> One example is Claritin vs. Clarinex. (Both are anti-histamines that don't cause drowsiness in most people). Claritin was a cash cow for Schering-Plough whose patent expired a few years ago. It used to be prescription-only and the cost used was around $1 a pill. Now you can buy 300-ct bottles over-the-counter at CostCo for ~ $10.00.
> Enter Clarinex, which Schering claims is certified for both indoor and outdoor allergies. Once again, it's a prescription-only medication with high prices. The punch line: Clarinex is exactly the same drug as Claritin after Claritin passes through your liver once.
And even if Clarinex were better, they'd have no reason to release it until the Claritin patent expired. In fact, they'd have good reason not to release it.
> It's funny that the BBC is asking for proof of bias when its tilted coverage of the Iraqi war led British soldiers to conclude that BBC stood for "Baathist Broadcasting Corporation".
And undoubtedly those soldiers have a completely unbiased view of the war.
The Big Melt is already upon us. Glacier Park is becoming Formerly Glaciated National Park, and people are talking seriously about getting a Northwest Passage out of this.
It won't help to stop global warming now. We've got to coerce some global cooling.
And for the anthropogenic denial crowd, the above doesn't depend in the least on what the cause of the warming is. We're being forced into the terraforming business whether we like it or not.
Or we can just let everthing go to hell in a handbasket...
> That's the entire point of an investigation like this. If no serious dissenting opinions exist, then the noise about counter-claims will be exposed as overblown hearsay. Or the investigation could go all X-Files on us and find that "the truth is really out there". We'll see when the reporters get back with their findings.:)
Nah, the scientists will kidnap the reporters and brainwash them to report that they didn't find a conspiracy.
> There are a lot of hypocrites on that site. They claim that religious people are closed minded while completely ignoring anything the other side presents out of hand.
Can you call our attention to any creationist claims that have ever been made on talk.origins that didn't deserve to be dismissed out of hand?
> This blind faith in popular theories is not just restricted to theoretical physics but also appears in the biological sciences as well. Science is supposed to be a tool for discovery. It is not supposed to supply the meaning of life
Biology is no more concerned with the meaning of life than geology or meteorology is.
It's just that some peoples' world views are threatened by the facts that biology has uncovered.
> or delve into things which are best left to philosophers and theologians given our current state of technology.
I don't know of any question best left to philosophers and theologians. If it's not supported by evidence, it's just someone's opinion.
FWIW, I just started using the dm-crypt based cryptfs on my Gentoo system over the past week. (I'm actually running it on top of LVM, which in turn runs on top of the kernel's RAID1.)
Pretty easy to set up, and no trouble so far, but annoying that it asks for the passphrase for each encrypted volume twice during boot, and and doesn't fail gracefully if you mistype anything.
> In any case, the only way the mess is likely to be cleared up is by imposing another Saddam Hussein-like dictator on the country
And the sad thing is, some of us predicted that before the invasion.
> making a mockery of Bush's 'freedom and democracy' crap
He doesn't care. That was just a retcon rationalization for consumption by a public that was starting to figure out that the original justification was a pack of lies.
> either way he ends up a laughing stock.
Ends up? He was a laughing stock before he ever took office.
> Arguing about whether it was right for the US to invade Iraq is rather academic now - however, if the US quits now, you can expect it to be spun as a huge victory for radical Islam.
It's already a huge victory for radical Islam and general anti-US sentiment in the Middle East and elsewhere. Staying there for a few more years of killing and dying aren't going to help that in the least.
> It will also destroy what little credibility the US has left.
Tell us more about this credibility the US has left.
> Maybe (unlikely) the US will admit it screwed up, request a UN mandate, and allow an international peace keeping force to step in and help administer Iraq till it can get back on its feet?
There's not any peace to be kept. The peace-keeping force will be needed after the three major factions have self-organized the new division of power, and only minor skirmishing over local details remains.
The plots at the bottom of this page give a good feel for how much progress we've made in the past 3-1/2 years. "Stay the course" is just a strategy of trading lives indefinitely in order to avoid admitting to a world-class screw-up.
How many times in the past 3-1/2 years have we been told that "the next six months will be critical"? How many times have people cheered when an election or a high-profile capture gave the illusion of progress?
Is there the slightest reason to believe that the next six months, or 3-1/2 years, will be any different?
Frankly, I think Bush's strategy is to leave the problem for the next President, and then claim in his memoirs that we would have won if his successor hadn't cut and run. The neocons are already taking time out from their clamoring for a similar fuckup in Iran, to figure out who they can blame for the failure of their grandiose vision for Iraq.
> What about magnetic fields? Is it that temporary "autism" effect?
I don't know much about it. Apparently 'they' have experimented with people playing a game designed to pit your greed against your sense of fair play, and people's decisions swing way in one direction when part of their brain is exposed to some kind of magnetic field while playing.
I read something about it very recently, but can't recall where.
> I recon this is probably going to throw the ol' religious community for a loop.
I doubt it. They don't tend to get their panties in a bunch over anything else coming out of neuroscience. (Though perhaps only because their oblivious to it. Maybe the next person who wants to compete for stardom in the anti-science profession will adopt this as his whipping horse; too much competition these days in the evolution-denial movement.)
You do encounter a lot of dyed-in-the-wool dualists on the 'net who should balk at this, but in my experience they're completely unfazed by the massive amounts of straightforward evidence that chemical imbalances in the brain, damage, aging, magnetic fields, medicinal or recreational drugs, etc. can affect decision making and behavior, some even to the point of complete personality changes, so I suspect that they will ignore these reports just as vigorously.
Slashdot Mirror
> One example is Claritin vs. Clarinex. (Both are anti-histamines that don't cause drowsiness in most people). Claritin was a cash cow for Schering-Plough whose patent expired a few years ago. It used to be prescription-only and the cost used was around $1 a pill. Now you can buy 300-ct bottles over-the-counter at CostCo for ~ $10.00.
> Enter Clarinex, which Schering claims is certified for both indoor and outdoor allergies. Once again, it's a prescription-only medication with high prices. The punch line: Clarinex is exactly the same drug as Claritin after Claritin passes through your liver once.
And even if Clarinex were better, they'd have no reason to release it until the Claritin patent expired. In fact, they'd have good reason not to release it.
> Dude, the medieval warm period was warmer than it is now.
Guess that's why Ötzi didn't thaw out until 1991...
[snip rest of unsupported rant]
> It's funny that the BBC is asking for proof of bias when its tilted coverage of the Iraqi war led British soldiers to conclude that BBC stood for "Baathist Broadcasting Corporation".
And undoubtedly those soldiers have a completely unbiased view of the war.
> Personally, I think it's too late.
The Big Melt is already upon us. Glacier Park is becoming Formerly Glaciated National Park, and people are talking seriously about getting a Northwest Passage out of this.
It won't help to stop global warming now. We've got to coerce some global cooling.
And for the anthropogenic denial crowd, the above doesn't depend in the least on what the cause of the warming is. We're being forced into the terraforming business whether we like it or not.
Or we can just let everthing go to hell in a handbasket...
> It's the "man made" climate change that's disputed.
So, do you reject the physics of greenhouse gasses, or reject the claim that we're pumping them up?
> The point is not whether counterclaims are being stifled or not. The point is that in reporting the facts, you don't "pick a side".
The bigger point is that you shouldn't mistake Slashdot for journalism.
> That's the entire point of an investigation like this. If no serious dissenting opinions exist, then the noise about counter-claims will be exposed as overblown hearsay. Or the investigation could go all X-Files on us and find that "the truth is really out there". We'll see when the reporters get back with their findings. :)
Nah, the scientists will kidnap the reporters and brainwash them to report that they didn't find a conspiracy.
> There are a lot of hypocrites on that site. They claim that religious people are closed minded while completely ignoring anything the other side presents out of hand.
Can you call our attention to any creationist claims that have ever been made on talk.origins that didn't deserve to be dismissed out of hand?
> This blind faith in popular theories is not just restricted to theoretical physics but also appears in the biological sciences as well. Science is supposed to be a tool for discovery. It is not supposed to supply the meaning of life
Biology is no more concerned with the meaning of life than geology or meteorology is.
It's just that some peoples' world views are threatened by the facts that biology has uncovered.
> or delve into things which are best left to philosophers and theologians given our current state of technology.
I don't know of any question best left to philosophers and theologians. If it's not supported by evidence, it's just someone's opinion.
> I enjoy slashdot, usually, but the rabid religion-hating mobs that pool their ignorance really ruin it at time imo.
Sounds like you're confusing "creationist pseudoscience" with "religion".
FWIW, I just started using the dm-crypt based cryptfs on my Gentoo system over the past week. (I'm actually running it on top of LVM, which in turn runs on top of the kernel's RAID1.)
Pretty easy to set up, and no trouble so far, but annoying that it asks for the passphrase for each encrypted volume twice during boot, and and doesn't fail gracefully if you mistype anything.
> > "I like that principle, but what do you do when you can'T fix what you broke?"
> Well from what I've seen, it looks like you suffer and then die. Maybe next time america won't be so hasty to take other peoples land.
That sort of feedback tends to work... except when the people making the decisions don't give a shit about the people suffering and dying.
> > IOW, your "plan" is to hope for something similar to what the civil war is ultimately going to produce.
> Yep, just make it happen much quicker with a lot fewer civilian casualties.
Did I miss the part where you explain how we're going to do that?
Don't the morons running this place realize that it isn't safe to forego shooting the messenger?
> The US and their Allies went into Iraq, without any proof. They messed up the country (and profited from it) now they have to sort it out.
I like that principle, but what do you do when you can' fix what you broke?
"And as for all of you dead people, your nearest surviving kin (if any) can accept the apology for you by proxy."
IOW, your "plan" is to hope for something similar to what the civil war is ultimately going to produce.
> In any case, the only way the mess is likely to be cleared up is by imposing another Saddam Hussein-like dictator on the country
And the sad thing is, some of us predicted that before the invasion.
> making a mockery of Bush's 'freedom and democracy' crap
He doesn't care. That was just a retcon rationalization for consumption by a public that was starting to figure out that the original justification was a pack of lies.
> either way he ends up a laughing stock.
Ends up? He was a laughing stock before he ever took office.
> The plots at the bottom of this page give a good feel for how much progress we've made in the past 3-1/2 years.
Here is the link.
> Arguing about whether it was right for the US to invade Iraq is rather academic now - however, if the US quits now, you can expect it to be spun as a huge victory for radical Islam.
It's already a huge victory for radical Islam and general anti-US sentiment in the Middle East and elsewhere. Staying there for a few more years of killing and dying aren't going to help that in the least.
> It will also destroy what little credibility the US has left.
Tell us more about this credibility the US has left.
> Maybe (unlikely) the US will admit it screwed up, request a UN mandate, and allow an international peace keeping force to step in and help administer Iraq till it can get back on its feet?
There's not any peace to be kept. The peace-keeping force will be needed after the three major factions have self-organized the new division of power, and only minor skirmishing over local details remains.
The plots at the bottom of this page give a good feel for how much progress we've made in the past 3-1/2 years. "Stay the course" is just a strategy of trading lives indefinitely in order to avoid admitting to a world-class screw-up.
How many times in the past 3-1/2 years have we been told that "the next six months will be critical"? How many times have people cheered when an election or a high-profile capture gave the illusion of progress?
Is there the slightest reason to believe that the next six months, or 3-1/2 years, will be any different?
Frankly, I think Bush's strategy is to leave the problem for the next President, and then claim in his memoirs that we would have won if his successor hadn't cut and run. The neocons are already taking time out from their clamoring for a similar fuckup in Iran, to figure out who they can blame for the failure of their grandiose vision for Iraq.
> 2.4 billion years ago, cosmic rays travelled through space to create this first post.
Are more on their way for the dupe?
> ...they're only just now figuring out a highly complex bit of machinery from the time when humans were supposedly about 'as dumb as teh average ape'.
I suspect they would come out well in a comparison with certain Slashdot posters.
> How much of our stuff will be unusable only 200 years from now?
Heh. Yesterday I saw a ~50 year old Studebaker, with a sign in the rear window asking whether my care would still run when it is that old.
> What about magnetic fields? Is it that temporary "autism" effect?
I don't know much about it. Apparently 'they' have experimented with people playing a game designed to pit your greed against your sense of fair play, and people's decisions swing way in one direction when part of their brain is exposed to some kind of magnetic field while playing.
I read something about it very recently, but can't recall where.
> I recon this is probably going to throw the ol' religious community for a loop.
I doubt it. They don't tend to get their panties in a bunch over anything else coming out of neuroscience. (Though perhaps only because their oblivious to it. Maybe the next person who wants to compete for stardom in the anti-science profession will adopt this as his whipping horse; too much competition these days in the evolution-denial movement.)
You do encounter a lot of dyed-in-the-wool dualists on the 'net who should balk at this, but in my experience they're completely unfazed by the massive amounts of straightforward evidence that chemical imbalances in the brain, damage, aging, magnetic fields, medicinal or recreational drugs, etc. can affect decision making and behavior, some even to the point of complete personality changes, so I suspect that they will ignore these reports just as vigorously.
You won't hear social conservatives crying "activist judges!" about this one.