Peoples memory of politics is even shorter lived. Those who blindly accept AGW and the policies touted to "save us" from it would do well to remember that.
Where in the link to the site? Why are stories about a site on the internet that fail to actually give us a link to the subject of the article taken seriously at all?
Traditional media outlets never provide source documents even though they are easily distributed on the web.
AFP's word is like a dollar. It's not worth much and it's worth less and less every day.
How many of you had a good experience your public school system?
I'd rather have no public education system at all. Let it all be private. It would be far less expensive, and parents could send their children to schools for indoctrination in the manner of their choosing.
However, I'd argue that we in the US would be a little happier if we could at least compete on a more equal basis against the countries that don't worry about pollution and don't have to mess with the added cost of environmental issues.....those countries that pay $1/hour....and those that manipulate their currency unfairly.
Getting the US to lead by example and stop manipulating its currency would be a good start. It's by far the worst offender in that area.
Yeah right, try to leave the checkpoint in the middle of the process. Let us all know how that works out for you. Also, TSA is not just in airports anymore. You aren't safe from them anywhere.
We need to put serious pressure on the politicians to stop this. It's going to be harder than it was with SOPA because we don't have Silicon Valley backing us up.
That argument gets nowhere because AGW critics simply point out that a huge number of the individuals making up the consensus are funded by the same people who will benefit from the policy changes AGW demands.
It's kind of like how nearly all professional economists have been at least indirectly on the payroll of the Federal Reserve.
This is similar to the reason why AGW critics get nowhere by asking for some kind of falsifiable claim from the AGW camp. AGW proponents simply point out that if we wait for that level of confirmation it will be too late.
Actually "we" do want to politically brainwash students in order to advance a political agenda. Some of "us" want to teach that AGW is true or not true because, for example, "we" have an interest in coal mining or "we" have an interest in operating a carbon credit exchange. Some of "us" truly believe AGW is real and great harm will come if "we" don't act. Others of "us" truly believe AGW is a lie put forth to advance an agenda and that great harm will come if "we" do act.
I agree that most of the posts here are political rants. I don't see any real way to separate the politics from the science.
> 3) They're not convinced? Claim they're biased, corrupt, ignorant, etc. Ignore their objections and move on. > 4) Keep presenting your case to people, those who agree can convince others. People who will disagree are biased, corrupt, ignorant, etc. > 5) When you have enough people you can hijack some of the traditional mouthpieces of the experts such as journals, the media, and schools, to broadcast your theory instead.
AGW proponents have done this too. Both sides do it constantly. Both sides have PR firms and think tanks that accuse the other side as biased. Both sides are trying to write the textbooks so that the next generation grows up believing their side as the unquestioned truth. Both sides contain vested interests who stand to win or lose everything depending on the outcome. Both sides contain people who believe they are are correct on purely scientific grounds and are free from conflicts of interest.
Look at this thread. Nearly every comment in it is political rather than scientific in nature.
If I had any mod points I'd use them to mod you up.
Children are taught in school that science is truth. They believe that whatever they leaned in the science classroom is the completely settled result of the infallible scientific method. We should hardly be surprised that political battles are fought there.
We would all be wise to remember that there is a long history of Problem-Reaction-Solution.
Slashdot Mirror
I remember chips & dips. And when the admins made us create users on the system to control the comments! :)
Mine is 422
I'd rather talk about Ron Paul than either of these clowns. I can't tell them apart anyway.
Torrents are already unbundled.
These illiterate fools just don't know what anarchist means.
If I had any mod points you'd get them.
It's pretty arrogant of you to presume such powerful forces can't successfully intervene in the Internet. Look at the censorship we have today.
Now make it that way at borders.
Yours and the parent post are the best I've read in this thread.
We need to find ways of manufacturing that produce less toxic waste, and we must find better ways of containing the waste that we must create.
Peoples memory of politics is even shorter lived. Those who blindly accept AGW and the policies touted to "save us" from it would do well to remember that.
It's led indirectly to $4 billion in K-12
The more money the K-12 system gets, the worse it becomes.
Your analogy is complete wrong. You can't copyright mere facts! A list of postal codes is like the score of a baseball game.
Where in the link to the site? Why are stories about a site on the internet that fail to actually give us a link to the subject of the article taken seriously at all?
Traditional media outlets never provide source documents even though they are easily distributed on the web.
AFP's word is like a dollar. It's not worth much and it's worth less and less every day.
These pictures are terrible. My phone takes better pictures than these.
How many of you had a good experience your public school system?
I'd rather have no public education system at all. Let it all be private. It would be far less expensive, and parents could send their children to schools for indoctrination in the manner of their choosing.
However, I'd argue that we in the US would be a little happier if we could at least compete on a more equal basis against the countries that don't worry about pollution and don't have to mess with the added cost of environmental issues.....those countries that pay $1/hour....and those that manipulate their currency unfairly.
Getting the US to lead by example and stop manipulating its currency would be a good start. It's by far the worst offender in that area.
Let a company spy on me constantly so it can make a profit by selling information about me? That sounds like a great deal for me. Where do I sign up?
Yeah right, try to leave the checkpoint in the middle of the process. Let us all know how that works out for you. Also, TSA is not just in airports anymore. You aren't safe from them anywhere.
Then they create roving squads to randomly search us on the streets and to conduct unannounced searches of our homes and cars.
For our safety, of course.
We need to put serious pressure on the politicians to stop this. It's going to be harder than it was with SOPA because we don't have Silicon Valley backing us up.
Can't break it. Can't break in.
That argument gets nowhere because AGW critics simply point out that a huge number of the individuals making up the consensus are funded by the same people who will benefit from the policy changes AGW demands.
It's kind of like how nearly all professional economists have been at least indirectly on the payroll of the Federal Reserve.
This is similar to the reason why AGW critics get nowhere by asking for some kind of falsifiable claim from the AGW camp. AGW proponents simply point out that if we wait for that level of confirmation it will be too late.
Actually "we" do want to politically brainwash students in order to advance a political agenda. Some of "us" want to teach that AGW is true or not true because, for example, "we" have an interest in coal mining or "we" have an interest in operating a carbon credit exchange. Some of "us" truly believe AGW is real and great harm will come if "we" don't act. Others of "us" truly believe AGW is a lie put forth to advance an agenda and that great harm will come if "we" do act.
I agree that most of the posts here are political rants. I don't see any real way to separate the politics from the science.
> 3) They're not convinced? Claim they're biased, corrupt, ignorant, etc. Ignore their objections and move on.
> 4) Keep presenting your case to people, those who agree can convince others. People who will disagree are biased, corrupt, ignorant, etc.
> 5) When you have enough people you can hijack some of the traditional mouthpieces of the experts such as journals, the media, and schools, to broadcast your theory instead.
AGW proponents have done this too. Both sides do it constantly. Both sides have PR firms and think tanks that accuse the other side as biased. Both sides are trying to write the textbooks so that the next generation grows up believing their side as the unquestioned truth. Both sides contain vested interests who stand to win or lose everything depending on the outcome. Both sides contain people who believe they are are correct on purely scientific grounds and are free from conflicts of interest.
Look at this thread. Nearly every comment in it is political rather than scientific in nature.
If I had any mod points I'd use them to mod you up.
Children are taught in school that science is truth. They believe that whatever they leaned in the science classroom is the completely settled result of the infallible scientific method. We should hardly be surprised that political battles are fought there.
We would all be wise to remember that there is a long history of Problem-Reaction-Solution.