Bin Laden and Al Gore are now two peas in a pod

Buzsaw writes:

quote:

---

According to the Wall Street Journal

---

First, your source wasn't the Wall Street Journal.Second, if the WSJ said it, chances are the exact opposite is true.Well, to be more accurate, the opinion page of the WSJ is notoriously inaccurate. The business section used to be fairly decent, but in the late 90s, it also began to go downhill in its attempt to become the Fox News of print. It routinely prints things that aren't true, fails to correct it, and then writes a second story based upon the falsehoods printed in the first story.So unless and until you can show the actual original story, I'm gonna have to call bullshit.For example, your article talks about the "rich oil reserves of Alaska."There are none. ANWR holds approximately six months-worth of oil at current US consumption rates. It would take more than a decade just to set up the equipment to start extracting it. This idea that if only we were allowed to "drill, baby, drill!" in Alaska and our energy problems would be greatly reduced if not cured is a lie.Similarly for Bloomberg. Your source was not Bloomberg. Until you can prove the actual source of the story, I call bullshit.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

---

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

Coyote writes:

quote:

---

OK, so let's put miles and miles of solar panels out in the deserts.

---

Huh? Who said anything about building them out in the desert? Why do we have to build them out in the desert? There's plenty of space in the urban areas we currently occupy that would handily accept solar panels. There's no reason that most every municipal building can't be set up to have solar panels installed and there should be heavy incetives to get private buildings to invest in them, too.Germany, for example, is one of the largest producers of solar energy in the world, and they don't get that much sunlight. Why? Because their (*gasp!*) socialist government set up incentives to do so and thus, a large percentage of buildings have solar panels.That isn't to say that there is nothing to be gained by building solar farms, but it is hardly a requirement.Hint: Carter had solar panels installed on the White House. One of the first acts Reagan did was to take them down. Imagine just how far along we would be in the development of solar power if Reagan had decided to run with the idea rather than denounce it as "liberal" science?

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

---

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

hooah212002 writes:

quote:

---

They're ugly.

---

Says who? You? Why should we believe you?And on a building that's so much taller than you, what makes you think you'd even see them?

quote:

---

Same with the reason for not wanting to put windmills along the east coast: "we don't want to see those gawdy things out of our beach front property window"

---

And we believe them why? The wind farm outside Palm Springs is beautiful. Especially at night when the warning lights start flashing.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

---

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

hooah212002 responds to me:

quote:

---

You're awful defensive.

---

Huh? Says who? You? Why should we believe you?Hint: You don't know my mental state. If you don't want me to take your comments as your personal statement, consider the possibility that I got it and that I am not responding directly to you.

quote:

---

I wasn't saying that's how I feel, I was saying that is what I have heard as the main complaint.

---

And I was responding with the same answer: Just because people claim that it's ugly doesn't mean it is. We should not coddle those who have some sort of mental block when it comes to changing our method of energy production.

quote:

---

But again, your rebuttal was misguided.

---

Not at all. I know those arguments. I've heard them before. Rather than let them simply rest, I presented the actual response that should be. Every time someone says, "But they're ugly!" the response is to say, "Says who?"In other words: Are we seriously saying that we should abandon our attempts at changing our method of energy production out of a sense of architectural aesthetics?Especially when such a claim is so purely subjective and quite often irrelevant since it will never actually be seen?

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

---

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.