Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:let me correct that for you. (Score 0) 619

>> There may be problems with socialism, but it's a better alternative than laissez faire capitalism.

Source? Because I don't see it based on the last 100 years. Can you point out positives that aren't just taking shots at whatever it is you don't like about the USA? Because I've noticed that most "socialists" are merely socially retarded individuals who have no concept of how normal people think and live their lives.

So, they decide FOR THEM how they should think and live their lives; then they urge them to do it. When that doesn't work they try to destroy the alternatives. When that doesn't work then they penalize the behavior they don't like. When that doesn't work, they coerce using the full weight of the government.

ALL liberal/socialist/communistic movements follow this same pattern.

Comment Re:But it wasn't for "national security" (Score 0) 353

>> who has lawfully arrested the person

So, who is it that doesn't think that you should be required to identify yourself once YOU'VE ALREADY BEEN ARRESTED FOR SOMETHING?

You guys make it sound like cops are just wandering the city asking people for their "papers" in a german accent.

And if you REALLY don't think that AFTER you've been ARRESTED for committing a crime that the police have no right in the interest of keeping the public safe to know that you have open felony warrants in ten states; well then - you are an extremist.

Comment Re:Eh? (Score 0) 568

So this is an evolving science? How can a evolving science still have consensus?

Do you see anything wrong with scientists making extraordinary claims of near-future disaster and strongly demanding DRASTIC and expensive changes in every facet of human existence based on immature science?

Or is this literally the only scientific theory in the history of man that is not required to have followed the scientific method?

Because when you are following the scientific method, there is no need for blacklisting and otherwise attempting to destroy the reputations of those who do not fully agree. Of course this sort of thing is completely commonplace when you are dealing with pseudosciences.

Only when the MMGW crowd actually starts acting like they have nothing to hide will they get any respect from those whose scientific beliefs are not filtered through a political lense.

Until then, it will remain what it is: Just another scare tactic to advance leftist causes.

Comment Re:When do we reach ... (Score 0) 703

That does not change the fact that politics is the #1 factor for all of the nobels. Someone could discover the cure for cancer, but if they are a known opponent of man made global whateveritscalledthisweek, there is NO chance they could win. And yes, IN THE PAST there are a few winners with some warts, BUT THAT WAS IN THE PAST. Sorry for the all caps, but I'm am good at anticipating the argument style of autistic spectrum people.

Comment Re:When do we reach ... (Score 0) 703

You act like every scientist is capable of winning the nobel. Even in science, there are those who fill the fry cook and janitor jobs. Besides, the nobel seems to have turned into a political award. Before you retort, please explain the substantive contributions to the world that won President-elect Obama his nobel peace prize.

Comment Re:Recency bias and global warming pause (Score 1) 703

You can always tell who bases their opinion on science: they use science to back up their opinions.

Faux science folks like to use name calling and character assassination.

Nowadays scientific method consists of making sure that your "research" ends up hitting a prearranged target. Only this will keep the funding coming.

Comment Re: Probably just more FAKED data.... (Score 0) 703

That's what you get when you make a science issue a political issue. Liberals, I'm looking at you.

Propaganda only works if you control access to opposing ideas. Thus since the left has *everything* invested in forcing global cooling/warming/change down everyone's throats, the only place you can get access to contrary ideas is on conservative sites.

If you compare the way *men of science* handle climate science with literally any other scientific idea, you'll see a massive difference in the conversation.

There is no conversation - because this is not about science. It's about damaging democracy and capitalism.

That's what you get when you politicize science. You get this.

Comment Re:When do we reach ... (Score 0) 703

You're not allowed to mention that here. Everyone knows that the scientific method is critical to the proper development of our world. So for you to bring up an idea that may confuse the masses is heretical. You might shake the faith of those weak-minded individuals who don't have kool-aid spewing from every orifice.

Remember that in science, extraordinary claims (like man made global cool .. I mean man made global warm . . I mean man made global climate change) require ordinary proof that cannot be challenged.

Also, you are safe espousing *any* idea as long as you say it is an consensus amongst scientists who only receive funding if their theories match the consensus. That is how science works.

Nowadays a scientist who shouts "eureka" has just discovered that their results closely match the demanded result. Thus the money train continues.

Slashdot Top Deals

Old programmers never die, they just become managers.