Slashdot Mirror
Re-examining the Port Chicago Disaster
GoneGaryT writes "Say chaps, this might be old hat, but there's a fab site for conspiracy theory aficionados at portchicago.org ; it's a pdf book expounding the theory of Peter Vogel's that the Port Chicago magazine explosion (1944) was a nuclear weapons test. It's actually pretty thorough, like 20 years of research thorough. Would the US really blow up their own people for the sake of global military supremacy? Naaaah..." Chapter 9 of the book has a factual account of the disaster (which I'd never heard of before); if you're not interested in the rest of the theory, at least reading the historical account is informative and will give you an appreciation of the explosive power of several million pounds of military ordnance.
20 seconds is too long to wait for an fp!
ack to the double ack!
-cornjchob
(5 ^ ((5/4 + 8)/2) + 6) / 3
/
alg: 20 keystrokes
RPN:
5 Enter 5 Enter 4 / 8 + 2 / ^ 6 + 3
15 keystrokes
Grrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!!! I mean it! GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!
-- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
Well...not sure why I am responding to a troll, but what the hell. It's late...I've got time.
To be succinct, I disagree with the premise of the article. There has always been liberal interpretations of science and conservative interpretations of science. More often than not, the truth lies somewhere in between the two...honestly, they are both out of whack. I used to love the people many years ago warning us about "Global Cooling"...I can't help but wonder how many of them are the same ones screaming about "Global Warming" today. (Note: Yes...the planet is/was on a warming trend...the debate is whether or not man has jack to do with it.) Amusingly, those are usually on the "liberal" side of the fence. ALOT of the environmental stuff comes from the liberal side of the fence...most of it is crap. The "liberals" play the same games as every other party...they want some impending doom to save us from, and they set up a nice objectively pro-facist arguement with the situation - those who are not with me are against me! Then with time, we get lefty enviro-wingnuts galore burning down logging operations and throwing paint on fur coats. People have been clobbered with this type of liberal-interpretted science for years that anything even in the middle often seems conservative-interpretted, and things that are conservative-interpretted make them drop a load in their pants. It's the whole relativity thing.
On a side note, it looks like it's biting them in the ass, as alot of the farther-out enviro's broke away from one liberal party to another one that is too anemic to get jack shit done. Kinda funny how that panned out.
Even the name of the "article" posted on slashdot was rather inflamatory. It needed a question mark...it stated that "U.S. pushing conservative science" as if it's an established fact and not open to debate...it may as fucking well not be with the rabid liberal groupthink that is plaguing Slashdot. It's partially due to the "editors" biases IMHO...they really don't often make it a friendly place to the other 90% of the political sprectrum that is to the right of them, relatively speaking.
Conservative science? No...it's just different interpretations of the information. Don't crap your pants when you see an interpretation that disagrees with yours...rather, look at what all party's have to say and find the poop in all of them. They've all got it...I promise.
Note: I don't agree with nearly everything that the conservatives are reading into the science either...but it's not all completely irrelavent...some of it deserves some more research and likely some peer review. Peer reviewed literation in damn near any industry, especially medicine, is where the good information is at.
Honestly...what do YOU think planned parenthood is going to say about the zillion abortions they've performed so far? Whatever. Sorry for the roundabout nature of my writing...it's about 5 AM here and I am good and fucking tired now. Go play or something.