Slashdot Mirror
Scientists Challenge U.S. on Scientific Distortions
rocketjam writes "The Union of Concerned Scientists, an independent organization which includes 20 Nobel laureates, issued a statement accusing the Bush administration of distorting scientific fact and supressing findings to fit administration policy decisions on the environment, health, biomedical research and nuclear weaponry. They also issued a 37-page report detailing the accusations. Bush's science adviser, John Marburger, called the report biased and said he was troubled that some very prestigious scientists had signed the statement. Numerous complaints from the scientific community about the administration's scientific policy-making prompted the The Union of Concerned Scientists to begin investigating the issue last summer. As an example, the group noted the panel that advises the Centers for Disease Control on lead poisoning had been prepared to recommend strengthening regulations due to new findings on lead toxicity, but had their recommendation rejected by the administration and two panel members replaced by individuals with ties to the lead industry." Other articles: Sydney Morning Herald, New York Times, The Guardian.
Yeah, you know Smith and Wesson, Glauk, Remmington...they got a lot of pull with the Texas cowboy types in Washington these days...
Never by hatred has hatred been appeased, only by kindness - the Buddha
Everytime michael gets his turn, he posts propaganda and flamebait stories. Nice use of slashdot... moron. You see, the problem is that LEGITIMATE stories are then pushed off the homepage that much sooner. Go ahead, mod me down for my opinion. Hail ze uberleft.
SCO: 800-726-8649
Verisign: 800-361-8319, 888-642-9675
Diebold: 800-433-VOTE (8683)
Sorry to play a sad depressing tune here, but the flat tax idea is all well and good, unless you're living off of 20k a year. The reason we have an 'unfair' scale is because whichever combination of laws etc that govern wages allows even hard-working people to make a poverty level 'living'. Explain to me, without the 'contributing to the gov will give them pride' crap, why someone making 20k/yr doing fulltime hard work should have to pay 15%. If you and your spouse make that much, and you have a couple kids, how the h*ll bad would you feel that some 6 figure 'worker' has to pay a higher percentage?
Gore did that during his attempt to steal the presidency in Florida (too bad those democrats got caught running around the counties with a Votamatic). Remember? He claimed that folks who make $250K/yr were 'millionaires' because in four years....
Running with Linux for over 20 years!
My experience has been that people that make a LOT of money... don't deserve it.
They haven't done a darn thing that someone making $200 Grand couldn't have done.
Certainly nothing to earn $10 Million...
Limit the amount of money that a person can earn in a year and there would have been no reason for Enron... or Iraq for that matter, to happen.
I'll define "excess" as more than a million a year... let the debate begin!
--Phillip
Can you say BIRTH TAX
Borg Gates and I both receive the same benefits from government, he just has to pay a helluva lot more. We're protected by the same tanks, ships, and planes. Our food is inspected by the same people. Our drugs are approved by the same tests. Our SS "funds" are administered by the same bureaucrats. Why does Gates (and pretty much 50% of taxpayers) have to pay more than I do for the same services? He has to pay more just because he makes more.
Even with a flat tax it isn't fair, because 10% of "billions and billions" is way more than 10% of my pittance.
You should feel bad if someone pays more taxes than you because they're getting ripped off more than you. But instead of worrying about how much your neighbor is or isn't paying, you should start wondering why the government needs to steal all this money in the first place.
Save me Jeabus!
As for kids...hey, you chose to have them. If you can't afford them, you shouldn't have them. If you do...then deal with the fact you have to make sacrifices. Why should you pay less because you chose to have one or more kids? Its not fair that a single person or childless couple should have to pay 'more' in taxes, and you pay less. Look at it this way. Say we both pay $10 each paycheck that goes to public education. You want a tax break for a child. So, now, I still pay the $10...and you pay nothing. Why is this the case that I'm paying for a resource that you are not paying for...but, ARE using, and I am not.
A fair taxation scheme is needed...but, not a income redistribution scheme...
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
for what it's worth, my earlier comment was supposed to have and tags, but my dumb ass didn't preview the comment and it turned out i didn't have proper formatting selected.
i hope i didn't offend you, and yes i do sometimes read the articles.
If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.
Sheesh. Give the minority/majority thing a rest, willya? Presidents are frequently elected with a minority of votes. Clinton won with 43.3% in '92. Electoral politics are pretty much rigged anyway, so the fact that SCOTUS decided to call 2000 for the side that would end electoral uncertainity fastest shouldn't be surprising.
If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
Let me get this right, they're saying that by making policy based on advice by scientists other than them, the Bush administration is censuring them? Forgive me if I'm wrong, but the findings of these agencies are still published are they not? If they were really being censured, we wouldn't be having this conversation, because none of this information would be public domain. No, this is really just a bunch of people whining because the policy that gets made isn't the policy they want to see get made. Well, I hate to say it, but the Bush Administration is not required to follow their recommendations no matter what they received the Nobel prize for, and that's a fact.