America's First Freedom -Totally free and informative new Magazine from the NRA . CLICK HERE for direct access.
March 19, 2014
3/19/2014 07:37:00 AM
No comments
America's First Freedom -Totally free and informative new Magazine from the NRA . CLICK HERE for direct access.
3/19/2014 07:23:00 AM
No comments
If Lawrence Torcello, an assistant philosophy professor at Rochester Institute of Technology, had his way, people who disagree with him about global warming would be thrown in jail, the Daily Caller reported Monday.
"When it comes to global warming, much of the public remains in denial about a set of facts that the majority of scientists clearly agree on. With such high stakes, an organised (sic) campaign funding misinformation ought to be considered criminally negligent," he wrote last week at The Conversation.
According to Torcello, there are times when criminal negligence and what he calls “science misinformation” must be linked.
Global warming -- or "climate change" as it is referred to now -- is one of those times, he argues.
He cited a case in Italy where six scientists and a local defense minister were accused of providing “inexact, incomplete and contradictory information" and imprisoned for six years each because they failed to “clearly communicate risks to the public” about living in an earthquake zone.
The 2009 earthquake in L'Aquila, Torcello said, left 300 people dead and nearly 66,000 people homeless.
"I don’t believe poor scientific communication should be criminalised (sic) because doing so will likely discourage scientists from engaging with the public at all," he wrote, but added that "scientists have the corollary obligation to correct public misinformation as visibly and unequivocally as possible."
He then goes on to argue that those who do not believe in the dogma of man-made climate change are part of a well-funded campaign.
"Indeed, public uncertainty regarding climate science, and the resulting failure to respond to climate change, is the intentional aim of politically and financially motivated denialists," he wrote.
He also claimed that concerns regarding free speech are "misguided" and essentially argues that those who seek to provide another point of view on the subject should not be allowed to voice their opinions, since doing so "stretches the definition of free speech to a degree that undermines the very concept."
"We have good reason to consider the funding of climate denial to be criminally and morally negligent. The charge of criminal and moral negligence ought to extend to all activities of the climate deniers who receive funding as part of a sustained campaign to undermine the public’s understanding of scientific consensus," he said, concluding with a call for societies to "interpret and update their legal systems accordingly."
Translation: Think as I tell you or go to jail.
Eric Owens noted that on the day Torcello's article was published, the high temperature in Rochester, N.Y., the city where his college is located, was 18 degrees Fahrenheit.
Source: examiner.com
"When it comes to global warming, much of the public remains in denial about a set of facts that the majority of scientists clearly agree on. With such high stakes, an organised (sic) campaign funding misinformation ought to be considered criminally negligent," he wrote last week at The Conversation.According to Torcello, there are times when criminal negligence and what he calls “science misinformation” must be linked.
Global warming -- or "climate change" as it is referred to now -- is one of those times, he argues.
He cited a case in Italy where six scientists and a local defense minister were accused of providing “inexact, incomplete and contradictory information" and imprisoned for six years each because they failed to “clearly communicate risks to the public” about living in an earthquake zone.
The 2009 earthquake in L'Aquila, Torcello said, left 300 people dead and nearly 66,000 people homeless.
"I don’t believe poor scientific communication should be criminalised (sic) because doing so will likely discourage scientists from engaging with the public at all," he wrote, but added that "scientists have the corollary obligation to correct public misinformation as visibly and unequivocally as possible."
He then goes on to argue that those who do not believe in the dogma of man-made climate change are part of a well-funded campaign.
"Indeed, public uncertainty regarding climate science, and the resulting failure to respond to climate change, is the intentional aim of politically and financially motivated denialists," he wrote.
He also claimed that concerns regarding free speech are "misguided" and essentially argues that those who seek to provide another point of view on the subject should not be allowed to voice their opinions, since doing so "stretches the definition of free speech to a degree that undermines the very concept."
"We have good reason to consider the funding of climate denial to be criminally and morally negligent. The charge of criminal and moral negligence ought to extend to all activities of the climate deniers who receive funding as part of a sustained campaign to undermine the public’s understanding of scientific consensus," he said, concluding with a call for societies to "interpret and update their legal systems accordingly."
Translation: Think as I tell you or go to jail.
Eric Owens noted that on the day Torcello's article was published, the high temperature in Rochester, N.Y., the city where his college is located, was 18 degrees Fahrenheit.
Source: examiner.com
3/19/2014 06:51:00 AM
No comments
Footage of the incident shows squabbles breaking out before a female officer grabs a male student and hauls him to the ground, aided by Officer Steve Rivers.
As the female officer presses the student’s face to the ground, Rivers grabs his left arm and violently bends it backwards in what appears to be a deliberate attempt to snap the bone. A sickening crunch is audible as the student screams out in agony. Although the kid is clearly in severe trauma, Rivers continues to push his head to the floor.Following an investigation of the incident, which occurred on March 7, Officer Rivers was placed on administrative leave without pay.
Despite the fact that the incident clearly represents one of the most sickening examples of police brutality in recent years, numerous respondents to a 12NewsNow story said that the student deserved to have his arm broken because he did not immediately comply with the officer’s demands.
“The young man was refusing to comply with the officer, and once again we don’t see what happened to cause the officer to subdue him. Officer says “don’t move”, you don’t move. Don’t condemn unless you know the whole story,” wrote Martin Scott.
Other commenters responded by pointing out that the student was already subdued on the floor before the cop broke his arm.
“That kid made a choice not to obey a police officer. Which means he will never obey in the “real” world. He got punished,” remarked Cody Wilson.
Joel Scott, a professional MMA fighter, said that the cop’s actions suggest he intentionally tried to break the student’s arm.
“I am a professional cage fighter. I have trained in Jiu Jitsu for 3yrs with is a form of martial arts that specializes in submissions and breaking bones. It takes a lot of force to break a human bone.
You can clearly see that was intentional. He used his weight as leverage. The average person knows the rage of motion of the human arm and he knew what he was doing,” wrote Scott.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
