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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JohnM who wrote (198451)	8/24/2012 11:29:40 AM
From: Steve Lokness	Respond to of 541265

<<<<< US House member writes about global warming, she/he is clearly writing about an important issue. Just not writing anything I care to read.>>>> Hmmmmmm? <<<<<"I thought you were open minded and curious, Steve. We clearly see the political world differently but I must have misread your openness. I'm more than a little surprised at that response.">>>>>

To: JohnM who wrote (198451)	8/24/2012 5:23:50 PM
From: Bread Upon The Water	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 541265

Your argument is: 1 Murray has used unscrupulous methods/methodology as the basis for past books therefore I shun his future work no matter the import of the topic. My response: 1. According to who(m) were these methods judged unscrupulous (said he distorted the data)? 2. And if you satisfy number 1 by producing the opinion of "neutral" academics who say Murray's scholarship was shoddy/faulty/negligent in the past, if I produce current "neutral" academics who say his current book ("Falling Apart") doesn't rest on faulty scholarship does this clear the slate with you for the current book? 3. Aside from the first two points I make, I suspect you wouldn't be opposed to the House and Senate debating the topic of Global Warming based on a report of committee of Scientists that was requested to "inform the congress" on the merits or demerits of the said (hypothetical) Tea Party's congressperson's book, so can we not talk about the topic in general (is an underclass forming that is based on economics and education and not on race) without using the data from Murray's book? .