Sorry for injecting politics into a collection of Climate Science posts, but this is directly relevant.
If you wish to comment, please keep it civil. Thanks.
https://thinkprogress.org/trump-science-survey-fe56662669ea
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
-
LEGO Americana Roadshow: Building Across America I just checked out this traveling exhibition from LEGO and was quite impressed. The scale ... -
When we let politics trump science, people are needlessly put in harm's way. http://arstechnica.com/science/2017/01/self-censoring-fears...
-
Thank you, Lego, for letting me simply tell you online which parts were missing from the boy's Christmas present and sending them to me,...
Climate is inextricably tied to the social relations (politics) we use to create and live as a species. Ignore politics at your folly.
ReplyDeletePerhaps we are screwed for the next four years, regardless who wins.
ReplyDeleteOrange is a lemon.
ReplyDelete:-)
Did he answer a single question?
ReplyDeleteEric Smith Perhaps
ReplyDeleteGlobal warming denier and science denier for cash? Deplorable.
ReplyDeleteI really have to say that Jill stein is the most consistent with her platform in outlining a set of policies for real change.
ReplyDeleteWhy is it Americans don't want her?
Rob Mellor the media told them not to.
ReplyDeleteBecause she is a nutcase too.
ReplyDeleteI think he invented a time machine and he trying to see if it works. So far the survey results have been very positive. Society is regressing to hundreds of years back. Just a thought :)
ReplyDeleteRob Mellor I object to how she panders to nutcases. She says, for example, that there are real questions about vaccines which haven't been answered.
ReplyDeleteShe's a medial doctor FFS. She should be ashamed.
They are appalling on both sides. Truly, appalling.
ReplyDeleteDavid Westebbe She who? Learn to write complete sentences.
ReplyDeleteRob Mellor I don't think that Americans don't want JS. It's that she doesn't have a chance. This is her 3rd time running & hasn't broken 8% in polling. Her highest this season has been 6% & that was when she asked Bernie to take the ticket.
ReplyDeleteIt's the math & the reality we are facing now.
james vela Nope, you write in complete sentences. So that your point is made to whomever reads your comment.
ReplyDeleteTRAPPER JOHNSON Learn to properly read a thread.
ReplyDeleteI was responding to a person who was speaking about a particular woman "She" is the person spoken about in the comment I responded to.
Sheesh.
My prediction on this from August 14th:
ReplyDeleteTrump might ignore it entirely and then say he did answer it with the best answers, and the liberal media ate his homework to make him look bad... or he might answer it the day before it's due using his fat gold sharpie with mostly illegible scribbles he thinks look smart, to the same ultimate effect.
https://plus.google.com/+NateMcD/posts/g5sgojtHeEV
TRAPPER JOHNSON Yelling at people to "write in complete sentences" and then failing multiple times to write in complete sentences yourself makes you nothing more than a troll. Good riddance. #blocked
ReplyDeleteDavid Westebbe So you have also fallen for the media misinformation.. Jill Stein are not against vaccines. Never have been. What she have a problem with is big corporations and their influence on FDA. She goes after the facts. Like a scientist should do.
ReplyDeleteDaniel Sandman Jill Stein's unwillingness on multiple occasions to "offend" anti-vaxxers by unequivocally denying the myth that vaccines do harm makes me suspect that her commitment to science is far less than her commitment to getting elected. And that's not the kind of person I want in charge. Besides, she has nearly no relevant experience that would qualify her for being President of the freaking United States. I mean, hell, I have more executive and managerial experience than she does.
ReplyDeleteDaniel Sandman I base my statement up on a quote. It is in the Washington Post. If you want me to look it up for you, I will.
ReplyDeleteCraig Froehle Where did you get that from? She are pro vaccines! As a scientist she know about vaccines that has not been tested enough though. Not that she have ever mentioned it (to my knowledge) but like the one against H1N1 flu causing narcolepsy (http://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/history/narcolepsy-flu.html). This is proven facts. Vaccines are not a miracle drug. They can cause side effects.. Usually the side effects are insignificant, but still. Hiding facts are never a good idea. It causes more harm than not mentioning them. To my knowledge the narcolepsy side effect have had no deterrent effect on vaccines usage even with the big media coverage it got here.
ReplyDeleteDavid Westebbe Do that please.... Which of the candidates do you think Washington Post support? Which is why one should be really careful when reading media.
ReplyDeleteIn other words.. she is not an anti-vaxxer. She have multiple times talked about the good vaccine does. The claims that she is.. is unsubstantiated and at best taken from out of context.
ReplyDeleteDaniel Sandman When she's asked "what's your stance on vaccines?" she responds with a long diatribe on the role of the pharmaceutical industry in making and selling drugs. That's indirectly casting doubt on vaccines by insinuating that the way they're made is shady. What she SHOULD say is pretty much exactly what Bernie said/says: "Vaccines are great. Everyone should get vaccinated." End of story. With something as serious as population health, you don't make it political. That she's willing to do that means she's not serious about population health.
ReplyDeleteCraig Froehle What she say is... "Vaccines are great. Everyone should get vaccinated. We should also make them as safe as we can." Also.. it is not really she who make politics of it. It is the media and opponents who asks about this. You are welcome to point out where she makes politics of it... because it is not on her platform (http://www.jill2016.com/platform).
ReplyDeleteAnd yes, I liked Bernie better too (He actually also thinks the FDA is corrupt)... but if you compare HRC, Trump and Jill which are the ones still in the race... then Jill comes definitely on top.
Daniel Sandman Irrespective of the positions of these three candidates on vaccines, my greater concern is the House (GOP) reluctance to fund any health or science research (e.g., the current growing Zika Virus crisis). Also, any political Party that has in its platform that Anthropogenic Climate Change is a hoax needs to be feared.
ReplyDeleteHard to do!
ReplyDeleteDaniel Sandman Blaming the messenger (WaPo) is a bit ridicule, sorry.
ReplyDeleteShe made the choice to go with her base, just politics as usual.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/07/29/jill-stein-on-vaccines-people-have-real-questions/
It's just a bunch of excerpts. I want the full meat on the survey.
ReplyDeleteDaniel Sandman "There were concerns among physicians about what the vaccination schedule meant, the toxic substances like mercury which used to be rampant in vaccines. There were real questions that needed to be addressed. I think some of them at least have been addressed. I don’t know if all of them have been addressed."
ReplyDeletehttps://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/07/29/jill-stein-on-vaccines-people-have-real-questions/
Christian Nalletamby Um, David Westebbe was quoting Jill Stein, thereby illustrating what I was saying above -- her quaffling actually serves to empower the anti-vax crowd by so mildly casting doubt on vaccines as a whole, either due to their composition or the industry making them.
ReplyDeleteMore from Stein directly: ""We have a real compelling need for vaccinations," Stein said. "It requires an agency that we can trust to sort through all of those concerns. To assure the American public, whether it’s vaccinations, whether it’s administering estrogen to, you know, treat symptoms of menopause, or at one point it was the solution to prevent Alzheimer's and then it was discovered — oh, my goodness — it may actually contribute to Alzheimer's — it's really important that the American public have confidence in our regulatory boards so that all of our medical treatments and medications actually are approved by people who do not have a vested interest in their promotion."
ReplyDeleteBy casting doubt on the vaccine approval process, she's casting doubt on vaccines. While she says "vaccines are important," notice that she never, ever says "People should go get vaccinated if they can." THAT would be unequivocal, but she isn't willing to say that.
Also, it's interesting that a post about Trump's scientific ignorance has become a debate about Stein's scientific ignorance.
David Westebbe Whoopsie! My apologies :)
ReplyDeleteChristian Nalletamby It was "WaPo" who wanted her to explain which was my point. Both she and Bernie think FDA is corrupt. Bernie is a bit smarter when explaining it though.
ReplyDeleteCraig Froehle Yes, she explains that the FDA need some oversight and she are not wrong. Bernie also thinks the FDA is corrupt. This is not part of her political platform. She explains why she thinks FDA needs to be looked into. It is not just Big Pharma.. it is Monsanto and
So you would not support a candidate which have valid concerns of the FDA? You would rather support Hillary or Trump which is many many times worse?
Daniel Sandman I cannot support a candidate who panders to nutcases. Bullshit is one of the worst problems we have in today's world, and it is her stock in trade. We need clear thinking, and not bullshit.
ReplyDeleteI support most of her positions. But she is fatally defective to me because of the bullshit she spews on these fringe health concerns. She's a doctor, ffs. She knows better. She does it cynically and intentionally for her own gain.
Daniel Sandman I'll say this one last time in hopes you will finally try to understand my point instead of merely talking past it to reiterate your support for Stein (in which you will not convince me to join you): Her point that drug oversight should be done by a transparent, ethical agency free of conflicts of interest is true. But it is also self-evident and no one disagrees with her. It's like saying "Police shouldn't shoot innocent people." Obviously. But, she does that -- says something most people will agree with -- INSTEAD OF saying in no uncertain terms that people should get vaccinated. She has never said that publicly to my knowledge. Instead, she has said things like "vaccines are an important tool," but she's never denied the anti-vax conspiracy theorists and other quacks outright, and the responses she gives REPEATEDLY serve only to empower the anti-vax crowd rather than to educate them and/or shut them down. And that's unreasonable for someone who wants to be taken seriously as a candidate for the presidency.
ReplyDeleteSo, unless and until you have some reasonable source showing that she has, in fact, clearly refuted the anti-vaxxers in a public statement, I'm really not interested in hearing anything else you have to say on the subject.
Daniel Sandman Look, even if Stein wasn't antivaxx (and she is), she's worthless. She's unqualified and cannot win. This is not an election year where throwing your vote away in protest is a legitimate and moral option. We must choose between Clinton or Trump; if you don't vote for Clinton, you're helping Trump.
ReplyDeleteCraig Froehle Snopes also say that rumor is false (http://www.snopes.com/is-green-party-candidate-jill-stein-anti-vaccine/).. "As a medical doctor of course I support vaccinations. I have a problem with the FDA being controlled by drug companies." She is simply not an anti-vaxxer. That tweet pretty clearly refutes it publicly. It is maybe not the exact wording you wanted but pretty damn close. Jill Stein 2016 might now of a better one.
ReplyDeleteFor the record.. I am not really a supporter of Jill. I just see her as the better choice. I would much rather have seen Bernie still in the race.
This whole ordeal of Jill being an anti-vaxxer is being pushed and blown up by Hillary supporters. They wish to vote a crock in and need stuff to make the other candidates look bad.
Daniel Sandman She isn't anti-vax perse, but she clearly is pandering to the anti-vax crowd by not taking a firm and declarative position on the issue, instead justifying by repetition the two major arguments of antivaxxers: "Big-Pharma cha-ching," and "We can't be sure it's 100% safe."
ReplyDeleteNate McD She's antivaxx for all intents and purposes.
ReplyDeleteSteve S The best option is always to vote on the candidate who are closest to your own views. It is true it would be helping Trump but it is also the only way to help yourself. The only way to make change.
ReplyDeleteYou vote your ideology in the primaries, but if you lack the scruple to vote strategically in the general, you will never see your ideals achieved, you just get to drink your tears.
ReplyDeleteNate McD Yeah, you got some truth in that.. but on the other hand you have a somewhat corrupt DNC who makes sure "their" candidate wins.
ReplyDeleteDaniel Sandman Corrupt how? Corrupt compared to what? It takes no brains to say "both sides do it", no matter how false the equivalence claim is. It's cynical, it's dishonest, and it's the first bastion of moral cowards. You, my friend, suck as a human being.
ReplyDeleteIn the end, the People vote and chose, and are ultimately responsible.
ReplyDeleteWe can discuss a better selection process, where ideas and projects can be discussed, will not happen overnight, though, and needs more people participation.
Whoever is elected president has to take into account popular feelings and pressure, so the "programs" will still change.
Steve S You just made a pretty good argument for voting Jill.. What happened to Bernie and the DNC hacks made it pretty clear to me... and please grow up a bit and stop that name calling thing.
ReplyDeleteSteve S I think it is more important to not support corruption. You clearly have no issues with it... which is a bit sad to see.
ReplyDeleteSteve S No, It is not.
ReplyDeleteDaniel Sandman Even Sanders admits that it is.
ReplyDeleteSteve S You can never stop corruption by incentivize it.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteسلام خوبی
Animals and environment
ReplyDeleteWhen Trump says he wants to bring back all those dirty industry jobs and eliminate the EPA regulations to make America Great Again, what he really means is illustrated on the following map. sciencedaily.com - 92% of the world’s population exposed to unsafe levels of air pollution
ReplyDeleteIs he serious, and what about the other biggest countries economy
ReplyDeletemerci Annie Troch de m’avoir fait chercher le mot Ego, pour que je change la tournure de ma phrase de se texte !!
ReplyDeleteL'un de mes kinésithérapeutes m'a toujours dit que les problèmes, il faut les prendre à la base, c'est pour cette raison que nous devons demander au peuple du monde car, le problème de la surconsommation des uns et l'appauvrissement des autres est mondial, donc pour résoudre le problème, je demande l'aide des peuples du monde, par l'intermédiaire du WEB et de ...https://plus.Google.com/u/0/collection/MPotx
pour voir un changement pour notre future et nos futures générations !!
Namasté : plus.google.com - Google Translate - Google+
je fait de l'auto promotion pour mai différente collection,...https://plus.google.com/u/0/118333169852644676800/palette
tout est bon a partager, a effacer, si selon toi j'abuse !!
Eric Smith How are you doing today? And how is everything out there. I am Seidu Mariam by name and i would like you to send me a message through this email. Mel.mike30@yahoo.com for more information's about me
ReplyDeleteMac Baird How are you doing today? And how is everything out there. I am Seidu Mariam by name and i would like you to send me a message through this email. Mel.mike30@yahoo.com for more information's about me
ReplyDeleteParesh Desai How are you doing today? And how is everything out there. I am Seidu Mariam by name and i would like you to send me a message through this email. Mel.mike30@yahoo.com for more information's about me
ReplyDelete