Global warming?
in [Design]
|
From: Raveninghorde on 2 Feb 2010 16:08 On Tue, 02 Feb 2010 10:00:34 -0800, John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >On Tue, 02 Feb 2010 09:45:35 +0000, Raveninghorde ><raveninghorde(a)invalid> wrote: > >>On Sat, 30 Jan 2010 14:59:35 -0800, John Larkin >><jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >> >>>On Thu, 07 Jan 2010 05:58:42 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell" >>><mike.terrell(a)earthlink.net> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>No damn way! >>>> >>>>It's 21 degrees in Ocala right now and expected to get colder. They are >>>>forecasting some snow, and this may become one of the longest cold >>>>spells on record with another cold front headed this way. >>> >>>http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/7111525/UN-climate-change-panel-based-claims-on-student-dissertation-and-magazine-article.html >>> >>>http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/01/28/save-rainforest-climate-change-scandal-chopped-facts/ >>> >>>John >> >>Peer review appears corrupt across other sciences as well as climate. >> >>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8490291.stm >> >>/quote >> >>It has also emerged that 14 leading stem cell researchers have written >>an open letter to journal editors in order to highlight their >>dissatisfaction. >> >>Billions of pounds of public money is spent on funding stem cell >>research. >> >>The open letter to the major scientific journals claims that "papers >>that are scientifically flawed or comprise only modest technical >>increments often attract undue profile. At the same time publication >>of truly original findings may be delayed or rejected". >> >>Two internationally-renowned researchers have spoken to BBC News about >>their concerns. >> >>They are Robin Lovell-Badge, from the National Institute for Medical >>Research (NIMR), and Austin Smith, from the University of Cambridge. >> >>Professor Lovell-Badge said: "It's turning things into a clique where >>only papers that satisfy this select group of a few reviewers who >>think of themselves as very important people in the field is >>published. >> >>/end quote > >Stem cell research is another politics+emotion driven "science." Stems >are treated as x-rays once were, a magical cure-all for everything. >Have any therapies actually worked yet? It's no surprise that the big money involved corrupts the peer review process, just like with climate science. > >The stem cell thing is of course a surrogate for the abortion debate. > >John I have to say the abortion debate seems to be a peculiarity of the USA. Some people over here have strong opinions but it is not a big issue. Animal rights campaigners seem to fill the abortion slot with extreme actions.
From: krw on 2 Feb 2010 18:33 On Tue, 02 Feb 2010 10:00:34 -0800, John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >On Tue, 02 Feb 2010 09:45:35 +0000, Raveninghorde ><raveninghorde(a)invalid> wrote: > >>On Sat, 30 Jan 2010 14:59:35 -0800, John Larkin >><jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >> >>>On Thu, 07 Jan 2010 05:58:42 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell" >>><mike.terrell(a)earthlink.net> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>No damn way! >>>> >>>>It's 21 degrees in Ocala right now and expected to get colder. They are >>>>forecasting some snow, and this may become one of the longest cold >>>>spells on record with another cold front headed this way. >>> >>>http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/7111525/UN-climate-change-panel-based-claims-on-student-dissertation-and-magazine-article.html >>> >>>http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/01/28/save-rainforest-climate-change-scandal-chopped-facts/ >>> >>>John >> >>Peer review appears corrupt across other sciences as well as climate. >> >>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8490291.stm >> >>/quote >> >>It has also emerged that 14 leading stem cell researchers have written >>an open letter to journal editors in order to highlight their >>dissatisfaction. >> >>Billions of pounds of public money is spent on funding stem cell >>research. >> >>The open letter to the major scientific journals claims that "papers >>that are scientifically flawed or comprise only modest technical >>increments often attract undue profile. At the same time publication >>of truly original findings may be delayed or rejected". >> >>Two internationally-renowned researchers have spoken to BBC News about >>their concerns. >> >>They are Robin Lovell-Badge, from the National Institute for Medical >>Research (NIMR), and Austin Smith, from the University of Cambridge. >> >>Professor Lovell-Badge said: "It's turning things into a clique where >>only papers that satisfy this select group of a few reviewers who >>think of themselves as very important people in the field is >>published. >> >>/end quote > >Stem cell research is another politics+emotion driven "science." Stems >are treated as x-rays once were, a magical cure-all for everything. >Have any therapies actually worked yet? Stem cell therapies, yes. Fetal stem cells, not so much. >The stem cell thing is of course a surrogate for the abortion debate. Which is a surrogate for the right to (one's) life itself.
From: Michael A. Terrell on 2 Feb 2010 18:54 Uwe Hercksen wrote: > > John Larkin schrieb: > > > So why do the warmingists cite every warm spell, hurricane, and beach > > erosion as proof of global warming? > > Hello, > > one very cold winter and a temperature record of 150 years in one place > does not proof that global warming does not exist. If the next decades > are getting colder and the ice around the north pole is growing instead > of shrinking, then we can talk of a probable end of global warming. > > Just wait and see, but do wait long enough. One cold winter is nothing. Neither are small, closed minds like yours. -- Greed is the root of all eBay.
From: Jim Yanik on 2 Feb 2010 23:10 krw <krw(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote in news:tedhm51q487h5hv2s9k5j5s1pceibdnubt(a)4ax.com: > On Tue, 02 Feb 2010 10:00:34 -0800, John Larkin ><jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > >>On Tue, 02 Feb 2010 09:45:35 +0000, Raveninghorde >><raveninghorde(a)invalid> wrote: >> >>>On Sat, 30 Jan 2010 14:59:35 -0800, John Larkin >>><jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >>> >>>>On Thu, 07 Jan 2010 05:58:42 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell" >>>><mike.terrell(a)earthlink.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>>No damn way! >>>>> >>>>>It's 21 degrees in Ocala right now and expected to get colder. They >>>>>are forecasting some snow, and this may become one of the longest >>>>>cold spells on record with another cold front headed this way. >>>> >>>>http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/7111525/UN >>>>-climate-change-panel-based-claims-on-student-dissertation-and-magazi >>>>ne-article.html >>>> >>>>http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/01/28/save-rainforest-climate-cha >>>>nge-scandal-chopped-facts/ >>>> >>>>John >>> >>>Peer review appears corrupt across other sciences as well as climate. >>> >>>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8490291.stm >>> >>>/quote >>> >>>It has also emerged that 14 leading stem cell researchers have >>>written an open letter to journal editors in order to highlight their >>>dissatisfaction. >>> >>>Billions of pounds of public money is spent on funding stem cell >>>research. >>> >>>The open letter to the major scientific journals claims that "papers >>>that are scientifically flawed or comprise only modest technical >>>increments often attract undue profile. At the same time publication >>>of truly original findings may be delayed or rejected". >>> >>>Two internationally-renowned researchers have spoken to BBC News >>>about their concerns. >>> >>>They are Robin Lovell-Badge, from the National Institute for Medical >>>Research (NIMR), and Austin Smith, from the University of Cambridge. >>> >>>Professor Lovell-Badge said: "It's turning things into a clique where >>>only papers that satisfy this select group of a few reviewers who >>>think of themselves as very important people in the field is >>>published. >>> >>>/end quote >> >>Stem cell research is another politics+emotion driven "science." Stems >>are treated as x-rays once were, a magical cure-all for everything. >>Have any therapies actually worked yet? > > Stem cell therapies, yes. Fetal stem cells, not so much. > >>The stem cell thing is of course a surrogate for the abortion debate. > > Which is a surrogate for the right to (one's) life itself. > one doesn't HAVE a life until they are BORN. -- Jim Yanik jyanik at localnet dot com
From: krw on 2 Feb 2010 23:54
On Tue, 02 Feb 2010 22:10:37 -0600, Jim Yanik <jyanik(a)abuse.gov> wrote: >krw <krw(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote in >news:tedhm51q487h5hv2s9k5j5s1pceibdnubt(a)4ax.com: > >> On Tue, 02 Feb 2010 10:00:34 -0800, John Larkin >><jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >> >>>On Tue, 02 Feb 2010 09:45:35 +0000, Raveninghorde >>><raveninghorde(a)invalid> wrote: >>> >>>>On Sat, 30 Jan 2010 14:59:35 -0800, John Larkin >>>><jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>>On Thu, 07 Jan 2010 05:58:42 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell" >>>>><mike.terrell(a)earthlink.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>No damn way! >>>>>> >>>>>>It's 21 degrees in Ocala right now and expected to get colder. They >>>>>>are forecasting some snow, and this may become one of the longest >>>>>>cold spells on record with another cold front headed this way. >>>>> >>>>>http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/7111525/UN >>>>>-climate-change-panel-based-claims-on-student-dissertation-and-magazi >>>>>ne-article.html >>>>> >>>>>http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/01/28/save-rainforest-climate-cha >>>>>nge-scandal-chopped-facts/ >>>>> >>>>>John >>>> >>>>Peer review appears corrupt across other sciences as well as climate. >>>> >>>>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8490291.stm >>>> >>>>/quote >>>> >>>>It has also emerged that 14 leading stem cell researchers have >>>>written an open letter to journal editors in order to highlight their >>>>dissatisfaction. >>>> >>>>Billions of pounds of public money is spent on funding stem cell >>>>research. >>>> >>>>The open letter to the major scientific journals claims that "papers >>>>that are scientifically flawed or comprise only modest technical >>>>increments often attract undue profile. At the same time publication >>>>of truly original findings may be delayed or rejected". >>>> >>>>Two internationally-renowned researchers have spoken to BBC News >>>>about their concerns. >>>> >>>>They are Robin Lovell-Badge, from the National Institute for Medical >>>>Research (NIMR), and Austin Smith, from the University of Cambridge. >>>> >>>>Professor Lovell-Badge said: "It's turning things into a clique where >>>>only papers that satisfy this select group of a few reviewers who >>>>think of themselves as very important people in the field is >>>>published. >>>> >>>>/end quote >>> >>>Stem cell research is another politics+emotion driven "science." Stems >>>are treated as x-rays once were, a magical cure-all for everything. >>>Have any therapies actually worked yet? >> >> Stem cell therapies, yes. Fetal stem cells, not so much. >> >>>The stem cell thing is of course a surrogate for the abortion debate. >> >> Which is a surrogate for the right to (one's) life itself. >> > >one doesn't HAVE a life until they are BORN. Birth is only half the issue, but there are many who would disagree with you. |