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: Tenchusatsu who wrote (599472)	2/1/2011 3:13:24 PM
From: HPilot	2 Recommendations Respond to of 1571813

Actually WMD in Iraq was not made up. Many were found by the UN including yellow cake in the late 90's. Small amounts of WMD were used by the insurgency and terrorists, but most were bad, etc. Sadaam might still be alive and possibly ruling if he simply fessed up that he had destroyed all or almost all of the WMD's. Except perhaps the no small matter of continiously violating UN sanctions, to include the money for oil scam.

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (599472)	2/1/2011 6:04:08 PM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571813

"global warming. Another stupid made up crisis" You need to read about it in the original. Something gets lost in translation.... “It is not my job to sit down and read peer-reviewed papers because I simply haven’t got the time…. I am an interpreter of interpretations.” The TV interview that tied James Delingpole's tongue The bellicose Telegraph climate sceptic has complained to the BBC of being 'intellectually raped' on Horizon during an interview with Nobel prize-winner Sir Paul Nurse == I'm looking forward to watching Horizon: Science Under Attack this evening. First, it is about a question that impinges on much public debate about science – how can scientists be open to dialogue and scrutiny from the public without being derailed by politically motivated attack and mischievous wrecking? But I must confess, I am also intrigued to see one of the most forthright and at times vicious commentators on global warming, James Delingpole, torn apart (by his own admission) in an interview. The Telegraph blogger is not on the receiving end of an acerbic Jeremy Paxman or belligerent John Humphrys. He is questioned by the new president of the Royal Society, the distinguished geneticist and Nobel prize-winner Sir Paul Nurse. I have not seen the programme, but Delingpole apparently complained to the BBC afterwards that he had been "intellectually raped" by Nurse. More about that later. Such a confrontation is perhaps inevitable in a programme about why public debate and science sometimes seem so far apart. Scientists have always had to argue their case, and rightly so, but Nurse believes they are now fighting a more fundamental battle – one for public trust. As the programme blurb puts it: Key scientific ideas – such as climate change, MMR vaccinations and genetically modified foods – now polarise public opinion; it's clear that scientific opinion and consensus isn't always supported by the public. Sir Paul sets out to investigate how this gap between scientists and the public has developed, meeting leading investigators and well-known critics of some of the world's most contentious scientific theories. Among others, Nurse talks to Tony, an American with Aids who is not convinced that his disease is caused by the HIV virus. So, instead of receiving clinically supported anti-retroviral treatments, he treats himself with yoghurts and his own nutritional programme. And then there's Delingpole. Nurse told me that he simply presented Delingpole with a hypothetical question: if a dear relative was suffering from a fatal disease, would he opt for the "consensus" treatment recommended by doctors, or advice to drink more orange juice offered by a fringe maverick quack? In terms of the science of climate change, that fringe maverick is analogous, of course, to Delingpole's own position. Delingpole apparently found the line of questioning too much to handle and was purportedly lost for words. He at one point, according to Nurse, asked for the film crew to stop filming. Delingpole told the Guardian he denied asking the crew to stop filming. "The interview went on for about three hours – there were various points where I said 'I've had enough, I want a tea break.' There was no point where I felt that the interview had to be stopped because I was in any way uncomfortable with what Nurse was saying." Asked if he had called the BBC to say he had been "intellectually raped" afterwards, he said: "I don't think I would have said that, because he is incapable of intellectually raping me." This vision of a shrinking violet is not the man who comes across in his bellicose Telegraph blog. In that medium he seems pretty keen to dish it out without the slightest provocation. In a recent post, for example, he referred to the people who run London zoo as having "eco-fascist leanings" for daring to suggest that climate change might be connected with the extinction of corals. To Delingpole, Roger Harrabin is the "the BBC's High Priest of Gaian Worship and Climate Alarmism". And in an outburst worthy of Sarah Palin, Delingpole reaches for his metaphorical semi-automatic: "...the Warmist faith so fervently held and promulgated by the Met Office is exactly the same faith so passionately, unswervingly followed by David Cameron, Chris Huhne, Greg Barker, the Coalition's energy spokesman in the Lords Lord Marland, and all but five members of the last parliament. And also by the BBC, the Prince of Wales, almost every national newspaper, the European Union, the Royal Society, the New York Times, CNBC, the Obama administration, the Australian and New Zealand governments, your children's schools, our major universities, our minor universities, the University of East Anglia, your local council… Truly there just aren't enough bullets!" Delingpole is clearly a very angry man, but perhaps he should develop a thicker skin. • This article was amended on 25 January. We incorrectly spelled John Humphrys's name. This has been corrected. guardian.co.uk