I'm always amazed at how skeptical people are about the health benefits of fruits, vegetables, and whole grains. This is the diet we ate for the vast majority of our evolutionary history. No, correlation doesn't imply causation, but the modern American diet is correlated with obesity, heart disease, diabetes, breast cancer, colorectal cancer, macular degeneration, dementia, Alzheimer's, kidney stones, and osteoporosis. So if you guys want to hold out until science establishes pure unadulterated causality before you take steps to protect your own health, be my guest. But just because there are many legitimately unanswered questions about precisely how the fatty, meaty, cheesy, salty, high fructose corn syrup American diet is slowly poisoning you, that doesn't make the diet any healthier.
Wow, you're go-to example of government invasiveness is the TSA. Not warrentless wiretapping. Not powers of indefinite military detention. Not the criminal prosecution of journalists. Nope.
I'm always shocked when I meet a person who believes dangerous government authority is a low-paid government employee sneaking a peak at your caboose when you fly on a commercial airlines.
Slashdotters seem to be vigilant about confronting ignoramuses with actual facts, but the number of misinformed bullshit comments like yours never seems to improve.
There are common sense ways of changing incentives to address the deleterious effect of corporate wealth. Lawrence Lessig explains why transparency alone is insufficient, and talks about some real reforms that will actually change behavior:
Now we've got the blinding light weapon, and the deafening sound weapon, and that Ray Gun that makes your skin feel like it's on fire. All this massive R&D going into novel crowd control technologies. It's almost as if the US Government anticipates needing fancy new riot gear. Wonder why that could be.
China's growth is fueled by western capital and industrial espionage. They afford western capital by selling to the west. And without the west, they would have to conduct their own R&D. China desperately needs us.
I was talking about the global AIDS pandemic when I said:
"Most people [ie not just Americans] who get AIDS today are young heterosexual females"
So it doesn't matter what CDC estimates for HIV in the US because that is only one place on the globe. For the full information read the UNAIDS 2011 World AIDS Day Fact Sheet
The proportion of women living with HIV has remained stable at 50% globally, women are more affected in sub-Saharan Africa (59% of all people living with HIV).
Also, more than 10% of those infected with AIDS in 2010 were children who got the disease from their mother. Are you going to blame those children for their loose morals and homosexual adventures?
I said "I don't sleep around a lot, but I have sex and unprotected oral sex." Only somebody seething with sexual resentment could even consider such a bland factual statement to be "crowing about how much of a stud [I am]".
Yeah, those babies infected with HIV should have taken more personal responsibility for their actions. Those babies are just a bunch of big babies who want to be freed from the consequences of their rampant breast-feeding.
The proportion of women living with HIV has remained stable at 50% globally, women are more affected in sub-Saharan Africa (59% of all people living with HIV).
Also, more than 10% of those infected with AIDS in 2010 were children who got the disease from their mother. Are you going to blame those children for their loose morals and homosexual adventures?
I'm a 30 year old man who has had several girlfriends and has been serially monogamous. My question is: How much sex are you having that you consider this entirely modest amount of sexual activity "fucking a bunch of skanks and behaving like a dog."? Probably none, which is why you are lashing out.
1) Most people getting infected with AIDS aren't in the United States. They are in Africa and other underdeveloped regions.
2) AIDS prevalence is not the same as the infection rate. The total AIDS prevalence is high among gay men for historical reasons. But young heterosexual women are now the most at risk demographic.
The article expresses a concern that once the gene therapy is started it can't be turned off if the person has an allergic reaction to the antibodies. Maybe somebody more informed can explain why:
1) You couldn't test for an allergic reaction in advance of the gene therapy.
2) You couldn't just do more gene therapy to turn off your original gene therapy.
Most people who get AIDS today are young heterosexual females. They are not "fucking random strangers in the ass without protection."
AIDS is a disease that any sexually active person can get, even if they use protection. I don't sleep around a lot, but I have sex and unprotected oral sex. Why do you think my partners and I deserve to die? Because we are violating your personal moral code? Or because you are driven by resentment of your more sexually successful peers?
The wavefunction is not a deterministic object. It doesn't matter how predictable the time evolution of the wave function is, the object itself is not a deterministic object. Even if you have perfect knowledge of the wavefunction you still can only probabilistically describe its behaviour.
Einstein was an advocate of the Ethical Culture Movement, a "religion" dedicated to the principle that religious creeds should never divide us, and that people should be good to each other and behave ethically. Einstein didn't care what your religion was as long as you weren't a dick.
Look, you need to think about what you are saying because you are oozing ignorance.
Anybody can see the data and methods of the climate community. Climate studies are published in detail in the most rigorous and prestigious scientific journals around, including Nature and Science. So if you think that OPERA's neutrino investigation is science nonpareil, then you should love climate science because Nature holds both to the highest standards.
Meanwhile, the denial community never produces any peer reviewed publications. They just post on their blogs and give misleading testimony to Congress.
Go to the library. Get a copy of Nature. Everything will be reprinted in more detail that you will care to read. Read it. Understand it. Then, if you still aren't convinced, go produce your own peer reviewed research and get that published in Nature. Until you or somebody else in the denial community can do that you need to stop bullshitting everybody with your bullshit allegations.
Keep telling yourself that if it makes losing more comfortable.
Science isn't about "winning" or "losing" in the court of public opinion. Science isn't an American Idol finale where consumers vote for their preferred scientific theory and thus decide the fate of the natural world. Do you honestly not understand that? Do you literally believe that we should seek scientific truth by polling the opinions of our least educated citizens?
It's not "Our little corner of academia." It's every major academy of science in the entire world. And they aren't focused on "messaging" because they are scientists, not PR flacks.
It's true that in recent years the coordinated propaganda of the fossil fuel industry has managed to sway masses of uneducated people against the scientific community. But that's not because the fault of the scientific community. Some people out there are just going to believe whoever has the loudest microphone or the endorsement of their local pastor, no matter what the science says.
And that article is just the tip of the iceberg. There's also Exxon's funding of the infamous Heartland Institute, a "libertarian" anti-science denial shop. Heartland used to deny smoking caused cancer but unsurprisingly switched to denying global warming when their sponsorship changed. Exxon used to fund Heartland directly, but now funds them indirectly through conservative groups like the Scaife and Olin foundations.
It's hard for me to imagine how an educated person in 2011 could have ever been ignorant of how oil companies fund global warming denialism, but now there's no excuse.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm always amazed at how skeptical people are about the health benefits of fruits, vegetables, and whole grains. This is the diet we ate for the vast majority of our evolutionary history. No, correlation doesn't imply causation, but the modern American diet is correlated with obesity, heart disease, diabetes, breast cancer, colorectal cancer, macular degeneration, dementia, Alzheimer's, kidney stones, and osteoporosis. So if you guys want to hold out until science establishes pure unadulterated causality before you take steps to protect your own health, be my guest. But just because there are many legitimately unanswered questions about precisely how the fatty, meaty, cheesy, salty, high fructose corn syrup American diet is slowly poisoning you, that doesn't make the diet any healthier.
Wow, you're go-to example of government invasiveness is the TSA. Not warrentless wiretapping. Not powers of indefinite military detention. Not the criminal prosecution of journalists. Nope.
I'm always shocked when I meet a person who believes dangerous government authority is a low-paid government employee sneaking a peak at your caboose when you fly on a commercial airlines.
Slashdotters seem to be vigilant about confronting ignoramuses with actual facts, but the number of misinformed bullshit comments like yours never seems to improve.
There are common sense ways of changing incentives to address the deleterious effect of corporate wealth. Lawrence Lessig explains why transparency alone is insufficient, and talks about some real reforms that will actually change behavior:
1) Democracy Vouchers
2) Mandatory Anonymous Donations
These are examples of the basic reforms we need to restore decency to our democracy.
Now we've got the blinding light weapon, and the deafening sound weapon, and that Ray Gun that makes your skin feel like it's on fire. All this massive R&D going into novel crowd control technologies. It's almost as if the US Government anticipates needing fancy new riot gear. Wonder why that could be.
China's growth is fueled by western capital and industrial espionage. They afford western capital by selling to the west. And without the west, they would have to conduct their own R&D. China desperately needs us.
I was talking about the global AIDS pandemic when I said:
"Most people [ie not just Americans] who get AIDS today are young heterosexual females"
So it doesn't matter what CDC estimates for HIV in the US because that is only one place on the globe. For the full information read the UNAIDS 2011 World AIDS Day Fact Sheet
The proportion of women living with HIV has remained stable at 50% globally, women are more affected in sub-Saharan Africa (59% of all people living with HIV).
Also, more than 10% of those infected with AIDS in 2010 were children who got the disease from their mother. Are you going to blame those children for their loose morals and homosexual adventures?
I said "I don't sleep around a lot, but I have sex and unprotected oral sex." Only somebody seething with sexual resentment could even consider such a bland factual statement to be "crowing about how much of a stud [I am]".
Yeah, those babies infected with HIV should have taken more personal responsibility for their actions. Those babies are just a bunch of big babies who want to be freed from the consequences of their rampant breast-feeding.
UNAIDS 2011 World AIDS Day Fact Sheet
The proportion of women living with HIV has remained stable at 50% globally, women are more affected in sub-Saharan Africa (59% of all people living with HIV).
Also, more than 10% of those infected with AIDS in 2010 were children who got the disease from their mother. Are you going to blame those children for their loose morals and homosexual adventures?
I'm a 30 year old man who has had several girlfriends and has been serially monogamous. My question is: How much sex are you having that you consider this entirely modest amount of sexual activity "fucking a bunch of skanks and behaving like a dog."? Probably none, which is why you are lashing out.
1) Most people getting infected with AIDS aren't in the United States. They are in Africa and other underdeveloped regions.
2) AIDS prevalence is not the same as the infection rate. The total AIDS prevalence is high among gay men for historical reasons. But young heterosexual women are now the most at risk demographic.
Are you literally suggesting that a vagina is an inappropriate place to put a penis? I'm guessing your mommy never gave you "the talk".
The article expresses a concern that once the gene therapy is started it can't be turned off if the person has an allergic reaction to the antibodies. Maybe somebody more informed can explain why:
1) You couldn't test for an allergic reaction in advance of the gene therapy.
2) You couldn't just do more gene therapy to turn off your original gene therapy.
Are you from 1982?
Most people who get AIDS today are young heterosexual females. They are not "fucking random strangers in the ass without protection."
AIDS is a disease that any sexually active person can get, even if they use protection. I don't sleep around a lot, but I have sex and unprotected oral sex. Why do you think my partners and I deserve to die? Because we are violating your personal moral code? Or because you are driven by resentment of your more sexually successful peers?
The wavefunction is not a deterministic object. It doesn't matter how predictable the time evolution of the wave function is, the object itself is not a deterministic object. Even if you have perfect knowledge of the wavefunction you still can only probabilistically describe its behaviour.
This positivist interpretation of quantum mechanics in which the underlying dynamics are deterministic and our knowledge is only limited by "measurement uncertainty" is demonstrably incorrect: The wavefunction is a real physical object after all, say researchers
Einstein was an advocate of the Ethical Culture Movement, a "religion" dedicated to the principle that religious creeds should never divide us, and that people should be good to each other and behave ethically. Einstein didn't care what your religion was as long as you weren't a dick.
Look, you need to think about what you are saying because you are oozing ignorance.
Anybody can see the data and methods of the climate community. Climate studies are published in detail in the most rigorous and prestigious scientific journals around, including Nature and Science. So if you think that OPERA's neutrino investigation is science nonpareil, then you should love climate science because Nature holds both to the highest standards.
Meanwhile, the denial community never produces any peer reviewed publications. They just post on their blogs and give misleading testimony to Congress.
Go to the library. Get a copy of Nature. Everything will be reprinted in more detail that you will care to read. Read it. Understand it. Then, if you still aren't convinced, go produce your own peer reviewed research and get that published in Nature. Until you or somebody else in the denial community can do that you need to stop bullshitting everybody with your bullshit allegations.
Science isn't about "winning" or "losing" in the court of public opinion. Science isn't an American Idol finale where consumers vote for their preferred scientific theory and thus decide the fate of the natural world. Do you honestly not understand that? Do you literally believe that we should seek scientific truth by polling the opinions of our least educated citizens?
It's not "Our little corner of academia." It's every major academy of science in the entire world. And they aren't focused on "messaging" because they are scientists, not PR flacks.
It's true that in recent years the coordinated propaganda of the fossil fuel industry has managed to sway masses of uneducated people against the scientific community. But that's not because the fault of the scientific community. Some people out there are just going to believe whoever has the loudest microphone or the endorsement of their local pastor, no matter what the science says.
They just keep cutting and pasting the same debunked arguments and pretend that nobody notices.
Can I distinguish between one arm of Exxon's propaganda machine and another arm? Sure I can, but it's not a meaningful distinction.
somebody mod this guy up because he has a fucking clue
ExxonMobil continuing to fund climate sceptic groups, records show "ExxonMobil gave hundreds of thousands of pounds to lobby groups that have published 'misleading and inaccurate information' about climate change."
And that article is just the tip of the iceberg. There's also Exxon's funding of the infamous Heartland Institute, a "libertarian" anti-science denial shop. Heartland used to deny smoking caused cancer but unsurprisingly switched to denying global warming when their sponsorship changed. Exxon used to fund Heartland directly, but now funds them indirectly through conservative groups like the Scaife and Olin foundations.
It's hard for me to imagine how an educated person in 2011 could have ever been ignorant of how oil companies fund global warming denialism, but now there's no excuse.