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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: combjelly who wrote (530606)	11/20/2009 5:08:39 AM
From: Joe NYC	Respond to of 1575423

No. For one, you are comparing apples and pineapples. In more ways than one. We are talking about a group that isn't anywhere close to 60% and we aren't talking about occasional dissent. How about this one: A panel dominated by various activists, deliberately designed to exclude "conservatives" decided US nutritional policy by this type of "consensus". The consensus was that (and I am paraphrasing), Americans should be eating white bread with mayo to be healthy. The "conservatives", the ones who always say "no" said there is no scientific support for this hypothesis. Studies would have to be designed, and they would be costly, and last perhaps 20 to 30 years. Not to let the crisis go to waste, these political / nutritional activists excluded enough of the sceptics so that they could declare consensus. Rather than waiting for proof, US went on the limb, telling people to turn into birds and eat grains (bird food). Needless to say, in the following 40 years, billions and billions of dollars and 10s of studies, no conclusive study has emerged to uphold the hypothesis. The consensus is maintained though, by intimidation.... BTW, the same "consensus" is at work on CO2. Consensus by exclusion of dissent, and consensus by intimidation of dissenters.