I need specifics, not vague accusations. Like I said the UCS
complained and there was a response. Do you want to debate the
response? Pick a line item out of 17 and let's do it. To say NASA and
attorney general means nothing. Give me details.



On 8/8/07, G Money <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 8/8/07, Sam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > And most regrettably takes the focus off of your otherwise excellent
> > points.
> >
> > Excellent points?
>
>
> Ok, POINT: Political hacks should keep their hands OFF of scientists, who
> deal in facts, not poll numbers.
>
> He accused the White House Science advisor, Dr. John Marburger, of
> > righting a right wing opinion piece or McCarthyite/Bircher fantasy. At
> > the same time he used a science-fiction/fantasy author to prove his
> > point. This is far from an excellent point.
>
>
> I don't know or care about that accusation.
>
> Out of thousands of presidential appointees, they are all right-wing
> > fundamentalists except for the five or ten that speak out against the
> > administration. Somehow they are the only believable ones. Do you see
> > the bias there?
>
>
> Several prominent scientists have spoken out about interference from the
> administration that they felt compromised their work as legitimate
> scientists. I choose to believe them, because they are reputable and have no
> real cause for making up lies.
>
> The attorney general sounds like nothing more than a disgruntled
> > worker upset that every word he said wasn't worshiped by the
> > administration.
>
>
> Who and what is this in reference too? I'm talking about surgeon generals
> and NASA scientists.....
>
> The other item he mentions doesn't have a link and google turned up
> > nothing. Everything else we discussed was presented by the Union of
> > Concerned Scientists, a known left-wing group. It's all been debunked
> > so let's talk about those items.
>
>
> His main point is still valid, and you can't object to that reasonably.
>
> Global warming as government policy? Bad idea to mix politics with science.
> > They insisted on us joining Kyote and it's now falling apart.
>
>
> Global warming is a scientific topic. If the government chooses to accept or
> reject what science knows to be true, that is their own political decision.
>
> That being said, science and politics always fight and to paint this
> > as a Bush admin only issue is just wrong.
>
>
> I don't give a shit whether this administration invented the practice of
> stifling science in the name of politics....it's still wrong and it still
> sucks!!! What the hell kind of argument is this??? Someone else did it
> first, so it's OK?
>

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Create robust enterprise, web RIAs.
Upgrade to ColdFusion 8 and integrate with Adobe Flex
http://www.adobe.com/products/coldfusion/flex2/?sdid=RVJP

Archive: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:239695
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5

Reply via email to