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: bentway who wrote (851354)	4/21/2015 3:13:58 PM
From: i-node	1 Recommendation Recommended By gamesmistress Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1579394

>> Dave, at one time, amputation was the 'cure' for an infected limb, but medical science progressed. The point is that it is HUMAN NATURE to stick with what we know, to believe in what we do, and to be intransigent. Exactly what climate science is doing today. Intellectual honesty is very hard to find within academia. Unfortunately. So, we get people who think GMOs are dangerous. Who think vaccinations cause autism. Who think CO2, the very air breathed by plant life, is dangerous to humans. And hundreds of other disproved or questionable theories that people still subscribe to. Even educated professionals. Now, you can argue with me about it all day, which simple makes you one of those closed-minded fools. Or you can open your mind to the possibility you are wrong. I don't really care. The similarity between the treatment of breast cancer over the years and what is happening today with climate science is striking. Amputations are a different subject that really don't have the force of the wrongheadedness that radical mastectomy and climate science have. Amputation was, at least the best alternative until it wasn't. That cannot be said about radical mastectomy or high dose chemo for most breast cancers, and it can't be said about the radical and confused science of GW.