The Moderate Voice - Latest Comments in An Interesting Choice for NIH

Re: An Interesting Choice for NIH

DLS — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 18:54:28 -0000

"The GOP is not the least bit interested in science. ..."

As I was saying about that Big Lie. Believe all you wish...

Re: An Interesting Choice for NIH

MarianoApologeticus — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 16:15:43 -0000

There is some good info on Francis Collins at these links:

http://atheismisdead.blogspot.com/2009/04/john-...

http://atheismisdead.blogspot.com/2009/05/new-a...

Re: An Interesting Choice for NIH

DLS — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 13:54:28 -0000

"The GOP is not the least bit interested in science. ..."

As I was saying about that Big Lie. Believe all you wish...

Re: An Interesting Choice for NIH

Ken Ammi — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 11:15:43 -0000

There is some good info on Francis Collins at these links:

http://atheismisdead.blogsp...

Re: An Interesting Choice for NIH

Ryan — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 20:57:17 -0000

Give me a break. The GOP is not the least bit interested in science. The party is majority creationist, for FSM&#39s sake. Science has an annoying habit of exposing religious beliefs as utter nonsense, and most conservatives prefer the nonsense.

Re: An Interesting Choice for NIH

DLS — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 18:47:24 -0000

"all who believe in the existence of God are bigoted, closed-minded, or anti-science"

This is one current Big Lie of the Left (associated with hype and hatred of the Religions Right ), along with the general or broad corollary that they, the Left and the Dems, are the party of science, the Right and the GOP not, when in fatc the Left and the Dems are the party of emotion rather than logic, feelings foremost In some cases, they have politically tainted, tarnished, and corrupted science, such as in the case of global warming, which they have made into a politically and ideologically based dogmatic religion.

I just hope they don&#39t corrupt NIH. I actually hope they will engage in research instead, though I wonder where they&#39ll find the money to do it. (Or will they neglect the costs once more and pass them onward?)

Re: An Interesting Choice for NIH

DLS — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 18:42:54 -0000

I believe his scientific reputation (as opposed to, say, celebrity status, something we&#39d have to worry about with Team Obama appointments, the continued manipulation of public opinion among those they still presume to be susceptible) makes him a good choice. Moreover, what does that say or imply about future research that may be done by that body? Is there at least a commitment to it?

Re: An Interesting Choice for NIH

Ryan — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 15:57:17 -0000

Give me a break. The GOP is not the least bit interested in science. The party is majority creationist, for FSM's sake. Science has an annoying habit of exposing religious beliefs as utter nonsense, and most conservatives prefer the nonsense.

Re: An Interesting Choice for NIH

Ryan — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 15:19:11 -0000

Scientists use all sorts of tools on the job that they don&#39t take home with them. Apparently for Francis "Frozen waterfall, therefore Jesus" Collins, reason is just another one of those.

Re: An Interesting Choice for NIH

DLS — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 13:47:24 -0000

"all who believe in the existence of God are bigoted, closed-minded, or anti-science"

This is one current Big Lie of the Left (associated with hype and hatred of the Religions Right ), along with the general or broad corollary that they, the Left and the Dems, are the party of science, the Right and the GOP not, when in fatc the Left and the Dems are the party of emotion rather than logic, feelings foremost In some cases, they have politically tainted, tarnished, and corrupted science, such as in the case of global warming, which they have made into a politically and ideologically based dogmatic religion.

I just hope they don't corrupt NIH. I actually hope they will engage in research instead, though I wonder where they'll find the money to do it. (Or will they neglect the costs once more and pass them onward?)

Re: An Interesting Choice for NIH

DLS — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 13:42:54 -0000

I believe his scientific reputation (as opposed to, say, celebrity status, something we'd have to worry about with Team Obama appointments, the continued manipulation of public opinion among those they still presume to be susceptible) makes him a good choice. Moreover, what does that say or imply about future research that may be done by that body? Is there at least a commitment to it?

Re: An Interesting Choice for NIH

Ryan — Thu, 09 Jul 2009 10:19:11 -0000

Scientists use all sorts of tools on the job that they don't take home with them. Apparently for Francis "Frozen waterfall, therefore Jesus" Collins, reason is just another one of those.