Re: Biblical Archaeology ..

[X]

I didnt mean here..........although they probably get lots when being pushed to prescribe a product....dinners and what not

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424127887323455104579014812178937016?mg=reno64-wsj&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB10001424127887323455104579014812178937016.html

[Rockhopper]

If you want to convince me that what you say is true then you need to come up with much better info on how you come to the conclusions you do. Gut feelings don't come into the conversation, I need conclusive proof Mr. W. Otherwise it's just bullshit! I am quite happy to change my mind when I am supplied with solid, verifiable evidence.

I have asked you several times to name the rich and famous scientists that are around - to date nothing! Pure speculation.

If you have such a problem with science and technology then give it all up. Throw out your phone, your laptop, your car and any other vehicles. Buy your food in paper bags only. Do all of that then you can claim the moral high ground. Or live in a world with diphtheria, small pox, and other virulent diseases that kill you children and neighbours.

Of course scientists need to make a living just as you do, or do you believe that they must live on air and water? They have to pay their rent, power bills etc. just like the rest of us.

Like Ka, I won't be responding here anymore until I get the real info I have asked for.

Tim.

[X]

http://www.nbcchicago.com/investigations/doctors-prescription-drugs--207652001.html

[X]

http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/200209/25/eng20020925_103862.shtml

How to solve a problem in the scientific world?

http://www.americanscientist.org/bookshelf/pub/who-wants-to-be-a-millionaire

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/10142904/Multi-millionaire-computer-scientist-found-dead-in-waters-off-Bermuda.html

http://millionaireprofiler.com/sir-christopher-evans/

[X]

and i can add more

[X]

If you have such a problem with science and technology then give it all up. Throw out your phone, your laptop, your car and any other vehicles. Buy your food in paper bags only. Do all of that then you can claim the moral high ground. Or live in a world with diphtheria, small pox, and other virulent diseases that kill you children and neighbours.


Tim.

I believe I said in another thread that i am guilty as are scientists in putting money first instead of doing the t=right thing for the planet....and my island does too..in pesticide use and lots more.

I can admit

[Rockhopper]

As do I. Mr.W. you implied that ALL science is bad and profit motivated. Yet there are many things scientific that are not and have benefited humans and animals no end.

There are some things we have control over and some things we don't, wisdom is knowing the difference. I use scientific things all the time, the Solar Panels on my roof are an example, the car I drive, the tractor I drive. But I don't use pesticides or sprays. I use eco-paints where I can. I save freight miles by making as many parts as I can for all of my machinery.

I have a family of Hedgehogs that keep the grubs out of my vege garden.

Tim.

[Mordae]

Nice Tim, gotta love the spiky little chaps   

I disagree with your points. You are speculating as to why Banting did what he did, for all you know he had relatives who had diabetes and his motives were entirely altruistic. And perhaps in other parts of the world it's true but doctors here in Canada are not allowed to take drugs kickbacks and they do not bill the Province (their employer) for prescriptions written.

Good point Kaere. Here's another example:

In my spare time (hahaha!) I'm tinkering around with some ideas for a self contained energy system. As it stands atm, it'll take quite a few years (if not decades) to work out the theoretical kinks, and thats because I don't have the cash or time to invest in the materials until I'm certain I can generate a positive result. So my options are to find a wealthy backer to supply materials, support my family and pay my bills while I work on the project. In return they'll undoubtably want a return on investment...which would probably translate to patents/copyrights. Or I can keep on doing what I'm doing.

It's not really about intent, it's about getting the time and resources to spend on a project...and usually it means making a deal with those who may be less altrustic in order to get the work done.

[Rockhopper]

Yep Mordman. Snuffles got a little girlfriend last summer and now there are two more! Dog has learned that hedgehogs don't make a good basketball!

Mr. W. was stating that all science was crook when in fact, it's not. Some things would been better not developed but all too often we don't find that out until too late. Corexit is an example: the original developers wanted something to clean up oil spills and it wasn't until it was tried out that they found it to be destructive to the environment. There are some more like that. pesticides and weedicides are another. Glyphosate is really nasty and so is Neonicotin the systemic pesticide used to treat fleas on cats and dogs. It is used to kill off sap-suckers like aphids. yet the best way to get rid of aphids is a big family of Ladybirds and Katydids. They will munch through millions of the little sap suckers. Dishwashing liquid is good for getting rid of Mealy bugs and Starlings hammer Shield bugs.

Tim.

[X]

Oh blow it it out your arsehole....you know damn well I dont mean all scientists....

and just like im speculating on banting having greedy motives....you all are speculating just as much about what great individual he is because it has to do with the medical profession...therefore he must be angellic

[X]

Yep Mordman. Snuffles got a little girlfriend last summer and now there are two more! Dog has learned that hedgehogs don't make a good basketball!

Mr. W. was stating that all science was crook when in fact, it's not. Some things would been better not developed but all too often we don't find that out until too late. Corexit is an example: the original developers wanted something to clean up oil spills and it wasn't until it was tried out that they found it to be destructive to the environment. There are some more like that. pesticides and weedicides are another. Glyphosate is really nasty and so is Neonicotin the systemic pesticide used to treat fleas on cats and dogs. It is used to kill off sap-suckers like aphids. yet the best way to get rid of aphids is a big family of Ladybirds and Katydids. They will munch through millions of the little sap suckers. Dishwashing liquid is good for getting rid of Mealy bugs and Starlings hammer Shield bugs.

Tim.

scientist knew from the beginning how bad that stuff was...you are trying to make them look good

[Monk (in hiding)]

Nice tune....

[Agartha]

scientist knew from the beginning how bad that stuff was...you are trying to make them look good

Not scientists, SOME of them........let's go back to my main example, shall we?

Einstein developed his famous equation E=Mc. With that he developed the idea that if you split the nucleus of an atom with many neutrons, an incredible amount of energy would be released.....a chain reaction of splitting exploding atoms. He was thinking in terms of energy and that's what his work was about when the US army bought his work.....but where he saw energy, they saw the best bomb ever created.

Do we have to hate Einstein because of that? No.
Did he know they were going to create the atomic bomb with his work? no
Did he know they will then creat atomic energy and pollute and destroy with it?  No.

[Monk (in hiding)]

F.D. Roosevelt
President of the United States
White House
Washington, D.C.


Sir:

Some recent work by E. Fermi and L. Szilard, which has been communicated to me in manuscript, leads me to expect that the element uranium may be turned into a new and important source of energy in the immediate future. Certain aspects of the situation which has arisen seem to call for watchfulness and if necessary, quick action on the part of the Administration. I believe therefore that it is my duty to bring to your attention the following facts and recommendations.

In the course of the last four months it has been made probable through the work of Joliot in France as well as Fermi and Szilard in America--that it may be possible to set up a nuclear chain reaction in a large mass of uranium, by which vast amounts of power and large quantities of new radium-like elements would be generated. Now it appears almost certain that this could be achieved in the immediate future.

This new phenomenon would also lead to the construction of bombs, and it is conceivable--though much less certain--that extremely powerful bombs of this type may thus be constructed. A single bomb of this type, carried by boat and exploded in a port, might very well destroy the whole port together with some of the surrounding territory. However, such bombs might very well prove too heavy for transportion by air.

The United States has only very poor ores of uranium in moderate quantities. There is some good ore in Canada and former Czechoslovakia, while the most important source of uranium is in the Belgian Congo.

In view of this situation you may think it desirable to have some permanent contact maintained between the Administration and the group of physicists working on chain reactions in America. One possible way of achieving this might be for you to entrust the task with a person who has your confidence and who could perhaps serve in an unofficial capacity. His task might comprise the following:

a) to approach Government Departments, keep them informed of the further development, and put forward recommendations for Government action, giving particular attention to the problem of securing a supply of uranium ore for the United States.

b) to speed up the experimental work, which is at present being carried on within the limits of the budgets of University laboratories, by providing funds, if such funds be required, through his contacts with private persons who are willing to make contributions for this cause, and perhaps also by obtaining co-operation of industrial laboratories which have necessary equipment.

I understand that Germany has actually stopped the sale of uranium from the Czechoslovakian mines which she has taken over. That she should have taken such early action might perhaps be understood on the ground that the son of the German Under-Secretary of State, von Weizsacker, is attached to the Kaiser-Wilhelm Institute in Berlin, where some of the American work on uranium is now being repeated.


Yours very truly,


Albert Einstein

[Agartha]

It was a warning, VM......a warning that the Germans may build a bomb.....read the letter.

[X]

scientist knew from the beginning how bad that stuff was...you are trying to make them look good

Not scientists, SOME of them........let's go back to my main example, shall we?

Einstein developed his famous equation E=Mc. With that he developed the idea that if you split the nucleus of an atom with many neutrons, an incredible amount of energy would be released.....a chain reaction of splitting exploding atoms. He was thinking in terms of energy and that's what his work was about when the US army bought his work.....but where he saw energy, they saw the best bomb ever created.

Do we have to hate Einstein because of that? No.
Did he know they were going to create the atomic bomb with his work? no
Did he know they will then creat atomic energy and pollute and destroy with it?  No.

Einstein fully knew that the energy source he came up with when compressed and let out instantly would cause major destruction...he sold out for bucks

[X]

It was a warning, VM......a warning that the Germans may build a bomb.....read the letter.

a warning that our scientist should pick up the pace and create destruction first

[Monk (in hiding)]

It was a warning, VM......a warning that the Germans may build a bomb.....read the letter.

a warning that our scientist should pick up the pace and create destruction first

lsol - 'Operation Paperclip'

[Rockhopper]

It was a warning, VM......a warning that the Germans may build a bomb.....read the letter.

a warning that our scientist should pick up the pace and create destruction first

It's called "At war" Mr.W. perhaps you have heard of that?

Barnes Wallis developed the "Bouncing Bomb" to destroy the Nazi's Hydro Stations too. The destruction of them drowned many people further downstream. The destruction of those damns shortened the war by destroying much of the Nazi war production.

Einstein, Rutherford, et al. worked on finding out how much energy is stored in an atom. They didn't do it to make bombs, that was a corruption of the science later.

We could all go back to living in caves where life, was hard, brutal and short or we can use science to improve our lives.

You use the benefits of science every day as do I. The complaint that it's all profit driven is the fault of science but of the economic/political times we live in.

Tim.

[X]

"at war" Is an on going excuse....for why we did It.....still used today

war mongers...

[Sponsored content]