Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (163988)	7/24/2001 2:25:31 PM
From: Zoltan!	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769667

Most people agree that WP is a better paper than the NYTimes, the NYTimes has been losing prestige for years as its political bias becomes ever more blatant. Here's an examples of the NYTime's extreme bias: THE TIMES RATCHETS UP ITS BIAS I: "So even as the evidence grows that earth's climate is warming and that people are responsible for at least part of the change, the toughness of the modeling problem is often cited by those who oppose international action to cut the emissions of heat-trapping gases." - from a story on the science of global warming in today's New York Times. nytimes.com Has it occurred to the Times that this sentence (which reads like it was plopped in by some meddlesome uber-editor) has it backwards? Perhaps some scientists are actually scientists, i.e. they simply don't accept something as proven until it has been proved. The 'toughness of the modeling problem' requires no political agenda to cast doubt on the science of global warming - but the Times has to discredit such skepticism as fueled by politics. Later on in the (actually very helpful) piece, we find out that "a small change in the way droplets form could have a large impact on the climate, said Dr. Jenkins, in Britain. He said that Dr. Anthony Slingo, another scientist there, found a decade ago that in theory, a decrease or an increase in the size of water droplets of just 10 or 20 percent "could either halve or double the amount of climate change you'd get."" Wow. That's a huge variation - of which we now know nothing. The only thing here that's really fueled by politics is the Times' editing. andrewsullivan.com

To: Neocon who wrote (163988)	7/24/2001 2:34:25 PM
From: Mr. Whist	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

Re: "Well, flap, you have totally lost whatever residual perspective you might have had ..." That's about the 8th time you've sent me similar. Re: " ... presumably out of wounded feelings." The wounded feelings were feigned. The reason I resigned is that it no longer was fun to post there anymore. The humor had been replaced by bad manners and vinegar from you and your cohorts. What I was trying to do was to let JLA allow me one last post so I could give him one last blast ... but he was much too smart to do that. Re: " ... It is a shame to see you descend into Asennahood." I've been impressed with the quality of Asenna's posts.