jakee 1,489 #76 May 27, 2011 QuoteQuoteFreedom of information laws are used to harass scientists, says Nobel laureateSir Paul Nurse says climate scientists are being targeted by campaigns of requests designed to slow down their research Just to be sure you are not ignoring his statements I said 'in what way have I ignored or twisted it?' Simply reposting the quote you think is relevant is not an answer. Now, for the first time in this thread, would you like to actually back up one of your statements with some actual reasoning? In what way do you think I have ignored or twisted that quote?Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #77 May 27, 2011 QuoteHe is a not a climate scientist. Changing his job would not change anything for him, since HE is not being affected at this point. SO? He brought it up! He is the one being the baby All he needs to do is act like a grown up and deal with it or work or request to get it changed (which is seems like he is doing) He could have done it with out the tears and diaper however"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 23 #78 May 27, 2011 Quote Quote Quote Freedom of information laws are used to harass scientists, says Nobel laureateSir Paul Nurse says climate scientists are being targeted by campaigns of requests designed to slow down their research Just to be sure you are not ignoring his statements I said 'in what way have I ignored or twisted it?' Simply reposting the quote you think is relevant is not an answer. Now, for the first time in this thread, would you like to actually back up one of your statements with some actual reasoning? In what way do you think I have ignored or twisted that quote? I already have and It IS relevant because it is the opening line of the link!!! But the fucking hole you have dug is so deep you cant see your screw up anymoreYou playing the idiot is not going to get you an answer you like Seems some others need to grow up here too"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
jakee 1,489 #79 May 27, 2011 QuoteSO? SO why would him changing jobs have any effect on anything? QuoteAll he needs to do is act like a grown up and deal with it or work or request to get it changed (which is seems like he is doing) He could have done it with out the tears and diaper however Which part of what he said was delivered with tears and a diaper? Please, provide a quote from the article that you think was an example of crying. It seems that the problem that you have is that he mentioned it at all. So, ironically, it seems that you actually want him to keep secret the fact that he's asking for a review of the FOI laws that mean he can't keep anything a secret! Oh, and since you don't have any problem with him requesting a review of the freedom of information laws, perhaps you could explain how exactly he thinks he is above the law?Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,489 #80 May 27, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteFreedom of information laws are used to harass scientists, says Nobel laureateSir Paul Nurse says climate scientists are being targeted by campaigns of requests designed to slow down their research Just to be sure you are not ignoring his statements I said 'in what way have I ignored or twisted it?' Simply reposting the quote you think is relevant is not an answer. Now, for the first time in this thread, would you like to actually back up one of your statements with some actual reasoning? In what way do you think I have ignored or twisted that quote? I already have and It IS relevant because it is the opening line of the link!!! Sure it's relevant to the thread as a whole. It seems to be a brief, accurate synopsis of the article. But in what way do you think I have ignored or twisted it? How is it relevant as an example of my dastardly debating tactics? QuoteBut the fucking hole you have dug is so deep you cant see your screw up anymore Then explain it. What is my screw up? Go on rush, here's your chance to show me how clever you are. Explain it.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #81 May 27, 2011 QuoteSO? He brought it up! So you agree that changing his job would have no effect and hence you clearly just didn't understand the article. I am also pretty sure the tears and diapers weren't reflected in the article either. But then, we already established you didn't quite understand it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #82 May 27, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteThen why did you post something you knew to be untrue? Wrong. You: So all the scientists have to do is post all their papers on a web site, which anyone can access online, without them having to respond to each and every individual request. Simple, open, impossible to criticize. Article: "I have been told of some researchers who are getting lots of requests for, among other things, all drafts of scientific papers prior to their publication in journals, with annotations, explaining why changes were made between successive versions. See? Those requests would be denied under the FoI Act of 2000 due to a class based exemption for "information intended for future publication".Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,489 #83 May 27, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteThen why did you post something you knew to be untrue? Wrong. You: So all the scientists have to do is post all their papers on a web site, which anyone can access online, without them having to respond to each and every individual request. Simple, open, impossible to criticize. Article: "I have been told of some researchers who are getting lots of requests for, among other things, all drafts of scientific papers prior to their publication in journals, with annotations, explaining why changes were made between successive versions. See? Those requests would be denied under the FoI Act of 2000 due to a class based exemption for "information intended for future publication". Unless he's referring to preliminary drafts of papers that have been published. And I'm pretty sure that's what he's talking about. (And what the hell were you talking about in your previous post?)Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #84 May 27, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteThen why did you post something you knew to be untrue? Wrong. You: So all the scientists have to do is post all their papers on a web site, which anyone can access online, without them having to respond to each and every individual request. Simple, open, impossible to criticize. Article: "I have been told of some researchers who are getting lots of requests for, among other things, all drafts of scientific papers prior to their publication in journals, with annotations, explaining why changes were made between successive versions. See? Those requests would be denied under the FoI Act of 2000 due to a class based exemption for "information intended for future publication". Unless he's referring to preliminary drafts of papers that have been published. And I'm pretty sure that's what he's talking about. (And what the hell were you talking about in your previous post?) Once published, the information would be "accessible by other means", an absolute exemption under the Act.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,489 #85 May 27, 2011 Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote Then why did you post something you knew to be untrue? Wrong. You: So all the scientists have to do is post all their papers on a web site, which anyone can access online, without them having to respond to each and every individual request. Simple, open, impossible to criticize. Article: "I have been told of some researchers who are getting lots of requests for, among other things, all drafts of scientific papers prior to their publication in journals, with annotations, explaining why changes were made between successive versions. See? Those requests would be denied under the FoI Act of 2000 due to a class based exemption for "information intended for future publication". Unless he's referring to preliminary drafts of papers that have been published. And I'm pretty sure that's what he's talking about. (And what the hell were you talking about in your previous post?) Once published, the information would be "accessible by other means", an absolute exemption under the Act. [Sigh] Why do you have to make it so hard? Seriously? The preliminary drafts of the published final draft would not be published and 'accessible by other means' nor would they be 'intended for future publication' and nor would they already have the requested annotations. Capisce?(And seriously, the Guardian thing, what the fuck were you talking about?)Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #86 May 27, 2011 Quote [Sigh] Why do you have to make it so hard? Seriously? The preliminary drafts of the published final draft would not be published and 'accessible by other means' nor would they be 'intended for future publication' and nor would they already have the requested annotations. Capisce? Ok, I can see that angle of it. Is there any proof that the researcher in question actually had to release said papers? Quote (And seriously, the Guardian thing, what the fuck were you talking about?) "if you're going to pretend you didn't link to this article in a liberal UK newspaper because of it's frequent references to climate scientists" It was a sole source article - it's not like Nurse went to Reuters or the AP for worldwide distribution, so the inference that it was cherry-picked is bogus. Additionally, the article doesn't support climate skeptics - more of the quotes are in support of limiting access to research information that release of same, so the inference that the mean old Guardian is picking on the climate researchers again seems unfounded as well.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,489 #87 May 27, 2011 QuoteIt was a sole source article - it's not like Nurse went to Reuters or the AP for worldwide distribution, so the inference that it was cherry-picked is bogus. That was not the inference. Quite the opposite, in fact. Why would I think rush was searching out the Guardian's (again, a liberal UK newspaper) point of view on anything? Quoteso the inference that the mean old Guardian is picking on the climate researchers That was not the inference either. Why would the Guardian (again, a liberal UK newspaper) have an anti-climate science agenda? (Before you waded in did you stop to think for a second if your interpretation of my post made any sense whatsoever?) Quotemore of the quotes are in support of limiting access to research information that release of same, Disagree. The main interviewee's come out in favour of greater genuine transparency, but with a desire to address some unintended consequences of the current FOI Act.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #88 May 27, 2011 Congratulations. This thread wins the May 2011 award for Most Retarded Thread of the Month. P.S. in advance - I know you are, but what am I? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #89 May 27, 2011 Quote Congratulations. This thread wins the May 2011 award for Most Retarded Thread of the Month. P.S. in advance - I know you are, but what am I? It is well known what you are"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
Amazon 7 #90 May 27, 2011 QuoteCongratulations. This thread wins the May 2011 award for Most Retarded Thread of the Month. P.S. in advance - I know you are, but what am I? Now where did I put my argueing with a BOX OF ROCKS avatar when I really needed it. OH there is is. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
