He still got canned did he not.Moreover there was no interference with the peer review process. Not like what hte current administration is doing.
larry >Like when Clinton's CDC appointee got canned for making up false firearms >research? > >Tim > >-----Original Message----- >From: Jim Davis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Saturday, August 09, 2003 1:46 PM >To: CF-Community >Subject: RE: Report details Bush's misuse of scientific research > > >While I agree with this completely it seems to me just another example >of the blatancy of this administration. > >Others may indeed have found scientists leaning, politically, in their >direction (it's done all the time). Science itself may be unbiased, but >scientists are far from it and can be just as petty, self-serving, or >just plain stupid as anybody else. > >There was no attempt even for that level of political finesse in many of >these cases. Scientific advisory panels were populated with industry >lobbyists and career politicians. > >This is just another example, along with other appointments, false >statements and questionable contracts given, of this administration's >blatant self-service. There's no finesse to its politics, no sense of >competency or selflessness. It seems nothing more than a bully that's >made it to the top of hill and is now pulling up its cronies. > >Jim Davis > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Tim Heald [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: Saturday, August 09, 2003 10:33 AM >> To: CF-Community >> Subject: RE: Report details Bush's misuse of scientific research >> >> Ok, >> >> Let me understand this. The executive branch gets to make >appointments to >> certain panels, and you expect them not to take politics into >> consideration? >> >> Don't be naive. Left and right do this whenever they can. Obviously >if >> you >> have an agenda your going to make sure that you don't put people that >are >> diametrically apposed to it into positions where they can harm you. >> >> Tim >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Larry C. Lyons [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: Saturday, August 09, 2003 9:16 AM >> To: CF-Community >> Subject: RE: Report details Bush's misuse of scientific research >> >> >> >Hay. Just what is your problem? Who the heck would argue that >condoms >> >aren't effective against those little missile's hitting their target >:-)) >> >> Have you read the article? Have you any understanding of the need for >> honesty in scientific reporting. It can be a life or death matter in >> some cases. >> >> The problem is that by distorting the research to fit their agenda >> does a disservice to scientific research, public health, medicine and >> environmental health to name a few. Another example, missile defense. >> IF they fudged the data to show that it works, what happens when we >> are subjected to an attack and our much vaunted missile defenses fail >> miserably. Are you willing to care for all the people who are going >> to be dying of cancer in a few years because of these distortions. > > The only events I think that is comparable are Stalin's support of > > Lamarkian genetics in the 1930's - that resulted in the death of tens >> of thousands in Russia and the Ukraine. Or the more recent support of >> a crackpot AIDS theory by Tambo Mbeke, president of South Africa. >> That support may have resulted in hundreds or thousands of needless >> deaths by AIDS related illnesses >> >> In this case I do not care whether the administration is liberal >> conservative or just confused, lying and distorting scientific >> research is well beyond the pale. Its an assault on science in >> general. When the New England Journal of Medicine, the Lancet, Nature >> and science criticize the government over this you know something is >> wrong. The Lancet and the NEJM are not exactly what you would call a >> hotbed of liberalism. To quote from the article: "the editors of the >> Lancet noted "growing evidence of explicit vetting of appointees to >> influential [scientific] panels on the basis of their political or > > religious opinions" and warned against "any further right-wing >> incursions" on those panels. " >> >> And you're saying there is nothing wrong with this? >> >> If your view is typical of the pro-Shrub people that is really scary >> >> -- >> >> Larry C. Lyons >> >> ======================================================== >> Life is Complex. It has both real and imaginary parts. >> ======================================================== >> Chaos, Panic and Disorder. My work here is done. >> >> > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=5 Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
