Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:So about the world (Score 0, Troll) 848

A solid argument. I have a short, and perhaps rude retort. When those who state this is a dire situation start behaving like it is a dire situation, I will consider the argument. If Al Gore, Leo DiCaprio, Matt Damon, et. al. are going to be held up as paragons of truth, who bring the message to the masses, then they damn well better live by their rules. If they won't or can't, then I won't consider this to be a serious threat, and that those who say it is are only mewling to control our way of life.

Comment Re:Obvious (Score 1) 1128

I guess the submitter did not read the actual question posed in the poll: “The GSS asked respondents the following question: “I am going to name some institutions in this country. As far as the people running these institutions are concerned, would you say you have a great deal of confidence, only some confidence, or hardly any confidence at all in them [the Scientific Community]?”(page 172) The confidence in “people running these institutions” was being measured, not “Science”.

Comment Re:Waiting.... (Score 1) 442

You were right! He's already been 'scrubbed' from the AGU Task Force on Scientific Ethics page! Those evil deniers are so sneaky!

http://www.agu.org/about/governance/committees_boards/scientific_ethics.shtml

It was there four days ago, according to google’s cache. Has he resigned/been fired already?

Comment Re:It's not stealing (Score 1) 442

Quote from the very same HuufPo article you link to:

In an effort to do so, and in a serious lapse of my own and professional judgment and ethics, I solicited and received additional materials directly from the Heartland Institute under someone else's name.

See that part where he solicited and received additional materials directly? Try that with your local financial institution. Try that with an insurance company.

Comment Re:Forgery - (And obviously so) (Score 1) 442

The memo is the document that purports the Heartland Institute is going to 'bad things' to the Environment. All the other documents are sourced and authentic. They also reveal personal information about employees and donors. To blithely dismiss it as "one memo" is to be disingenuous, ignorant, or deceptive.

Submission + - Leaked Heartland Institute Memo Authenticity Questioned (theatlantic.com)

sithkhan writes: "After the explosive leak of the Heartland Institute documents on Thursday, the documents were looked over by a reporter for The Atlantic. Seems all the leaked documents are similar and consistent, with the exception of one: that damning memo.
FTFA:
" 1. All of the documents are high-quality PDFs generated from original electronic files . . . except for the "Climate Strategy" memo. (Hereinafter, "the memo"). That appears to have been printed out and scanned, though it may also have been faxed.
Either way, why? After they wrote up their Top Secret Here's All the Bad Stuff We're Gonna Do This Year memo, did the author hand it to his secretary and say "Now scan this in for the Board"? Or did he fax it across the hall to his buddy?
This seems a strange and ponderous way to go about it--especially since the other documents illustrate that the Heartland Institute has fully mastered the Print to PDF command.
It is, however, exactly what I would do if I were trying to make sure that the document had no potentially incriminating metadata in the pdf."

There's much more to read and consider at the link.

The author gives two caveats, which are somewhat at odds with one another."

Slashdot Top Deals

Advertising is the rattling of a stick inside a swill bucket. -- George Orwell

Working...