It is currently Fri May 24, 2013 6:42 am

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 569 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: The Mail vs Science!
PostPosted: Sun Mar 18, 2012 1:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 2:51 pm
Posts: 1439
:lol: :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mail vs Science!
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2012 8:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2011 11:00 am
Posts: 6732
Location: Time Vortex
Quote:
This really is space junk: Russian space experts examine 200-kilo metal 'UFO dustbin lid' which fell from the sky in Siberia
Six foot metal fragment fell near remote village in Siberia
Does not appear to be from earthly missiles or rockets
Russian space experts say, 'The object is not related to space technology'
Under police guard as experts examine it

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... z1pmTvtq51

_________________
Sick Left-wing Zealot.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mail vs Science!
PostPosted: Thu Mar 22, 2012 2:52 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2008 1:30 am
Posts: 5233
Location: Hearing Banjo Music...
UFOs have dustbin lids?

_________________
You may say I'm a dreamer.... but I'm not the only one....


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mail vs Science!
PostPosted: Thu Mar 22, 2012 9:53 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2011 11:00 am
Posts: 6732
Location: Time Vortex
Yes. They are fly tipping because of fortnightly collections.

_________________
Sick Left-wing Zealot.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mail vs Science!
PostPosted: Thu Jun 07, 2012 10:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2008 1:30 am
Posts: 5233
Location: Hearing Banjo Music...
The mail and Celsius to Fahrenheit conversion

Image

Did they forget to add 32?

_________________
You may say I'm a dreamer.... but I'm not the only one....


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mail vs Science!
PostPosted: Fri Jun 08, 2012 12:24 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2009 3:14 pm
Posts: 3168
At it again with some more bad science. This really is a disgrace, exploiting this guy's death to push their anti NHS/NICE agenda.

Former soldier who took on NHS bosses in fight to get life-saving drug dies of terminal cancer aged 37

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/artic ... ed-37.html

Life saving? I must have missed a memo. I didn't realise the cure for cancer had finally been found. Let me read on and check this out.
Quote:
A former soldier who bravely took on penny-pinching NHS bosses in his fight to get a drug that could save his life has died of terminal cancer aged 37.
A bit less certainty, with a 'could', but the nevertheless, "could" save his life.
Quote:
Wife Karen, 33, revealed how her husband was forced to lie to doctors to get hold of the life-prolonging treatment that had been denied to him because of a cruel postcode lottery.
Ah, so by paragraph three Avastin has been downgraded from "life saving" to "life prolonging". :roll:

I know I've referred to this before, but here are some facts from Dr. Ben Goldacre.

Quote:
This drug has been studied in a large randomised trial of 1401 patients receiving either chemotherapy with Avastin, or chemotherapy with placebo.

The trial isn’t perfect – no trial is, you can read the details online - but it gives the best estimate of the true benefit of this drug, and overall, it shows that Avastin extends survival from 19.9 months to 21.3 months, which is about 6 weeks. Some people might benefit more, some less. For some, Avastin might even shorten their life, and they would have been better off without it (and without its additional side effects, on top of their other chemotherapy). But overall, on average, when added to all the other treatments, Avastin extends survival from 19.9 months to 21.3 months. http://www.badscience.net/2010/08/in-pr ... anecdotes/
Quote:
Rationing healthcare resources is a soul-destroying and unavoidable horror, in which some people who are dearly loved will always die, and this makes it an irresistible magnet for questionable behaviour from people who are happy to release themselves from the burden of being realistic about difficult decisions.

Journalists can exploit these impossible decisions for outrage, and the pleasure of leading a popular campaign, but so can politicians: the Conservatives in opposition even invented a £50m fund to pay for the drugs that will save your life, in a scheme that is no more realistic than Barbara Moss’s* unrepresentative anecdote. With drugs that cost £21,000 per person, your £50m will buy you precisely 2,381 patients on Avastin living an extra 6 weeks, and then it’s gone forever. http://www.badscience.net/2010/08/in-pr ... anecdotes/


*see http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/artic ... ation.html


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mail vs Science!
PostPosted: Wed Jul 04, 2012 7:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2010 1:42 pm
Posts: 1626

Exxon CEO blames 'illiterate' public for 'overreacting' to global warming


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z1zdMA4Vr1

Oil industry shill = PROOF!!!1!

Scientific consensus = conspiracy

The stupid is strong in this one with the commentards out in force -

Quote:
He is 100% correct. Faux scientists, whom live off government grant money (academic welfare benefit), are trying to keep the myth/hoax alive. Al Gore is a phony and his fear mongering is based upon myth.
- Laurence of Pewsey, , Pewsey, WILTS UK, 3/7/2012 21:12


Can we add faux to good, bad and mad scientists?


Quote:
It has been shown by weather scientists that the gulf stream not performing as normal is the reason for the heat in USA and the dismal summer in UK. Al Gore has become a multi millionaire by being an eco warrior and I predict in some 10 years time we will have enough information to be able to destroy his "unacceptable truth"
- Colin, Wolverhampton, 3/7/2012 22:41


Colin, I salute you. It is not global warming it is the Gulf Stream misbehaving, wonderful logic and now if you could just enlighten me on what is causing the Gulf Stream to misbehave I am sure we can blow this myth out of the water...

_________________
I'd rather shoot Paul Dacre than anyone else in the country- Colin Dexter. A direct quote from the Radio Times m'learned friends


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mail vs Science!
PostPosted: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 09, 2010 11:56 am
Posts: 186
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... ience.html

Plenty of comments along the lines of, "I don't understand this, so it's worthless."


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mail vs Science!
PostPosted: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 26, 2009 11:46 pm
Posts: 23054
Location: In la France profonde, without personal transport...
Quote:
people believes are generally very strong and this amasing diskovery i feer will cause un rest on those who belief in other gods and religions. we have too push sience forward but have too also be very carefull that we dont end up in another world war

- Sue Previsor, Doncaster (HSE)


I'm not convinced Sue has really got it.

A complete moron wrote:
And will this stop world hunger and poverty? No i thought not..

- rsaviour, london,


A real bollockbrain wrote:
Now after the billions spent on scientists' dreams - now they think they have found it, what will they do with it ? Experiment, and ruin the world ??? Isn't this really a massive ego trip for the 'brains' ????

- J U Stanopinion, Doun souf


And there always has to be
A canadian numpty wrote:
If all the energy and money that went into this discovery was spent on coming up with the cure for cancer, I would be truly impressed.
- Mary, Scarborough, Ontario, Canada


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mail vs Science!
PostPosted: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 1:39 pm
Posts: 5999
Location: That London
Some of the commenters seem to have been beamed directly from the middle ages. Actually I do the middle ages a disservice - people then at least believed in things they couldn't actually see.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mail vs Science!
PostPosted: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2008 5:05 pm
Posts: 2466
Location: hove
Malcolm Armsteen wrote:
And there always has to be
A canadian numpty wrote:
If all the energy and money that went into this discovery was spent on coming up with the cure for cancer, I would be truly impressed.
- Mary, Scarborough, Ontario, Canada


considering one of the offshoots of the equipment which was originally developed for CERN and their experiments is the mri machine, they've actually done quite a bit to help with cancer treatment mary.

_________________
i have an art blog: http://procrastinationathon.blogspot.com/
and a review blog: http://blindwithwoodenhands.blogspot.com/
double blog! what does it mean?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mail vs Science!
PostPosted: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 5:49 pm
Posts: 10513
Location: Durham
Malcolm Armsteen wrote:
Quote:
people believes are generally very strong and this amasing diskovery i feer will cause un rest on those who belief in other gods and religions. we have too push sience forward but have too also be very carefull that we dont end up in another world war

- Sue Previsor, Doncaster (HSE)


I'm not convinced Sue has really got it.



Extraordinary spelling by Sue, really extraordinary. I'm very familiar with bad spelling, but there are mistakes there which I've not seen before. That, coupled with the fact that she appears to be trying to convince us that she works for the HSE, lead me to ask if she might be a parody.

_________________
That subtle admixture of the absurd and the surreally plausible...


Last edited by oboogie on Wed Jul 04, 2012 5:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mail vs Science!
PostPosted: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2008 10:32 pm
Posts: 233
This brings out two very nasty sides. One from the people who decide to write off science as quackery simply because they don't want to believe in it and others who try to use this as a blanket insult towards all people of a religious or spiritual persuasion.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mail vs Science!
PostPosted: Wed Jul 04, 2012 5:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2010 1:42 pm
Posts: 1626
Sue has been flagged up here before, always reads like an attempt to collect red arrows, hence the (HSE).

_________________
I'd rather shoot Paul Dacre than anyone else in the country- Colin Dexter. A direct quote from the Radio Times m'learned friends


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The Mail vs Science!
PostPosted: Wed Jul 04, 2012 5:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 5:49 pm
Posts: 10513
Location: Durham
SoulBoy wrote:
Sue has been flagged up here before, always reads like an attempt to collect red arrows, hence the (HSE).

Ah, she must have slipped under my radar. Thank you.

_________________
That subtle admixture of the absurd and the surreally plausible...


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 569 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group