX News can not be said to have not known the facts in this case. They displayed an Associated Press report about the LHC in June 2008 which accurately represented both sides of the debate in a more honest manner.

The excuse of blaming the "dumb mainstream media" is getting pretty thin. Maybe the scientists should point out the limits of their findings and what they mean by "junk" or "dark", etc., if only so to shut up slashdot smarta**es. Fat chance - marketing principle applies everywhere?

Your timing is incredible! How, exactly, would scientists communicate with the public? What do they do when the mainstream media intentionally misrepresents scientific quarrels?

Fear Looms Over Scientist's Experiment to Uncover Secrets of 'Big Bang' was a front page article on FoxNews.com today. Aside from the title, which implies "Arrogant Scientist Thinks He Knows It All", the text of the article is 100% misleading. Here are some good quotes, emphasis mine:

A British physicist has claimed he can explain the secrets of the Big Bang Theory, but his controversial experiment has scientists believing he could bring about the end of the world, the U.K.'s Daily Mail reported.

Evans' ambitions, however, have brought widespread concern among scientists who say the experiment could create a shower of unstable black holes inside the Earth, and subsequently bring destruction to the planet.

The Daily Mall then went on to make some indirect ad hominem attacks on the lead researcher because he "is so relaxed about his job, he wears shorts to work".

Anyone who has been watching the story or knows anything about it knows that the crackpot doomsday theories have been thoroughly debunked ad nauseum.

Perhaps "dumb mainstream media" should focus on reporting the actual facts, as already reported by scientists in their published, peer-reviewed papers, rather than intentionally distorting them to create sensationalist headlines to further their ideological goals? Since we know they won't do that, people like you should turn your criticism on those who deserve it.

Disclaimer: FOX News can not be said to have not known the facts in this case. They displayed an Associated Press report about the LHC in June 2008 which accurately represented both sides of the debate in a more honest manner.

So? Don't sign it. It is exactly this kind of mentality that has brought down the housing market. I am not denying that there was mortgage broker/financing fraud involved in the current housing market crisis - but majority of them are people failing to understand the loan terms and/or believing that the market always goes up and they will find a bigger sucker to sell the house at an inflated price. Prime example of Darwin's theory. Family has only two options - learn from this and never sign anything without knowing what they are signing or get decimated financially by recklessly signing contracts that they cannot honor. News items like these are brought into limelight to create unwarranted sympathy to this family and ultimately get ATT reduce the bill. Remember Walmart?

The editors note that is now attached to the Register article that you link to really does not help to support your position. Incidentally I remember having read earlier that year that the warming trend will be put on hold this year because of a severe La Nina effect - apparently the National Geographic guys didn't get the memo.

The Register article DID help my position, however not as dramatically as I would have hoped :)

The Ice extent graph showed 10% more ice than last year, whereas the map showed 30% more pixels than last year. The two sets of data appeared to be contradictory, but they were not. Still, the 10% increase of ice from last year instead of their being almost no ice is a big difference.

Especially since it wasn't just national geographic reporting this, it was almost everyone!

Exclusive: Scientists warn that there may be no ice at North Pole ...
North Pole could be ice-free this summer, scientists say - CNN.com
North Pole could be ice free in 2008 - climate-change - 25 April ...
ABC News: North Pole Could Be Ice Free in 2008
FOXNews.com - Report: North Pole May Be Ice-Free This Summer ...
North Pole Could be Ice-Free This Summer | LiveScience
Summer may see first ice-free North Pole - Climate Change- msnbc.com
North Pole May Be Ice-Free This Year - AOL News
No North Pole ice for 1st time in human history?_English_Xinhua
An Ice-Free North Pole? - TIME

Just a simple google search for "north pole ice free" will give you 1000's of articles. Notice how every one of these articles has very little variation. Not even fox news challenged the claim.

So much for a free and independent press.