US Presidential Elections thread - the fate of the world to be decided (15 Viewers)

[Sarah]

My father (scientist at higher levels of government research programs) just gave me a breakdown of the history of health research within this nation. Prior to Reagan's election, funding for different cancer research programs was actually quite good. But once Reagan was elected, that funding ran dry, jobs went out the window, great scientists happened to leave for other nations. Same during the first Bush time period.

Then Clinton came along and times changed. The National Institutes of Health and National Cancer Institute received some of the most funding in history, which has actually provided us with a lot inroads to important data that has enabled us to map the human genome, or in other words, Nobel Prizes in this sort of field. Mapping the human genome is something remarkable, just like the possibility that stem cells could be the key antidote to diseases such as Parkinson's. But ALL of this funding has went to hell, and has been ENTIRELY neglected, by the Bush administration.

Now only a mere rocket scientist could figure out why. Oh who the fuck am I'm kidding... the really OBVIOUS reason is because Republicans care more about war than research. They're a bunch of war-mongering, gun-toting, religious freaks that not only destroy our nation's infrastructure, but also destroys scientific research within this nation. Who in their right mind would want to hinder the advancement of research for various diseases and cancer? I mean Dear God, some of the morons who voted for Bush have these same various diseases FFS. Are you people really that blind? Do you really want to neglect stem cell research and die?

Stem cells? Fuck stem cells. Lets let people die because our fake religion tells us it's wrong to use these beloved cells we kill every single day.

Goddamn morons.

What you seem to be forgetting about stem cells is that they are harvested from fertilized eggs.....therefore a baby. It really depends on your feelings about when the baby is actually formed because the egg is already fertilized and it is forming into an embryo which is the first trimester of a pregnancy really. If you are against abortion being against stem cell research from the stem cells which come from babies is a logical step for some. You can also harvest stem cells from adults but they are already matured therefore do not have all the benefits of the stem cells that come from embryos.

I'm all for stem cell research because I see all the possible benefits but I just don't think its totally illogical for some people to not support it. I can see both sides.

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Enron]

HAHAHAAHHAHA

Enron, did you just see that on Olbermann??? That footage of O'Reilly yelling "fuck, this sucks" while taping a show? going off like a madman on his crew at his show? Holy shit that was funny as FUCK! What an imbecile.

Yeah I saw that 3 days ago.

 

[Bjerknes]

What you seem to be forgetting about stem cells is that they are harvested from fertilized eggs.....therefore a baby. It really depends on your feelings about when the baby is actually formed because the egg is already fertilized and it is forming into an embryo which is the first trimester of a pregnancy really. If you are against abortion being against stem cell research from the stem cells which come from babies is a logical step for some. You can also harvest stem cells from adults but they are already matured therefore do not have all the benefits of the stem cells that come from embryos.

I'm all for stem cell research because I see all the possible benefits but I just don't think its totally illogical for some people to not support it. I can see both sides.

TOTALY UNTRUE!

One can make stem cells from SKIN CELLS (fibroblasts) by reprogramming the genetic information using genetic input (MYC, SOS) material. This is the sort of stuff my pops works with, and he thoroughly argues that the egg is not the only place you can take a stem cell from. There is actual proof of this from a Japanese group of researchers.

That is why we need more funding for this... to figure out the exact best place to take these cells from except the egg.

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/conte...ls&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&resourcetype=HWCIT

So, in my humble opinion, one which stems from an educated scientist, there is truly no reason to be against stem cell research. In fact, it's moronic.

 

[Sarah]

TOTALY UNTRUE!

One can make stem cells from SKIN CELLS (fibroblasts) by reprogramming the genetic information using genetic input (MYC, SOS) material. This is the sort of stuff my pops works with, and he thoroughly argues that the egg is not the only place you can take a stem cell from. There is actual proof of this from a Japanese group of researchers.

That is why we need more funding for this... to figure out the exact best place to take these cells from except the egg.

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/conte...ls&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&resourcetype=HWCIT

So, in my humble opinion, one which stems from an educated scientist, there is truly no reason to be against stem cell research. In fact, it's moronic.

In Biology, we talked talked about harvesting it from actual adults ala the skin cells that you talk about but the benefit of taking them from babies was that they were able to become anything because they have no real assignments or something like that since they are the ones who that form the actual embryo thus having all the potential. I can't remember what exactly. I just remember the ones coming from the fertilized eggs having much more potential which is the form of stem cell which was opposed but messed up the funding for all types of stem cell research if I recall correctly. But I'm sure your dad knows much more than me so I won't argue his facts. I learned about stem cell research in a 9 am Biology class and as we all know, I don't function fully before 12 noon .

 

[Bjerknes]

In Biology, we talked talked about harvesting it from actual adults ala the skin cells that you talk about but the benefit of taking them from babies was that they were able to become anything because they have no real assignments or something like that since they are the ones who that form the actual embryo thus having all the potential. I can't remember what exactly. I just remember the ones coming from the fertilized eggs having much more potential which is the form of stem cell which was opposed but messed up the funding for all types of stem cell research if I recall correctly. But I'm sure your dad knows much more than me so I won't argue his facts. I learned about stem cell research in a 9 am Biology class and as we all know, I don't function fully before 12 noon .

But the whole point of the study I was referring to was that they could potentially program different genetic information from various sorts of cells, thus not using the actual egg. This is actually proven by these studies. The only problem is we don't exactly know how to efficiently do this yet. Molecular biologists are getting there, however.

Too bad other nations such as Singapore are more advanced in stem cell research because of this nation's mental retardation.

 

[Zé Tahir]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tJjNVVwRCY

 

[Vinman]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tJjNVVwRCY

but Andy...thats how you are every night on this forum !!!

 

[GordoDeCentral]

but Andy...thats how you are every night on this forum !!!

did you check out the golbal warming stuff i sent you

 

[Bjerknes]

but Andy...thats how you are every night on this forum !!!

Perhaps you're right.

But at least I do it for a good reason.

 

[Bjerknes]

did you check out the golbal warming stuff i sent you

So what's this stuff yo? More factually potent evidence against this Liberal propaganda?

 

[GordoDeCentral]

http://media.kusi.clickability.com/documents/Comments+on+Global+Warming02.pdf


Dont know about potent but through all his poor writing structure he does raise some good points. and it is John Coleman

 

[Bjerknes]

http://media.kusi.clickability.com/documents/Comments+on+Global+Warming02.pdf


Dont know about potent but through all his poor writing structure he does raise some good points. and it is John Coleman

I stopped reading after literally the first two sentences.

""Global Warming: Greatest Scam in History."

"Some misguided scientists with environmental and political motives manipulated long-term scientific data back in the late 1990's to create an illusion of rapid global warming." Then this author went on to say that these scientists "steered huge grants their way to keep the movement growing."

This is offensive to me, to many others, to my father, to anybody who actually matters in the scientific fields. Do you want to know why?

Because we terrible "Liberal Scientists" are trying to discover the real fucking truth about our earth, why we are here, why we exist, why there have been strange occurances in wordly atmospheric events, and so forth. We aren't politicians here... we don't care about money or fame. When the hell was the last time we saw some scientist making millions of dollars talking about Global Warming? And no, Al Gore isn't a scientist.

Scientists are not politicians, people.

I have personally had two professors in my classes who provided data and inputs to the IPCC here at Penn State, and these people are making no more 75,000 dollars a year. They all agree something is going on here. Where are the environmental sponsors? Where are their photos with Al Gore? Where is this supposed Global Warming FUNDING people talk about? It's surely not in the hands of these scientists.

But whatever. Please keep polluting this earth to high hell. I love it. Small-minded (usually Republican) individuals in this country are against this well-warranted research, so please, keep destroying us. Keep fucking with mother nature, baby. I don't really mind it whatsoever. It will only provide me job opportunities once the damage is already done. Then everybody who voted/agrees with screwing researching global warming will perish in ever increasing tornadic/hazardous weather activity. Mother nature really is a beautiful thing, equalling out a hell of a lot. GO HURRICANES!

 

[GordoDeCentral]

Didnt know you were such a big fan of Miami U, Dru will like it though

all joking aside i on the other hand choose not to stop at the first 2 sentences and look at both sides; and yes he does raise some interesting issues definitely worth inspecting. As for mother nature, it's only as beautiful as it is tamed especially for man in the 21st century and i will leave it at that.

 

[Bjerknes]

Didnt know you were such a big fan of Miami U, Dru will like it though

all joking aside i on the other hand choose not to stop at the first 2 sentences and look at both sides; and yes he does raise some interesting issues definitely worth inspecting. As for mother nature, it's only as beautiful as it is tamed especially for man in the 21st century and i will leave it at that.

Okay, fine. I will read it over sometime soon.

I'm just fucking sick and tired of people talking about atmospheric science like they actually know something about it. Get it straight - nobody really knows the implications of what we're doing to our earth, but scientists such as my synoptic professor have 1000 times the understanding that 99.99% of people that propagate these "100% Global Warming is a farce idea." At least the people I know have some understanding about how our atmosphere works.

What a fucking great abstract though by your guy... he reminds me of a religious zealot. Denying stuff outright like it's truth. No matter what I read in his report, guaranteed it's not total proof.

 

[swag]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tJjNVVwRCY

I love busting on O'Reilly. But I have to say in this case, he has a point. The guy is supposed to go live on the air and his director is being a complete incompetent. Who wouldn't want to flame an incompetent coworker who will make you look like a bigger dolt than you are because of your failures?

It would be enough to make me want to:

 

[GordoDeCentral]

Okay, fine. I will read it over sometime soon.

I'm just fucking sick and tired of people talking about atmospheric science like they actually know something about it. Get it straight - nobody really knows the implications of what we're doing to our earth, but scientists such as my synoptic professor have 1000 times the understanding that 99.99% of people that propagate these "100% Global Warming is a farce idea." At least the people I know have some understanding about how our atmosphere works.

What a fucking great abstract though by your guy... he reminds me of a religious zealot. Denying stuff outright like it's truth. No matter what I read in his report, guaranteed it's not total proof.

no that it really matters but thats the guy who founded the weather channel so your kin sorta

 

[Bjerknes]

no that it really matters but thats the guy who founded the weather channel so your kin sorta

A staunch conservative from Texas. Sweet. I cannot wait to read his report, since he's obviously an expert in the matter, considering he made the Weather Channel and is an actual certified AMS Meteorologist.

Dear God, Altair. This guy doesn't even have a Masters degree.



Nevermind, I probably won't bother reading this bro. But thanks anyway.

 

[Bjerknes]

In fact, Altair, those sort of news weathercasters are the exact opposite of people like me, and especially the people who work on the IPCC report. You see, people such as us went to school for degrees in meteorology, not broadcast journalism. People such as Coleman started out when the field of meteorology was primitive and anybody could get on television telling the crowd meteorological mishaps. There are fake meteorologists across the entire nation such as this on television, and they're really just fake people who never had a class in synoptic scale meteorology. They're just people who saw an opportunity to take a job. In no way should they be respected in this argument.

Coleman deserves no respect, he receives no respect in the field of meteorology (Thus why I haven't heard of him), so I will not waste my time reading his report. No offense, Altair, but this shortsighted crap is what makes me despise conservatives. Please don't bring out figures such as this guy to try and prove your conservative viewpoints. He's about as knowledgeable as Cheney in this matter.

Have a little more respect for Ph.D's and people who know what the FUCK they're talking about.

 

[Martin]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tJjNVVwRCY

The fact that we love this is a lot more sad than it is funny. It's so easy to mock people who are intellectually inferior. America is the country "where anyone can become president" and apparently anyone can become a nationwide pundit too. Bush and O'Reilly sure are proving this point, and while it may once have been cute in the sense of "look mom, my dog can skateboard too", the novelty ran out quick.

Normally, O'Reilly is the kind of idiot you meet at a big family reunion who has a lot of strong opinions about stuff but they're all insanely misinformed and noone wants to even listen to him cause he's so disconnected from reality that it's obviously a lost cause.

One look at Fox "News" and the mystery of why the most intelligent political debates happen on Comedy Central is solved.

 

[Enron]

http://media.kusi.clickability.com/documents/Comments+on+Global+Warming02.pdf


Dont know about potent but through all his poor writing structure he does raise some good points. and it is John Coleman

Are you kidding me? I saw this presentation last year. And then again this year. His science is as sound as Al Gore's.

Couple of problems.

1)Correlation doesn't mean causation. You have to look at thing from different angles. They teach you that in your first meteo course.
2)Solar radiation (cosmic rays) was shot down last year by NASA after research.

Awe man, he doesn't show that his friends papers are published in medical journals, like he did in the presentations.