"60 Scientists Debunk Global Warming Fears" means nothing to you, but if it said "60 Scientists against Bush policies" it would be gospell.
Whatever ;) On 8/8/07, Dana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > oh was there a point in all that? You lost me at "debunking" and > "alarmism." I'm trying again and getting stuck on "mainstream media > chooses to ignore..." > > But onward. > > Then there is is the disparaging "media darling" and > "sky-is-falling"... and "scare reports" and "concession." > > I am already turned off several times over in each sentence and this > is before I click a link. Do you ever read anything that doesn't have > this smirking undertone of "they are trying to pull a fast one but of > course we are smart enough to know better'? > > Seriously? > > I have my differences with Larry too but he has a point when it comes > to science. You cannot dispute peer-reviewed research using articles > written in that sort of emotionally charged normative language. You > can't. It's worse than trying to teach a pig to sing; that only annoys > the pig. > > Dana > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Enterprise web applications, build robust, secure scalable apps today - Try it now ColdFusion Today ColdFusion 8 beta - Build next generation apps Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:239767 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
