More GREEN snake oil.

>> ^Lowen:

We know vaccines work because we checked to see if they work via scientific method. The results were and are very clear, so the medical community can say with certainty that they work and are not snake oil.
I challenge you to find this clarity, or even a consensus, similar to what vaccination enjoys with the medical profession, within the community of economic experts.

Let's turn this double standard right on around. I challenge you to find the level of clarity, or even a consensus, similar to what vaccination enjoys with the medical profession, within the community of economic experts, that says to believe these programs were effective is akin to believing that human sacrifice is effective.

>> ^Lowen:
They are not the same.
and, FYI my comment was a sarcastic remark, not a serious comparison.

Right, and when I responded to your hyperbole with my own, you dismissed it. You didn't present an argument, you just flapped your yap with completely unjustified smug certainty.

I'm certainly up to hashing through an in-depth debate of whether any of these programs did what they were supposed to, if you put forth an actual argument. But I'm going to treat a snide, off the cuff remark like a snide, off the cuff remark.

>> ^NetRunner:

>> ^Lowen:
>> ^NetRunner:
>> ^Lowen:
By the same logic Rachel uses, human sacrifice as practiced by the Aztec also worked.

By the same logic you're using, we should be deeply skeptical that vaccination works.

No, not really.

The logic Rachel is using is scientific method, established by experts in their respective fields. TARP did better than anyone ever dreamed it would. The stimulus created the number of jobs it was expected to, and health care reform is a massive improvement to the system on every front.
You're basing your comment on what logic, exactly? We did all this stuff, and nothing obviously good happened, therefore it must have had no effect?
Again, that logic implies you should be skeptical of vaccination. Nothing's wrong, they stick you with a needle, and then there's no apparent effect. Vaccines must be snake oil!


We know vaccines work because we checked to see if they work via scientific method. The results were and are very clear, so the medical community can say with certainty that they work and are not snake oil.

I challenge you to find this clarity, or even a consensus, similar to what vaccination enjoys with the medical profession, within the community of economic experts.

They are not the same.

and, FYI my comment was a sarcastic remark, not a serious comparison. However I stand by the point I was making. Even if you're right and we know that these programs actually worked, neither you nor Rachael offer any evidence for believing why they worked beyond saying that some experts believe so. While it's fine to start with expert opinions, it isn't enough to justify your smug certainty.

>> ^Lowen:

>> ^NetRunner:
>> ^Lowen:
By the same logic Rachel uses, human sacrifice as practiced by the Aztec also worked.

By the same logic you're using, we should be deeply skeptical that vaccination works.

No, not really.


The logic Rachel is using is scientific method, established by experts in their respective fields. TARP did better than anyone ever dreamed it would. The stimulus created the number of jobs it was expected to, and health care reform is a massive improvement to the system on every front.

You're basing your comment on what logic, exactly? We did all this stuff, and nothing obviously good happened, therefore it must have had no effect?

Again, that logic implies you should be skeptical of vaccination. Nothing's wrong, they stick you with a needle, and then there's no apparent effect. Vaccines must be snake oil!

I doubt any of us here are climatologists, but we are people. As people, we can expect people doing science on climate to not be entirely dissimilar to us. While they my process possess information regarding a particular area, they are not immune to the culture they live and work in. Quine talked about this a lot. That science doesn't evolve like the romantic picture that is painted. Rather, like pop culture, science shifts its entire focus from one foundational theory to another. Einstein doesn't extend Newton, it replaces it. Why do we not, rather, adapt the math of Newtonian physics to incorporate the data of relativity and keep the same mindset of forces instead of space time warps? Quines answer is that, like pop culture, a mans theory only lasts as long as he is around to extend it. Eventually, no matter if your theoretical construct was correct, if you aren't around to sort out the sometimes minor technicalities...your out. The people after you will eventually supplant your theory with something else more trendy. That science is subject to the same rules of the schoolyard as anything else. Peer review is more of a contest of popularity and not overall truth value.

As such, the very act of peer review is subject to the cultural perspective of the day. The moral and political climate of the day speaks volumes to what peer evaluated papers support or don't. Peer review is the best we have in science to approximate how we experience the universe, but it is not without its short comings. Let us not fall into the fallacy of authority, and majority in stating x group of people are more correct than y group opposed. Instead, judge things on merit of the argument.

To that end, I find that I am undecided on the whole debate. Moreover, I hesitate to put government in control of saving the environment...such was already their responsibility in the gulf. I don't want to live in a world of wrappers and smog, and to that end, I am motivated for cleaner technologies. Being wasteful has always felt somewhat despicable. To me, I remain skeptical of mans prowess of weather prediction. Year after year there is tail of "the worst hurricane season in history" that fails to show itself. If you say it enough I guess eventually it will be right, but that takes some of the wind out of the sails(har har har).

Furthermore, where is the data to support that global warming would even be bad? The only fact to the end that I am even familiar with is more extreme weather, and that dried up lake in Africa. I have lived next to lots dried up lakes and rivers...so that seems like more of a social disaster than an environmental one.

In the end, I feel like there is some snake oil salesmanship over the whole ordeal. I think we want to believe that we are the next greatest disaster. We will entwine any evidence into the web of belief . And ostracize anyone that deviates. We have always been at war with Eurasia, after all.

edited: grammar and spelling

Teachers, good teachers, emit a certain energy/aura, in my opinion. Snake oil salesmen/frauds/wanna-be celebrities, on the other hand, emit something entirely different. I don't want to generalize, but I really do believe you can sense someone's motivations behind their behaviors/actions.

And this guy, to me, seems like a narcissist who knowingly spouts rubbish because he likes being miced, being in front of the camera, and having a captive audience. A real teacher doesn't need a set and lights and a camera and an audience.

So, in summation: he's a manwhore.

Thanks for all the votes!!

Glad to know another that appreciates an oily forked tongue.. i was beginning to wonder if my obscure-but-good senses went way off target.

In reply to this comment by choggie:
snake oils what my blood run thick and shares capillaries with....all about snakes and oils and what not.....

snake oils what my blood run thick and shares capillaries with....all about snakes and oils and what not.....

Yes Men=snake oil servers,to the dishers

I did. Take it up with Wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_United_States_inventions

>> ^pmkierst:

Although the first liquid fuelled rocket was launched by an american, it was invented by a Russian.
I'm not sure about "inventing" heart transplants, but the first one was performed by a South African in South Africa.
The CD is harder to tell, because it was based on prior technology, but it would be likely attributed to Philips (Netherlands) or Sony (Japan)
Those are just a few I decided to fact check.
America has produced lots of innovations, but it would be nice if people could do at least a cursory investigation before attributing everything to it.

>> ^Farhad2000:

Americans will invent it?
Hahahahah!


Why is that funny?
Some good ones, in chronological order:
Suspension Bridge,Refrigeration,Morse code
Steam Shovel, Vulcanized Rubber, Motorcycle,
Phonograph, Cash Register, Solar Cell,
Photographic Film, Skyscrapers, Radio,
Zipper, Tractor, FINALLY coming to the 20th century...
Air conditioning, Airplane, AC plugs and sockets,
Supermarket, Liquid Fuel Rocket, Frozen Food,
Particle Accelerators, FM, Digital Computer
, Microwave Oven, Transistor,
Mobile Phone, Supersonic Aircraft, Video Games,
Cable TV, CPR, HDD,
Industrial Robots, Videotape, LASER,
Carbon Fiber, Weather Satellites, GPS,
Heart Transplant, Cordless Phones, CDs,
Airbags, Lunar Module, WAN, PCs,
Microprocessors, Floppy Disks, Email,
Digital Cameras, Ethernet, MRI,
BBS, Internet (not WWW), Space Telescope,
DVRs, Composite Aircraft...whew that was fun. Thanks for egging me on, troll, and if you use any of the above, thank an American!

What I like is how she can literally contradict herself in the same sentence and STILL people support her point of view.

Snake oil is the opposite of science people. SHE is the one selling anti-climate change snake oil. Are you just too dumb to realize that? Or do you think a global conspiracy of climate scientists with perfect secrecy and coordination is just pulling the wool over your eyes so they can continue to get funding (which all goes into further research by the way, not their own pockets).

And before you bring those debunked e-mails into it better go check your sources (and no, Glenn Beck is not a legitimate source).

>> ^quantumushroom:

And Snowmageddon.


I suspect you are confused as to the factors involved in extreme snow fall.

>> ^acidSpine:

What on Earth makes Palin think America can supply it's own energy demands, ...

You guy's refuse to build nuke power plants and let environmentalist nuts dictate energy policy. Point is valid. The US energy policy on anti-nuclear set back actual development in other high-form reactors by about 60 years.

>> ^Shepppard:

... snake oil salesmen were unscrupulous unintelligent morally deprived people who relied on their high amount of charisma to charm people into believing them and buying what they're putting out.
The most comparable thing to this isn't science, it's Sarah fucking Palin.

You mean like Gore? Or other environmentalists? The ol'BS meter is generally pegged on anything relating to climate "science", simply because of the amount of scientists who use it to get their funding for the year. Another 10 years and sanity will return, providing that idiots who follow it, don't drive us into global bankruptcy first.

>> ^Trancecoach:

if this woman isn't terrible, then the implications of her longevity on the public stage certainly is.


I'm going to throw out a small point which I will probably be bashed for later, but here goes...
Now I don't believe in or agree with anything Palin has to say but isn't putting a tag of "Terrible" extremely bias especially since it is invoked by only one person? I'm not arguing that she is not terrible I am simply remarking on the damage this does to videosift's integrity. I've seen many posts on the sift calling Fox News bias for telling their viewers how to think by preceding the video with bias remarks... isn't putting tags on videos such as this telling people how to feel before watching the clip the same exact thing?