kallend 1,647 #76 September 26, 2007 Quote Quote What exactly does this have to do with government gags on US scientists, which IS the topic of this thread? Just another lame attempt at distraction? And your last three posts were on topic??? You crack me up. Here, let me try one of your recent tactics - You started it!!!Anyway, who gives a shit if our scientists are a humorless lot? Why is it OK if Exxon pays scientists to write articles debunking GW, but not OK if Soros funds a scientist to present the opposite view? BTW, Clinton got a BJ, before you bring that up.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #77 September 27, 2007 QuoteWhy is it OK if Exxon pays scientists to write articles debunking GW, but not OK if Soros funds a scientist to present the opposite view? I don't know, why? To me, either situation is pretty sleazy. Also, saying it's okay for your guy to act in a sleazy manner because the opposition seems to be doing it, is pretty low brow. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,647 #78 September 27, 2007 QuoteQuoteWhy is it OK if Exxon pays scientists to write articles debunking GW, but not OK if Soros funds a scientist to present the opposite view? I don't know, why? To me, either situation is pretty sleazy. Also, saying it's okay for your guy to act in a sleazy manner because the opposition seems to be doing it, is pretty low brow. Ummm - who is this "your guy"? I don't have a guy. I'm objecting to the government's gag (read the thread title).... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #79 September 27, 2007 Quote Quote Quote Why is it OK if Exxon pays scientists to write articles debunking GW, but not OK if Soros funds a scientist to present the opposite view? I don't know, why? To me, either situation is pretty sleazy. Also, saying it's okay for your guy to act in a sleazy manner because the opposition seems to be doing it, is pretty low brow. Ummm - who is this "your guy"? I don't have a guy. I'm objecting to the government's gag (read the thread title). By asking "Why is it OK if Exxon pays scientists to write articles debunking GW, but not OK if Soros funds a scientist to present the opposite view?"? How does this apply to governmental gag orders? Try to keep up. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,647 #80 September 27, 2007 Quote Quote Quote Quote Why is it OK if Exxon pays scientists to write articles debunking GW, but not OK if Soros funds a scientist to present the opposite view? I don't know, why? To me, either situation is pretty sleazy. Also, saying it's okay for your guy to act in a sleazy manner because the opposition seems to be doing it, is pretty low brow. Ummm - who is this "your guy"? I don't have a guy. I'm objecting to the government's gag (read the thread title). By asking "Why is it OK if Exxon pays scientists to write articles debunking GW, but not OK if Soros funds a scientist to present the opposite view?"? How does this apply to governmental gag orders? Try to keep up. Because every time I try to get back on topic, you drag it off to the funding issue. Try to stay on topic, will you... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #81 September 27, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteWhy is it OK if Exxon pays scientists to write articles debunking GW, but not OK if Soros funds a scientist to present the opposite view? I don't know, why? To me, either situation is pretty sleazy. Also, saying it's okay for your guy to act in a sleazy manner because the opposition seems to be doing it, is pretty low brow. Ummm - who is this "your guy"? I don't have a guy. I'm objecting to the government's gag (read the thread title). I appears your point was largley in error and, has the gagee has some very questionable funding!"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pirana 0 #82 September 27, 2007 QuoteIn the end I can make any data set return a result you request. All right then. Here is my dataset: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 The result I want is that a faulty and highly politicized system of inspections resulted in the I35W bridge collapse. Make the data support my result." . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #83 September 27, 2007 QuoteBecause every time I try to get back on topic, you drag it off to the funding issue. What a load of crap. Go back and look at the last two pages. Mixed in with missing the point and changing the subject numerous times, you made a few statements about getting back to the OP topic. They ring pretty hollow. Here's some free advice - if you really want to get a discussion back on topic, don't fuel off topic subjects. It's basic stuff, but I'd thought I'd offer it, just in case... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,647 #84 September 27, 2007 Quote Quote Because every time I try to get back on topic, you drag it off to the funding issue. What a load of crap. Go back and look at the last two pages. Mixed in with missing the point and changing the subject numerous times, you made a few statements about getting back to the OP topic. They ring pretty hollow. Here's some free advice - if you really want to get a discussion back on topic, don't fuel off topic subjects. It's basic stuff, but I'd thought I'd offer it, just in case... Based on your posting history, that advice will come back to haunt you.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #85 September 27, 2007 NASA’s Hansen Mentioned in Soros Foundations Annual Report By Noel Sheppard | September 26, 2007 - 17:51 ET As NewsBuster Jake Gontesky reported, an editorial in Investor's Business Daily Monday claimed one of billionaire leftist George Soros's foundations gave $720,000 in 2006 to the head of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, James Hansen. Since this editorial was published, according to LexisNexis and Google News searches, not one major media outlet has reported these allegations. Maybe even more shocking is that had press outlets looked into this matter - you know, acted like journalists instead of advocates! - they would have found Hansen's name prominently mentioned in the 2006 Soros Foundations Network Report (relevant section on page 123): AdvertisementScientist Protests NASA's Censorship Attempts James E. Hansen, the director of the Goddard Institute for Space Studies at NASA, protested attempts to silence him after officials at NASA ordered him to refer press inquiries to the public affairs office and required the presence of a public affairs representative at any interview. The Government Accountability Project, a whistleblower protection organization and OSI grantee, came to Hansen's defense by providing legal and media advice. The campaign on Hansen's behalf resulted in a decision by NASA to revisit its media policy. Fascinating, wouldn't you agree? Here, in Soros Foundations' annual report, is a direct connection to Hansen, along with an admission that "The campaign on Hansen's behalf resulted in a decision by NASA to revisit its media policy." As is typical, a global warming obsessed media don't find this newsworthy. Think they'd be so disinterested if this smoking gun involved an oil company giving money to a Republican official? While you ponder, forward to page 143 (emphasis added): note: The Strategic Opportunities Fund includes grants related to Hurricane Katrina ($1,652,841); media policy ($1,060,000); and politicization of science ($720,000). Add it all up, and everything the IBD editorial claimed - that a high-ranking official at NASA may have received money from an organization funded by George Soros in order to politicize science -- is actually available in this annual report. Yet, not one media outlet thought this was newsworthy. How disgraceful."America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,647 #86 September 27, 2007 Follow NCclimber's advice and stick to the original topic, or start a new thread of your own. ... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 622 #87 September 27, 2007 maybe even more shocking is his participation in adjusting historical climate temperatures to support his GHG position but of course he says these adjustments are "invisible"...so maybe they're less likely to listen to his theories with his adjustments to support them...I'm not sure that Hansen has been a trustworthy source and whistle blower protection doesn't protect authenticity you know. it's just a thought... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #88 September 27, 2007 Quote Follow NCclimber's advice and stick to the original topic, or start a new thread of your own. Cant take the heat huh............ Looks like the cental point/person of your thread has been discredited............even before this info came out"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #89 September 27, 2007 Quotemaybe even more shocking is his participation in adjusting historical climate temperatures to support his GHG position but of course he says these adjustments are "invisible"...so maybe they're less likely to listen to his theories with his adjustments to support them...I'm not sure that Hansen has been a trustworthy source and whistle blower protection doesn't protect authenticity you know. it's just a thought... He "was" the Cindy Shehan of the get Bush GWing alarmists agenda. I doubt much more will be heard of or from him now"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #90 September 27, 2007 Quote Quote Quote Because every time I try to get back on topic, you drag it off to the funding issue. What a load of crap. Go back and look at the last two pages. Mixed in with missing the point and changing the subject numerous times, you made a few statements about getting back to the OP topic. They ring pretty hollow. Here's some free advice - if you really want to get a discussion back on topic, don't fuel off topic subjects. It's basic stuff, but I'd thought I'd offer it, just in case... Based on your posting history, that advice will come back to haunt you. If you say so Doctor Kallend. Is this another one of your attempts to get back on topic? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,647 #91 September 27, 2007 Quote Quote Follow NCclimber's advice and stick to the original topic, or start a new thread of your own. Cant take the heat huh............ Looks like the cental point/person of your thread has been discredited............even before this info came out You could always try READING the OP. The central person are a woman called Janet Hohn and a man called Craig Perham. You are clearly in the wrong thread here. "The memos concern trips to be made by Janet Hohn, who is scheduled to accompany a delegation to Norway led by Julia Gourley of the State Department at a meeting on conserving Arctic animals and plants; and Craig Perham, a biologist attending a meeting in Russia about how to minimize dangerous interactions between humans and polar bears. Tina Kreisher, a spokeswoman for the Interior Department, parent of the Fish and Wildlife Service, said the policy did not prohibit Hohn from talking about climate change "over a beer" but indicated that climate was "not the subject of the agenda." The other employee, Perham, specializes in polar bears. He was invited by the World Wildlife Fund to help advise villagers along the Siberian coast on avoiding encounters with the bears, according to Margaret Williams, director of the WWF's Bering Sea Program."... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,647 #92 September 27, 2007 Quote Quote Quote Quote Because every time I try to get back on topic, you drag it off to the funding issue. What a load of crap. Go back and look at the last two pages. Mixed in with missing the point and changing the subject numerous times, you made a few statements about getting back to the OP topic. They ring pretty hollow. Here's some free advice - if you really want to get a discussion back on topic, don't fuel off topic subjects. It's basic stuff, but I'd thought I'd offer it, just in case... Based on your posting history, that advice will come back to haunt you. If you say so Doctor Kallend. Is this another one of your attempts to get back on topic? Try to stay on topic, will you.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #93 September 27, 2007 Quote Quote Quote Follow NCclimber's advice and stick to the original topic, or start a new thread of your own. Cant take the heat huh............ Looks like the cental point/person of your thread has been discredited............even before this info came out You could always try READING the OP. The central person are a woman called Janet Hohn and a man called Craig Perham. You are clearly in the wrong thread here. "The memos concern trips to be made by Janet Hohn, who is scheduled to accompany a delegation to Norway led by Julia Gourley of the State Department at a meeting on conserving Arctic animals and plants; and Craig Perham, a biologist attending a meeting in Russia about how to minimize dangerous interactions between humans and polar bears. Tina Kreisher, a spokeswoman for the Interior Department, parent of the Fish and Wildlife Service, said the policy did not prohibit Hohn from talking about climate change "over a beer" but indicated that climate was "not the subject of the agenda." The other employee, Perham, specializes in polar bears. He was invited by the World Wildlife Fund to help advise villagers along the Siberian coast on avoiding encounters with the bears, according to Margaret Williams, director of the WWF's Bering Sea Program." ah yes, you are correct although the stories these people were putting out have been largley discredited too. Oh well......"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #94 September 27, 2007 Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Because every time I try to get back on topic, you drag it off to the funding issue. What a load of crap. Go back and look at the last two pages. Mixed in with missing the point and changing the subject numerous times, you made a few statements about getting back to the OP topic. They ring pretty hollow. Here's some free advice - if you really want to get a discussion back on topic, don't fuel off topic subjects. It's basic stuff, but I'd thought I'd offer it, just in case... Based on your posting history, that advice will come back to haunt you. If you say so Doctor Kallend. Is this another one of your attempts to get back on topic? Try to stay on topic, will you. Isn't that the OP is about - STAYING ON TOPIC! ? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,647 #95 September 27, 2007 Quote Quote Quote Quote Follow NCclimber's advice and stick to the original topic, or start a new thread of your own. Cant take the heat huh............ Looks like the cental point/person of your thread has been discredited............even before this info came out You could always try READING the OP. The central person are a woman called Janet Hohn and a man called Craig Perham. You are clearly in the wrong thread here. "The memos concern trips to be made by Janet Hohn, who is scheduled to accompany a delegation to Norway led by Julia Gourley of the State Department at a meeting on conserving Arctic animals and plants; and Craig Perham, a biologist attending a meeting in Russia about how to minimize dangerous interactions between humans and polar bears. Tina Kreisher, a spokeswoman for the Interior Department, parent of the Fish and Wildlife Service, said the policy did not prohibit Hohn from talking about climate change "over a beer" but indicated that climate was "not the subject of the agenda." The other employee, Perham, specializes in polar bears. He was invited by the World Wildlife Fund to help advise villagers along the Siberian coast on avoiding encounters with the bears, according to Margaret Williams, director of the WWF's Bering Sea Program." ah yes, you are correct Yes, I am. Thank you.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #96 September 27, 2007 Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Follow NCclimber's advice and stick to the original topic, or start a new thread of your own. Cant take the heat huh............ Looks like the cental point/person of your thread has been discredited............even before this info came out You could always try READING the OP. The central person are a woman called Janet Hohn and a man called Craig Perham. You are clearly in the wrong thread here. "The memos concern trips to be made by Janet Hohn, who is scheduled to accompany a delegation to Norway led by Julia Gourley of the State Department at a meeting on conserving Arctic animals and plants; and Craig Perham, a biologist attending a meeting in Russia about how to minimize dangerous interactions between humans and polar bears. Tina Kreisher, a spokeswoman for the Interior Department, parent of the Fish and Wildlife Service, said the policy did not prohibit Hohn from talking about climate change "over a beer" but indicated that climate was "not the subject of the agenda." The other employee, Perham, specializes in polar bears. He was invited by the World Wildlife Fund to help advise villagers along the Siberian coast on avoiding encounters with the bears, according to Margaret Williams, director of the WWF's Bering Sea Program." ah yes, you are correct Yes, I am. Thank you. Nice arrogant cherry pick"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
