Recent Posts

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/19/breaking-news-story-hadley-cru-has-apparently-been-hacked-hundreds-of-files-released/

I didn't like this thread much at all. After reading it, I just want to add this comment:

   In an argument, if you did not convince the other person of the truth in your position, whether by appeals to logos (logic), pathos (emotion), or ethos (credibility), then you've lost. In science, the biggest challenge is usually to convince someone to use logic alone, and this is rarely accomplished by logic alone. If scientific, logical thought is ever going to progress beyond a lamentably small fraction of the populace, we should be prepared to convince irrational people of the necessity of logic without using rhetorical clubs, even if (especially if) they deserve it.

I enjoyed this whole thread quite a lot - usually message boards bore me with repetitive finger-pointing.  Even Stoney's posts were well-written, which is rare enough in media-quoting hype-robots.  I enjoyed the thread until I read this response, that is.  Then I stopped reading because I've read enough to know when the topic is about to veer off track.

I recently had a discussion with somebody who considered himself an extremely intelligent philosopher-type.  His modus operandi was to use an abnormally overloaded vocabulary and philosophic nit-picking to talk his 'opponent' into a corner.  For some reason, he believed that if he could make his opponent frustrated because they had no clue what he was even saying, then therefore he 'won' the argument.

I told him that I would not have another discussion with him about politics, religion, or anything other than business after he said with all sincerity, "You are not allowed to have an opinion unless you can successfully define the word 'knowledge' and apply it to the discussion.  I can define knowledge.  Can you?"

My point is, Ribald:  Whether you are right or wrong is indifferent.  Ethos, Logos, and Bears, oh my!  Your post really added nothing of value to the conversation. 



...And neither did mine.  But at least I can be honest about it. 

I have been visiting there and they have a small forum discussing it too.

I hope this project will get the attention it deserves.

"Give a thief enough rope and he will hang himself."  Sure is taking a whole lot of that "rope" stuff.

Circa 1938.  Dupont bringing out synthetic fiber Nylon.  Hemp is about the best fiber for fabrics . . . and rope . . . and almost any other widespread commercial use of fiber.  Circa 1935.  First machine invented to automate the harvesting and separation of hemp fiber, which would have made commercial hemp a major contender, and most probably, the big winner in the fiber sweepstakes.  Hemp had to go before its markets could grow, and when marijuana was banned by Congress in 1937, hemp was banned as a result.   During WWII, the US Navy really needed the best rope, so the ban on commercial hemp was lifted.  Then imposed again after WWII ended.  What was it that Will Rogers said about an "honest politician"?  "An honest politician is one who stays bought."  Lots of "honest politicians" back in the 1930s, there were.

i want one but i need it in black If i order it today can i get a black on when they come in?

Want to talk about JUNK SCIENCE?  Go to www.reason.com and type Steven Hayne, then Michael West in their search engine. The state of Mississippi has not had a Certified Medical Examiner since 1995.  They left an 'anatomical' pathologist named Dr. Steven Hayne 'fill-in' all these years since.  He and his co-hort Dr. Michael West, a 'dentist' have had the monopoly on the autopsies.  They were only supposed to do 250 a year but were doing, by their own admission 1500-1800 a year. 

Dr. Hayne's testimony sent a 13 year old boy named Tyler Edmond to prison for life over 6 years ago. Edmonds older sister shot and killed her ex-husband and tried to enlist her brother to help.  Hayne testified that there had to be TWO fingers from TWO people on the TRIGGER because of the way the 'wound pattern' looked.  WHAT?

There are witnesses to Hayne's unethical, unqualified work.  Things such as hosing bodies down prior to autopsy, going from body to body without changing gloves or instruments, smoking and eating while autopsies are being performed and the list goes on and on.

Hayne is NOT a forensic pathologist or certified Medical Examiner even though he has perjured himself countless times on the witness stand claiming he is.  He attempted the state medical examiners exam in the early 80's but stormed out on the test saying it was stupid.

Also online at www.reason.com you will fond a video of Dr. Michael West explaining 'bite-marks'.  The catch is...that a DETECTIVE sent an impresssion of his own teeth to compare to the victim's bite mark.  After a 30 minute video Dr. West is adamant that THESE teeth fit the bite marks on the 'victim'!

I have a petition and am urging everyone to sign it.  The state fired Hayne last year after all the controversy yet they have refused to re-open old cases where Hayne and West have testified and possibly sent innocent people to prison and death row.  That is what my petition is all about.  Here's the link.  PLEASE sign it and pass it on: http://www.gopetition.com/online/25939.html

Thank you in advance!

Judi

It has become quite obvious that the whole Anthropogenic Global Warming concept began as a complete scientific fraud, and then a good many who like to term themselves as "scientists" picked it up and ran with it for the purpose of getting all those nice and profitable gubmint grants, for "studying" something or other which might be considered to have relevance to the speculation.  And enhance their careers and reputations while doing it.  And of course, these "studies" had to espouse the "cause", or no more of those delightful gubmint grants would be forthcoming.  The publicity which would enhance their careers would cease to be.

If there were any honor among them, the originators of this fraud would say loudly, "Mea culpa" and fall on their swords.   Then the vast majority who are left could say, "How were we to know?  These people had the proper credentials, and indeed, they led the rest of us astray".  This would salvage the reputations and careers of the vast majority at least somewhat, and they could go about genning up some other subjects to study.  Who knows?  Perhaps they might even come up with something to study, the results of which study might actually be of use to the rest of us.

Right wing, left wing . . . and those that fall in between, and those who fall outside the artificial limits . . . what indeed is to be made of all of these terms?  I think that the term that Josef Stalin used was the best.  For those who would espouse communism, without having the faintest idea of what the ultimate results would be, or how dreadful for those who expoused communism things would turn out to be . . . Stalin used the term "useful idiots".  Useful for the cause of communism, and idiots for thinking they themselves would prosper from it or even be the lest better off when it came to be.

There was no shortage at all of useful idiots back then, and there is no shortage of useful idiots as of now.  If anything, there are many more of them as of now than back when Stalin was in power.  The cause espoused today might be whacko environmentalism, or whacko economics, or whacko anything.  Even whacko Anthropogenic Global Warming.  The useful idiots expousing any of these sorts of things will be harmed, and badly harmed, if the whacko cause comes to be in power, or if significant governmental controls and higher taxes are put in place due to the actions of whackos. 

On the other hand it needs to be carefully monitored to make sure it doesn't induce another ice age.

Then too, prohibiting anything at all where there is a demand for it will assure that it is either stolen and smuggled or illegally procured and smuggled, and sold illegally, with no control at all.  Want more of something?  Leave it unregulated and untaxed.  Want less of it?  Regulate it and tax it . . . unless it is taxed so high and/or regulated so much that there is a good profit to be had by stealing it or smuggling it and selling it illegally on a "black market" basis.