Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

NYT - DU Derided? -- Myths Run Wild in Blog Tsunami Debate

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
matt819 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-02-05 11:54 PM
Original message
NYT - DU Derided? -- Myths Run Wild in Blog Tsunami Debate
Edited on Sun Jan-02-05 11:57 PM by matt819
Take a look at this: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/03/international/worldspecial4/03bloggers.html

This from Monday's NYT re the blog responses to the tsunami. Clearly, they are having fun at DU's expense, though, to be fair, the second snip adds some balance. So, is any publicity good publicity?

<snip>
To some in the blogosphere, it (th tsunami) simply had to be the government's fault.

On Democratic Underground, a blog for open discussion and an online gathering place for people who hate the Bush administration, a participant asked, "Since we know that the atmosphere has become contaminated by all the atomic testing, space stuff, electronic stuff, earth pollutants, etc., is it logical to wonder if: Perhaps the 'bones' of our earth where this earthquake spawned have also been affected?"

The cause of the earthquake and resulting killer wave, the writer said, could be the war in Iraq. "You know, we've exploded many millions of tons of ordnance upon this poor planet," the writer said. "All that 'shock and awe' stuff we've just dumped onto the Asian part of this earth - could we have fractured something? Perhaps the earth was just reacting to something that man has done to injure it. The earth is organic, you know. It can be hurt."

The ridicule began immediately. Online insults, referred to colloquially as flames, rose high on other sites.

"What would life be without D.U.?" asked an editor at Wizbang, a politically conservative blog (www.wizbangblog.com), using the initials of Democratic Underground.

"Get out the tin foil hats," a contributor to the blog wrote.

<snip>

<snip>

Mr. Surowiecki pointed out that there is nothing new about ill-informed rumor-mongering or other forms of oddness. "There were always cranks," he said. "Rumors have always been fundamental about the way people talk, or think, about politics or complicated issues." Instead of a corner bar or a Barcalounger, however, the location for today's speech is an online medium with a potential audience of millions.

But there is another, more important difference, Mr. Surowiecki and others say. Internet discourse can be self-correcting, with near-instant feedback from readers.

What was lost in the sniping over the Democratic Underground posting was the fact that the follow-up comments were a sober discussion of what actually causes earthquakes. The first response to the posting asked, "Earthquakes have been happening since the beginning of time ... How would you explain them?"

Further comments explained the movement of tectonic plates and provided links to sites explaining earthquakes and tsunamis from the United States Geological Survey and other authoritative sources.
<snip>



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Maple Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-02-05 11:56 PM
Response to Original message
1. Ignore the peanut gallery
People who said the earth was round, or that man could fly were treated the same way. Twas ever thus.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
metisnation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-02-05 11:59 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Rovian attack
Attack dogs writing a story about DU to make you ashamed of who you are. Democrats are united.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Floydian Slip Donating Member (18 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 01:22 AM
Response to Reply #2
50. ugh
The NYT does not do 'Rovian' attacks, its one of the most liberal newspapers in the country, why do you think they mentioned this site? Because they read it daily. It was not totally unfair in the article, they said all forums did it and the Internet had a way of self-correcting.

But, this ain;t no BLOG either
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Crunchy Frog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 02:07 AM
Response to Reply #50
68. Why do you believe that the NYT is liberal?
Do you know anything about Judith Miller and her role in building up the phoney case for war in Iraq, and her phoney reports concerning WMDs? If you don't, I would advise you to look into it.

The NYT, just like the rest of the corporate media, has not been doing its job of reporting the facts accurately and impartially, and of holding those in power accountable. That's the absolute minimum of what a "liberal" newspaper, or indeed any reputable newspaper should be doing.

They certainly do repeat Rovian and neocon talking points, in an uncritical fashion. We need to get over this myth that there's a "liberal media" out there. Apart from some small independent publications, there just isn't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Doctor. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 10:50 AM
Response to Reply #68
133. While the NYT cannot be labelled as 'Liberal' per se....
It is fair to note that many of 'The Time's' columnists have reported news which is not entirely favorable to the administration.

Just do a DU search and you will find hundreds of references to NYT article cited as sources.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
silvermachine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 01:31 PM
Response to Reply #133
182. It's also fair to note...
... that this administration's policies are what created the news that is not entirely favorable to the administration. It didn't appear out of thin air and was hardly a concoction of the NYT.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
David Zephyr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 06:54 PM
Response to Reply #133
236. The New York Times Cheerled For Making War Against Iraq.
Nothing liberal about it at all.

Once maybe. Certainly, not now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bvar22 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 02:13 AM
Response to Reply #50
72. Did you read the NYTimes while bush*...
Edited on Mon Jan-03-05 02:15 AM by bvar22
...and the republican psychos were lieing this country into WAR?

They (NYTimes) were totally onboard the bush* propaganda bandwagon! Yeehaw! Lets go kill a bunch of Brown People!!!!


I was more disappointed in the NYTimes than the other WhiteHouse outlets. The NYTimes knew better, but still went with the Rovian NeoCon Program of Death and Destruction for profit.

That's only one example. Like all the other CorpoMedia Outlets inside the US, the NYTimes DOES channel the Republican/Republican Lite Press Releases.

You may find some liberal Columnists on the back page, but you will also find Gingrich, Friedman, Safire, Frist, Buckley, and Limbaugh on the same page.

If you want to find out what is happening inside the US, you must look outside the US.

May I suggest:
http://www.ipsnews.net/headlines.asp
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
creeksneakers2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 11:23 AM
Response to Reply #72
150. The Times exposed the aluminum tubes hoax before the war n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bvar22 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:54 PM
Response to Reply #150
170. And then immediately dropped it.
That story was NOT a scoop or an expose', and required no investigation or compilation.

As early as May of 2001, experts at the Energy Dept. were issuing public statements refuting White House claims that these tubes were suitable for use in centrifuges. In fact, experts everywhere (Oak Ridge, IAEA) were PUBLICALLY DENYING that these tubes were evidence of WMD.

So it is a stretch to say that the NYTimes broke the story. They merely published what was already (or should have been) public knowlege. To their SHAME, they also continued to publish and HIGHLIGHT the WhiteHouse claims.

"The calculated and dishonest character of the Times reportage of the tubes issue is underscored by its coverage after September 8, 2002. This history is set out in the October 3 expos by Barstow, Broad and Gerth. Having plastered a sensational and alarming article on its front page, the newspaper subsequently buried on its inside pages articles hinting at the truththat the claims were not credible and were hotly disputed by the most expert analysts within the government itself.

On September 13, the Times published an article on page A13 that noted in passing the internal differences within the intelligence community, but came out clearly on the side of the administration and the CIA. According to Barstow, Broad and Gerth, the September 13, 2002 article reported that an unidentified senior administration official dismissed the debate as a footnote, not a split.

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/oct2004/nyti-o13.shtml

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tinoire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 04:46 AM
Response to Reply #50
79. The NYT? Liberal! Lol, Your floydian slip is definitely showing! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tsuki Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 05:28 AM
Response to Reply #50
85. Thanks, I was getting ready to ask. I didn't think this was a blog.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CatWoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 10:00 AM
Response to Reply #50
120. only morans subscribe to that logic
The NYT does not do 'Rovian' attacks, its one of the most liberal newspapers in the country,.......
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mountainvue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 11:12 AM
Response to Reply #50
146. Were they "the most liberal
newpaper in the country" when Judy Miller was carrying water for the proponents of the Iraq war?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pokercat999 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 08:48 AM
Response to Reply #2
288. There us no such thing as bad publicity......eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
soleft Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:00 AM
Response to Original message
3. Read further
But there is another, more important difference, Mr. Surowiecki and others say. Internet discourse can be self-correcting, with near-instant feedback from readers.

What was lost in the sniping over the Democratic Underground posting was the fact that the follow-up comments were a sober discussion of what actually causes earthquakes. The first response to the posting asked, "Earthquakes have been happening since the beginning of time ... How would you explain them?"

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RoyGBiv Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:08 AM
Response to Reply #3
9. Unfortunately ...

A lot of people won't. This actually is a pretty good article on the whole, but a lot of people, including people right here apparently, will get stuck at "myths" "Democratic Underground" and "cranks."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mcscajun Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 09:33 AM
Response to Reply #9
117. If I hadn't already been involved with DU...
...this article would have left me with a truly bad impression.

It's not balanced at all, but does a remarkable job of feigning impartiality by mentioning sites on both sides. BUT...the conservative sites are mentioned only in their derision of DU with no mention of their own 'warts' and the hate they spew. Where was the mention of Free Republic? Nowhere.

Many people do not read past the first few paragraphs of any article in the newspaper, which is why the most important information is always there. If they persist, then the last paragraph is what a great many readers will take away as their final thought on DU, if they got past the first: "In the tsunami discussion on Democratic Underground, some participants continued to post farfetched theories about what caused the earthquake based on pseudoscience and conspiracy,..."

In this case, bad publicity is simply bad publicity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 10:48 AM
Response to Reply #117
131. We've been a target since the latest "Selection" because of ACTIVISM!
This article is cleverly worded (thanks for pointing that out).

Because our registration is so high and we've been a Forum that encourages activism and links to activism projects from all over the internet...they want us gone. Everytime we are mentioned many "infiltrators" show up...along with a few folks sincerely "just looking."

When the NYT's goes after us it shows they think we are dangerous. So, to ridicule us while not mentioning Free Republic and the Swift Boat Liars for Truth who are part of the Repug Machine on the ground, is a clear sign from the White House that they want us "marginalized."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jdj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 06:58 PM
Response to Reply #131
238. I wondered if the original post was a set-up. I was suspicious of
it the minute I read it.

Oh, well.

Compare this to Falwell's "Blow them away in the name of the Lord" and Bush's love-practicing gynecologists, and who loses. At least we are anon., very few open public figures.

I think this is an attack on the internet in general, because the print media KNOWS we are kicking their asses. We are doing the work they can no longer do, or won't do, we are reading their articles online for free. They have to be close to going under.

All a sudden this weekend, I tried to look up old articles on some papers online and they were trying to charge me for the archived ones.. Fuck that. I'll google til I find a site that's free, there is an archive site that archives important articles like the Tampa Bay Tribune Flying Out The Saudi Royals on 9/13 story.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RoyGBiv Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 08:07 PM
Response to Reply #238
248. Glad you said that ...

I had the same thought.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RoyGBiv Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 11:09 PM
Response to Reply #117
274. Bad Impression ...

That was kinda my point. People will get stuck on the bad elements of the article, particularly since they are "up front," and not pay attention to any of the broader themes.

I just wanted to comment on one other thing, though. The lack of a mention of Freeperville could be seen in one of two ways. You've mentioned one. Another is that DU has gained enough notoriety and has developed enough influence as a group that it warrants being mentioned, whether positively or negatively. Freeperville is obviously a bastion of stupidity, even to a lot of people who would disagree with pretty much everything that's said on DU. (I know a few who've said this to me personally.) It's off the radar of pretty much anyone with a brain. DU, however, is very much on that radar.

That's not a defense of the article, just the way I see it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GHOSTDANCER Donating Member (550 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 12:46 PM
Response to Reply #274
296. It was written to create a bad impression.
Edited on Tue Jan-04-05 12:46 PM by GHOSTDANCER
Look at what they chose as a topic to manipulate. In no way is this a fuqin blog!!! It's a new revolution in collaborative communication filled with a broad spectrum of ideas, feelings and points of view from all kinds.
To take a tin foiled fuqin idea like US created earthquakes, from all the important topics on DU is fuqin bullshit. To exclude what the fuqin Fascist Republican Party is conspiring about on their sites is further proof, it was written to keep the tin-foil lefties in their corner. LOOK AWAY....LOOK AWAY

In defense of the Tin foil idea of manufactured earthquakes. which the US wouldn't ever do because hurting This region only hurts the slave production that is so important to our precious living standards in the US. Why do you think the World bank is the 3 largest contributer of aid for Tsunami relief? The machine can't be slowed down too much. Christmas is only 349 days away.... Get it back on its feet quick!!!

Russia, carried out an extensive "tectonic weapon" research program, a deliberate attempt to create earthquakes using underground nuclear weapons. Russian newspaper Moscow News has obtained papers showing that the program, first known as "Mercury" and later as "Volcano," was launched in 1987 and ended in 1992.
<http://www.coastalpost.com/96/12/2.htm>




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lib_1138 Donating Member (143 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 07:55 PM
Response to Reply #3
244. But they didn't feature that
Now it looks like we are a bunch of tin-hats. I am new here, but facts is facts -- the effect of bombs on a country, even the shock and awe type and quanity, are the same as tapping your fingers on the side of a building. People forget how big the Earth is.

The last part is just a "but I mean that in a GOOD way" like the old Seinfeld routine.

This just breaks my heart. I don't why this guy decided to do a hit piece on DU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
librechik Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:01 AM
Response to Original message
4. wow, it turned out to be fair!
more or less...We are so educational. And kooky.

:loveya:DU
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:01 AM
Response to Original message
5. if anyone saved the hate threads on the Tsunami from the
Free Republic, (before they got deleted), they should send them along to the asshole who wrote this piece of crap, along with a few questions about impartiality.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pirate Smile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:15 AM
Response to Reply #5
14. I remember asking people to do just that. We should forward them
to the reporter.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kagemusha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:04 AM
Response to Original message
6. .... You people don't really believe those bombs caused it... right?
Do you?... For real? Not a joke?

Because so far I'm seeing no one even try to deny that the tsunami was man-made, which is not a view I share personally...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pirate Smile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:09 AM
Response to Reply #6
10. LOL. I kind of assumed everyone just thought that was obviously
nuts.

I saw that thread (although I wish I knew now who posted it), rolled my eyes, and looked for something else.

There was probably one person who thought that and 1,000's who didn't but, you know, the wacky bird gets the attention.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kagemusha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:14 AM
Response to Reply #10
13. There was more than one thread and I noticed several.
My reaction was, "not worth my time"

But geez, look what happened. This is what happens when complete loss of perspective isn't challenged.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pirate Smile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:16 AM
Response to Reply #13
16. I know. I just ignore stuff sometimes but I think more challenging
is in order.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bpilgrim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:26 AM
Response to Reply #16
22. are you kidding?
challenging is what makes DU great and a great deal of it goes on, especially directed at the TH folks... believe me i know, i'm in that minority ;->

:hi:

peace
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pirate Smile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:32 AM
Response to Reply #22
28. I know, but who has time to actually challenge everything you
Edited on Mon Jan-03-05 12:32 AM by Pirate Smile
see that you disagree with - MY GOD MAN, I MUST SLEEP SOME TIME.:evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bpilgrim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:33 AM
Response to Reply #28
30. welcome to the MATRIX
Edited on Mon Jan-03-05 12:35 AM by bpilgrim
it ain't just YOU and I on here ;->

peace
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IStriker Donating Member (408 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 07:04 PM
Response to Reply #22
241. Sorry but I have to ask what are the "TH folks..."
I've sat here trying to figure out what it stands for and gone back a couple of comments and still have not figured out what TH folks are.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nickgutierrez Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 02:09 PM
Response to Reply #241
299. I imagine TH folks = Tinfoil Hat
Which is a usually derogatory way of referring to a conspiricy theorist.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bpilgrim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:23 AM
Response to Reply #13
21. according to the article it was challenged
and made for an interesting thread, according to the NYT.

i just wish we could all vote on every post this way we could have the highest rated post float to the top... it would save a lot of time :evilgrin:

:hi:

peace
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kagemusha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:27 AM
Response to Reply #21
24. Yes, it was challenged in one of the threads I saw.
And not at all in another that came later.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bpilgrim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:31 AM
Response to Reply #24
27. well, 9 x out of 10 then
like i said above, most everything is challenged here and thats what makes this place GREAT.

if you can't back up an assertion here you WILL get called on it and thats why it BLOWS the main-stream media out of the water.

they probably feel like the candle stick makers did when electric bulbs first appeared in the market :evilgrin:

peace
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
freeplessinseattle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 01:27 AM
Response to Reply #13
53. if you read even one of those threads you wouldn't need to ask
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SmokingJacket Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 11:52 AM
Response to Reply #13
154. Actually it WAS challenged. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zelda7743 Donating Member (256 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 01:54 AM
Response to Reply #6
63. Actually, I caused the tsunami
I live in Hawaii. I went out swimming in the ocean on December 25th after eating some Taco Bell.
Sorry about all the loss of life and stuff....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cessna Invesco Palin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 04:03 AM
Response to Reply #6
76. I have tried.
I can speak for myself and several others, who have actively tried to counter the unscientific rumor-mongering because we believe in educating people on geology, and because this sort of gibberish makes all of us look bad. Granted, it is impossible to keep up with the radically high post counts of those who attemt to spread fear and disinformation, but we do try :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fujiyama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 08:44 AM
Response to Reply #6
100. Don't worry
If you check out one of the threads, you'll notice that many responded, debunking the idea and dismissing it completely.

The NYT article, while on the whole somewhat snide and biased (ignoring hateful comments by RWers), did mention a few of the replies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HeeBGBz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 08:54 AM
Response to Reply #6
102. I remember contributing to that thread
I offered that underground nuclear testing would have an effect on the equilibrium of the planet. I wondered if that could in effect set off a massive quake. I didn't say anything about the tsunami being manufactured. Only that man's stupidity could be the cause.

That's when somebody was saying the tectonic plates were too massive to be effected. I did not argue that fact because I just don't know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alaintex Donating Member (82 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 11:00 AM
Response to Reply #102
143. I read in the paper (FW Star Telegram) that the 9.0 quake
Had the equivalent force of 2 million Hiroshima sized atomic bombs, so I don't think an occasional underground test would have much of an impact.

Just my opinion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OldVlad Donating Member (151 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 06:42 PM
Response to Reply #102
233. Oh Brother
*slaps forehead* We haven't done underground testing in decades! Why bring this up now after such a tradigy?

I certainly hope it wasn't your misinterpretted, poorly timed post that brought about this coverage, the NYT is one of the widest circulated papers on earth, tons of people who have never heard of DU think we're America hating looneies thanks to this horrible publicity. First the Wellstone funeral, then the election, now this, the hits just keep on rolling. Helluva year.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nashville_brook Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 09:06 PM
Response to Reply #102
257. i brought underground testing up too on that thread --
as i remember, i didn't assert that this tsunami or this earthquake was caused by an underground nuclear test... my point was like, "doesn't it seem reckless to set off nueclear weapons underground." as in, "this is something that has always bugged me."

jiminy christmas! guess i better watch what i say.

(i'm going to start a thread that claims masterbation causees blindness and see if the WP runs a story).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zann725 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 02:51 AM
Response to Reply #257
283. LOL! Please do! And they probably will.
Might make for more interesting NYT reading!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ashmanonar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-08-05 04:38 PM
Response to Reply #6
304. well, it's not that i say that the government wanted it to happen
bc as evil as bushco is, they'd...never...
ok, scratch that line of thinking...:evilgrin:

let's just say that nothing is impossible...i wouldn't say that we definitely caused it, but it'd be hubris to say that we can have no effect on our world, and that anything that happens (earthquake, volcano, tsunami) is purely natural...

like it or not, we have some effect on this world...in 40,000 years of human presence on this world, we've dammed rivers (destroying river deltas), run species into extinction (there's definitive evidence that the earliest inhabitants of North America ran the mammoth off cliffs and exterminated them), we've detonated thousands of nuclear weapons on its surface, under its oceans, and deep underground...thousands of tons of pollution are created every day by all the vehicles that drive around this world, and the factories that produce our goods...

and people want to believe that the world just does what it does, and that we have no effect?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bpilgrim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:06 AM
Response to Original message
7. we hit the NYT, wooHoo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Edited on Mon Jan-03-05 12:21 AM by bpilgrim
we must be doing something right to get them to start deriding us :evilgrin:

thanks for the FREE advertising NYT :toast:

peace
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NAO Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 01:30 AM
Response to Reply #7
56. Yeah but they DIDN'T LINK DU (they DID link the conservative blogs) bias!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Child_Of_Isis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 02:09 AM
Response to Reply #56
69. Put a link in the comments section.
Looks as if someone has already been there. ;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NashVegas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:46 PM
Original message
It Does Now
Can't remember if it did this morning.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NAO Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 01:23 PM
Response to Original message
179. Now I feel like a successful media watchdog activist
The link is there!

Still, the initial observation that the linked the conservative blogs but not DU, which was purportedly the subject of the story, shows the subtle right-wing bias that dominates the corporate media.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OldVlad Donating Member (151 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 06:47 PM
Response to Reply #7
234. Your optimism is cute
Wish I was that young again.

This is the worst advertising possible, reinforcing tons of stereotypes about the internet and us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NashVegas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:06 AM
Response to Original message
8. I Am So Tempted to Lock This
Edited on Mon Jan-03-05 12:07 AM by Crisco
But I won't :)

After reading the article and seeing direct quotes lifted from DU, the irony is delicious.

That's just the laziest excuse for reporting I think I've ever seen in the NYT. Did they have an intern write this up? You'd think the reporter would have taken the step of contacting the posters in question and asking for clarification (I got this weird flakey idea in my head because that's exactly what an AP guy did with me, elsewhere). This article is essentially no different from a blog entry.

PS, Matt - you need to edit your post down. 4 paragraphs are the max under copyright rules.

Someone tell the Gray Lady her drawers are showing.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pirate Smile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:13 AM
Response to Reply #8
12. Did you see the original thread? How many people actually
believed that?

The lazy ass could have included some of the venom toward the victims coming from the other side.

That is so much more reprehensible then one person's misguided idea about the causes of earthquakes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RoyGBiv Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:18 AM
Response to Reply #12
19. There have been several threads ...

The number of people who believe this or some variation of it is not incredibly small ... unfortunately.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skittles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:49 AM
Response to Reply #12
42. perhaps the "reporter" himself posted it
:D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 05:06 AM
Response to Reply #42
81. Wouldn't be the first time
Remember Jayson Blair?

The Times' editors haven't exactly had the greatest reputation for checking their reporter's stories over the past several years....

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Flammable Materials Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 09:57 AM
Response to Reply #8
119. Does the four paragraph rule include ...
... quotes ripped from DU?

:evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NashVegas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 10:43 AM
Response to Reply #119
128. Don't You Get Fresh With Me ....
Or I'll make you run write an essay on the sublime beauty of the "Musica" sculpture on the Demonbruen traffic circle.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Flammable Materials Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 03:52 PM
Response to Reply #128
212. They're NEKKID people! They're DANCING! With their HOO-HAHS out!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
goforit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 10:54 PM
Response to Reply #212
271. Toooo funny!................(Do ya work for the Daily Show?)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Snivi Yllom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 03:46 PM
Response to Reply #8
211. the Times is the Gray Old Whore
Queen of the Media Whores. Lazy bad reporting has become standard at the Times.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
VegasWolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:12 AM
Response to Original message
11. The conservatives would never find any good in DU regardless,
water under the bridge. Too bad they don't do a follow up
artice about free republic, they are tin foil hat about everything.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 01:26 AM
Response to Reply #11
52. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
OrwellwasRight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 01:33 AM
Response to Reply #52
58. In case you have not heard yet...
Edited on Mon Jan-03-05 01:34 AM by OrwellwasRight
Welcome to DU, Floydian.

:hi:

On edit: silly HTML error
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Floydian Slip Donating Member (18 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 02:10 AM
Response to Reply #58
70. thanks
hello to you too
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spiffarino Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 01:35 AM
Response to Reply #52
59. That's because they're sorry, stupid assholes
...who have no real thoughts or ideas of their own. Like all ignorant, fascist chumps, they spend their time pointing fingers and laughing at things they pretend to understand.

Nobody here really gives a shit about what they think. I've read that shitpile often enough to understand that they're nothing more than a mutual masturbation society.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mike Niendorff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:15 AM
Response to Original message
15. not really surprising.
Edited on Mon Jan-03-05 12:15 AM by Mike Niendorff

If DU allows itself to devolve into Art Bell central, then we deserve what we get. The credibility of this site is our responsibility (although, eventually, I think Skinner's going to have to make some judgment calls as to what's actually good faith participation vs. what's an attempt by disruptors to skate around the rules).


MDN

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pirate Smile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:19 AM
Response to Reply #15
20. Sometimes I think someone is just trying to make us look like
idiots on purpose - trolls - but people have their own wacky ideas too so how do you really know.:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mike Niendorff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:36 AM
Response to Reply #20
33. I think it's a bit of both

but the exact split, well, that's anyone's guess. Like I said, I think ultimately Skinner's going to have to make some tough choices on this front. But that's just my personal opinion (and, as the saying goes, "that and a dime ...").


MDN
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bpilgrim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:40 AM
Response to Reply #33
35. and you forgot an option, sometimes they are TRUE - 911, BBV, PNAC, etc
another reason why DU is VERY important in pass'n the word ;->

peace
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mike Niendorff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:52 AM
Response to Reply #35
44. nope, didn't forget that at all :)

I guess I'm not making myself very clear here, but I'll try again:

All I'm saying is that there's a huge difference between doing legitimate investigative research -- with verifiable facts, backing citation, etc -- versus just random speculation without concern for verifiability or factual accuracy.


MDN


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AZCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 01:01 AM
Response to Reply #44
46. I'd say there's a fair bit of random speculation here
But it doesn't get coddled (like at the NYT). Instead, the poster usually retreats under fire from posters who do know a thing or two about the subject of the post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HeeBGBz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 09:30 AM
Response to Reply #44
116. So we're not allowed to question until we have answers?
That will narrow things down a bit, eh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:50 AM
Response to Reply #20
43. Well, that's an interesting thought. Let's hope that's it.
Because some of the stuff on here - like the thread mentioned in the NYT - is ridiculously embarassing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
murray hill farm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 10:52 AM
Response to Reply #43
137. Why do u even care?
Why are u embarrassed? Is our role here to only discuss what is viewed by the main stream media as "appropriate"..to present ourselves as a scientific journal here? We are not that...we ..or i thought that we were here to present ideas...and, ya know.. a lot of what appeared wacky to the world at first, has turned out to be so true in the long run. If you only discuss ideas that are approved of by the media...thoughts that u perceive as OK to discuss, then where have we put ourselves..what have we helped them to do to us? We will then be silenced...except for, of course, appropriate and approved of and accepted ideas. I don't want to go there, do you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zann725 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 02:57 AM
Response to Reply #137
284. I agree. And THEY know that. It's the "dialogue" of possible "facts"
that's bothering them. That's why they're laughing at us, and trying to get their readers to laugh at us...to try and belittle or dismiss possible alternative theories of "MSM-reported" world events.

When they can no longer laugh us away, or shame us into no longer freely discussing "possible" facts, then they may try and shut us down. Stay tuned!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
murray hill farm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 02:06 PM
Response to Reply #284
298. ya know..u are right!!
The "dialogue of possible facts" is what is happening..is just what they are trying to squelch here...and a good number of DUers..are assisting them with the ongoing and often nasty and name calling responses to any attempt in that "dialgue of the possible". I was at the point of..just laying low for a bit here...but then i discovered the joys of that "ignore" button..ha! Thanks for the reply.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
0007 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 04:25 PM
Response to Reply #43
219. Then why not take it on the Arthur Duffy instead of staying
and whining?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 11:23 PM
Response to Reply #219
275. Whatever that means.
Whining? Who is whining? Who wants this to be turned into a a little corner of the world for kooks and their unsupportable theories? It's a lot more fun to pop in here and read the ideas of people who bring some intelligent viewpoints to the table.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 10:57 AM
Response to Reply #20
141. Trying?
:eyes:

We are becoming a Mecca for cranks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pirate Smile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:22 PM
Response to Reply #141
164. Well, sometimes succeeding, of course. Do we need a damn poll to
show 99% of people here don't think pollution causes earthquakes?

Then we could send it to the NYT.

The Washington Post has already published a DU Poll so why not the NYT?

I know everyone here always takes the polls very seriously.
;-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 11:25 PM
Response to Reply #141
277. agreed
Can't figure out if I belong here or not. I'm wondering if the "whacky" threads are really freepers coming in here making DU looking like the land of liberal nutsville.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Minstrel Boy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:26 AM
Response to Reply #15
23. There are 60,000 registered here. That's a small city.
Sorry if you find it uncomfortable to be in the presence of some. Perhaps you should cross to the other side of the street if you see one coming.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Octafish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:42 AM
Response to Reply #23
37. NYT Missed 'BUSH Involved in JFK Assassination'
Never see this covered, FBI memo documenting how George Herbert Walker Bush called the FBI to rat on a suspect -- within MINUTES of the death President Kennedy:



This one shows what a "Mr George Bush of the Central Intelligence Agency" told J Edgar Hoover a week later.



SOURCE:

http://www.internetpirate.com/bush.htm

Not that I know everything, but there are a LOT of important things The New York Times misses.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sleepyhead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 08:37 AM
Response to Reply #37
96. Wait a minute.....
Didn't GHWB say in an interview that he "didn't remember" where he was on 11/22/63? You'd think he would recall his important part in the investigation. I guess he's not being entirely truthful. How shocking.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Octafish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 11:12 AM
Response to Reply #96
147. 'He who does not trust enough will not be trusted.' -- The Tao
"He who excuses himself accuses himself." -- Gabriel Meurier
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Child_Of_Isis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 01:50 AM
Response to Reply #23
61. One does wonder why we get so much attention.
Hell we probably have as many lurking as we have registered.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
d.l.Green Donating Member (273 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 01:42 PM
Response to Reply #61
185. Lurking?
Edited on Mon Jan-03-05 01:43 PM by d.l.Green
B-)

I wouldn't call it lurking, geez. I've been "lurking" here since I was linked here from a Dean campaign site in '03. Finally decided to register.

I administer a local chat forum. There are only about 10 regular posters, yet there are close to 50,000 hits/month. (Thanks local MSM!!!!)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Child_Of_Isis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 03:54 PM
Response to Reply #185
213. Yes. It's called lurking.
When you read a board but do not post, it is called lurking.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nashville_brook Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 09:10 PM
Response to Reply #15
258. yeah, we should tombstone anyone who says anything stupid. n/t


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
geek tragedy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:17 AM
Response to Original message
17. Drive-by reporting of a straw man. The only surprise was that it wasn't
Bumiller.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Straight Shooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:17 AM
Response to Original message
18. I believe DU encompasses more than merely hating the bush administration
Do you think they would have referred to Free Republic as the bush administration worshipping forum? Somehow I doubt it.

Of all the valid, rational, scientific and thoughtful threads on DU, they choose a speculative tsunami thread. Maybe NYT should join Free Republic and get a real taste of off-the-wall material, eh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bpilgrim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:28 AM
Response to Reply #18
25. and they say the NYT is liberal - lol
everything mainstream is so tilted AGAINST us it ain't funny.

shoot i've seen numerous freakrepublic articles held up for praise by mainstream it's SICK :puke:

but at least we made the BIG-TIME :bounce:

peace
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JI7 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 01:29 AM
Response to Reply #25
55. NYT ,Washington Post are both pretty right wing leaning
they do a few ok articles at times and of course they make their traditional election year endorsement of democratic candidates. but that's only to keep their mostly democratic subscribers.

i would rather have them NOT endorse any democratic candidates and do better reporting of the issues with facts than crappy reporting and the worthless endorsements.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bunkerbuster1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 09:00 AM
Response to Reply #55
103. Anyone who believes the NY Times is especially progressive
Edited on Mon Jan-03-05 09:01 AM by bunkerbuster1
ought to look at the adverts they run in the Sunday magazine.

The Times cares about three things: Money, money, and money. The Times readership is mildly interested in progressive causes, so the Times pretends to care about them.

I'm not so burnt-out cynical that I don't still believe the Times is, on balance, still probably the best American daily paper out there--it is--but the idea that it's somehow ideologically leftist is a wingnut lie.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheKingfish Donating Member (263 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 08:19 PM
Response to Reply #55
250. In defense of WaPo
You have to separate the neo-con editors from the news reporters. If you don't know who Dana Priest and Anthony Shadid are you really should.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hansolsen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 10:49 PM
Response to Reply #250
269. Good point. Dana Priest in particular provided responsible reporting on
WMD in the lead-up to the war when hardly any one else dared. I respect her work.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AngryOldDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 08:42 AM
Response to Reply #18
99. My thought exactly
There's more to us than that.

That description is actually pretty insulting, IMO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SemperEadem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 01:56 PM
Response to Reply #18
190. because the topic was 'fish in a barrel'
God forbid they choose one that wasn't wrapped up all nice and pretty in a bow for them so they didn't have to break a sweat doing their damn job.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Neshanic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:29 AM
Response to Original message
26. Maybe the NYT can make up some stories. We love when they do that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bpilgrim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:32 AM
Response to Reply #26
29. how many times did they have to appologize for lying to us last year 2, 3x
:puke:

peace
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dr Fate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:38 AM
Response to Reply #29
34. How many troops dead b/c the NYT refused to investigate the truth????
They reported Bush lies about WMDs & 9/11 connex as fact- and only retracted the lies AFTER troops & civillians were killed.

So how many deaths has DU been indirectly responsible for???

About 80% of America supported the war, b/c they TRUSTED the NYT and other GOP/media talking points when they all claimed that Saddam had WMDs and had "somthing to do" with 9/11.

The NYT is a joke.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bpilgrim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:42 AM
Response to Reply #34
38. zactly, those who read the DU are the most informed people on the PLANET
Edited on Mon Jan-03-05 12:43 AM by bpilgrim
we should do an official survey, like the one that showed how STUPID everyone is who gets their news from the mainstream, especially FOX :evilgrin:

peace

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lcdnumber6 Donating Member (232 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:46 AM
Response to Reply #29
41. So, who is up for the LTTR?
I think this is unbelievable. Pigeonhole DU as a site ONLY (as anyone who reads this article) for "people who hate the Bush administration". Dear lord I wouldn't come here if it was just about hating Bush. Has NYT ever done any other press on DU for just being a GREAT clearinghouse of all sorts of news from around the world, with quite compelling debate among critical thinkers? Or for its efforts to mobilize democrats from state to state and city to city? I found out how to contribute to the Gregoire recount from this site. Mr. Schwartz needs a talking to. I'd do it, but I ain't too eloquent. I just can't believe the NYT editors let this spin get into press. Ugh.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dr Fate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:33 AM
Response to Original message
31. NYT reported that Saddam had WMDs and 9/11 connex as hard fact...
Edited on Mon Jan-03-05 01:19 AM by Dr Fate
...w/o even investigating it. They just took Bush's word for it.

They even had to apologize for the months of fake news they reported.

Pot, meet kettle. At least DU doesnt claim to be investigative journalism- but an open forum.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Exit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 01:16 AM
Response to Reply #31
49. Great point! Better to be a "conspiracy theorist" or a "kook" than
to just be an out-and-out LIAR.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tsuki Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 05:39 AM
Response to Reply #31
86. I like the local pub analogy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:35 AM
Response to Original message
32. Well, this doesn't surprise me-
Edited on Mon Jan-03-05 12:35 AM by depakid
Despite the fact that numerous people have tried to talk sense into the conspiracy nuts- no one listens.

Frankly, I think many of these posters are either:

1) Too poorly educated in science to understand that they sound just like creationists; or

2) They are plants by the right who post here to make DU look stupid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dr Fate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:41 AM
Response to Reply #32
36. Hey- at least DUers did not report fake, uninvestigated "news"...
...that resulted in thousands of deaths.

DU was not the one who convinced 80% of Americans that "Saddam has WMDs & had somthing to do with 9/11"

No, that was the handy work of "investigative journalist" from the New York Times, Fox, and CNN.

DU is an OPEN opinion/discussion forum- NYT is SUPPOSED to be news.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 03:01 AM
Response to Reply #36
75. This is true
Edited on Mon Jan-03-05 03:04 AM by depakid
even so, I wish people were a little more responsible and thought a little more before posting this nonsense. It affects everyone else's credibility in other areas- where a good many DU'rs actually do know what they are talking about and deserve to heard.

I little respect for the Times anymore- based not only on the likes of Miller, Adam Ngourney and others who brazenly slant- perhaps even falsify the news- but on the fact that their editors seem too lacsidaisical to care what's printed.

The Times' only saving grace is that they're not the Washington Post- which has gone so far off the journalistic deep end as to have lost all credibility. There was an article the other day about cougars moving east that contained some absolutely stunning false statements of fact.

No one at my university takes them seriously anymore- most of us actually laugh at them (as several of us did over the couger article)- although those of us old enough to remember who they once were- also lament.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HeeBGBz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 09:21 AM
Response to Reply #32
111. Or maybe they are just worried about the damn planet
Or those of us who know Earth is fragile and wonder if her repeated rapes are beginning to set off unimaginable cataclysm.

Anyone who thinks I'm gonna stop thinking and wondering so those-who-know-so-much-more can have a pristine playground, can kiss my tinfoil behind.

Set me straight. Inform me. Teach me. Ease my worry.

If that makes me a tinfoiler to explore all possibilities then so be it. I wear the tin topper with pride. At least I'm thinking. Which can't be said for the right.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 11:34 AM
Response to Reply #111
292. I have news
Edited on Tue Jan-04-05 11:38 AM by depakid
If you want to learn- if really you want to know things- and not play games with pseudoscience- be prepared to worry like you never worried before.

The real thing is much harder and much scarier than fiction.

It'll keep you awake at night, wondering.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mcscajun Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 09:23 AM
Response to Reply #32
113. I have to agree...
Edited on Mon Jan-03-05 09:24 AM by mcscajun
...I've been replying to some of the many threads involved with conspiracy or other crackpot theories on the tsunami...and the lack of understanding in science is appalling. There's a wall of "I don't believe facts from official sources" that is impenetrable by reasoned argument.

And yes...the fact that this issue keeps coming up again and again has made me wonder just who is raising it and why. It certainly does make us look collectively stupid and/or marginally wacko.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
geek tragedy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 10:12 AM
Response to Reply #113
122. That's why they were given their own ghetto forum (the 9/11 forum). eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LastLiberal in PalmSprings Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 11:44 AM
Response to Reply #32
152. "Hello, Mr. Rove, we ran the article you sent us...
Thanks for pointing out that Bush-haters like those on Democratic Underground are also conspiracy wackos. We really appreciate that you did the research for us so we didn't have to." -- NYT memo

BTW, for any NYT reporter who reads this, it's a joke. It's called "satire".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
w4rma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:44 AM
Response to Original message
39. I didn't get mentioned. Not even my arguments (which weren't about quakes)
Edited on Mon Jan-03-05 12:46 AM by w4rma
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muriel_volestrangler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 08:49 AM
Response to Reply #39
101. Good - because your argument didn't hold up
(a few inches on top of a couple of miles of water won't affect the power of a tsunami).

I think that people who have genuine questions about science that they don't understand, and have ideas that can potentially look outrageous, should ask them as follow-up posts inside an existing thread. They'll get answered there (people with knowledge in the subject should already be looking there), but won't attract immediate attention from people skimming the site for a "look at the silly DUers" article. It also means anyone coming new to the site via a link sees the sober discussion first, before we move off into the hyper-speculative realms.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
daleo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:44 AM
Response to Original message
40. Maybe some muddying of the waters re: who new what and when they knew it
Eventually real questions will be asked about why there was not more warning given to the affected region. Plenty of people monitor the ocean, including the U.S. Navy. This is the 21st Century, there are dozens of lines of communications. And yet, this disaster varied little from the Krakatoa tsunami of the 1880s.

When the death toll of Americans comes clear (most are still just being called missing) the questions will begin. This seems like an attempt to make anyone who has questions into a crazy unscientific nut who thinks the earthquake was triggered by H-bombs planted in the earth's crust.

The mainstream media is doing its job of protecting the status quo with this kind of reporting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eric J in MN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:59 AM
Response to Original message
45. I think this will get us more members (nt)
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThoughtCriminal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 01:07 AM
Response to Original message
47. The Earthquake Weapon threads annoy me but
Edited on Mon Jan-03-05 01:08 AM by ThoughtCriminal
A person who thinks you can trigger a man-made magnitude 9 earthquake is not nearly as annoying as the nuts who think God made it to punish Asians for being non-Christian, non-White or whatever.

The NYT isn't writing about forums promoting that lovely bit of hatred are they?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Child_Of_Isis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 01:56 AM
Response to Reply #47
64. What about a president who believes that
he has been hand picked by god to be involved in a holy war so that the second coming of christ can be carried out. THEY CALL US NUTS???
Ha!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Downtown Hound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 01:58 AM
Response to Reply #47
65. Ditto!
they love to pick on DU because of a few out there posts in the midst of many more "rational" ones, but the truly vile stuff from the right never gets quoted. At least we don't pretend to be balanced NYT. Better to be radical than a hypocrite.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
No Exit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 01:14 AM
Response to Original message
48. Derision will NEVER make me close my mind
I want to consider all possibilities, if I'm trying to figure something out. So if the NYT, or someone else, wants to ridicule, LET 'EM! I don't care!

I've been told some things that I really thought were off-the-wall. Sometimes it was a friend telling me. I would just keep my mouth shut, to avoid insulting the friend, but inwardly I was thinking, "That's crazy."

Well, guess what? Some of the things I smugly thought were "crazy" turned out to be true! Boy, was I glad I kept my big mouth shut!

One time on another forum, I referred to a connection btw assassin John Hinckley's brother and Neil Bush. A Bush-worshipping poster responded, "Oh, now I see what you are--you're just a kook, that's all." I answered back with two Associated Press articles from the time of Reagan's shooting. Those two AP articles described how on the day of the shooting by John Hinckley, "coincidentally", Hinckley's brother was scheduled to have dinner with Neil Bush. Oh, and the likely subject of their dinner conversation was the fact that the Hinckley family's oil company had just been slapped by the federal government (EPA) with some extremely hefty fines (in the millions). See, Neil Bush, being the son of the Vice President, seems to have had some friends in high places... gee, maybe he could help their friends the Hinckleys and get those fines eliminated/reduced?

The guy who'd called me a "kook" never said another word about it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
genieroze Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 01:24 AM
Response to Original message
51. That fact that they are protesting and making fun strikes me as we
hit a nerve somewhere. Hum-mm, very interesting. We aren't the only discussion group saying these things. Take the black vault, holy tinfoil hat. I read a link that was on DU that was from a legit news source and it said that the Russians have a weapon that can cause tremors. Now is that a conspiracy theory?


http://www.bvalphaserver.com/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NAO Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 01:28 AM
Response to Original message
54. The NYT linked wizbangblog.com but NOT D.U. (only mentioned name, no URL)
So they link the conservative blogs, but only name the liberal blogs...

A similar tactic was used by the Bush shilling media in the coverage leading up to the election. They would show footage of Bush speaking (or garbling utterances and smirking) but they when they cut to covering Kerry they would only RELATE what he said, not show him speaking or play footage of him. The result was that people felt the did 'not know Kerry' or 'were not connecting with Kerry'. It was an overt, obvious media ploy.

Linking to the conservative blog, but not to DU is just so obvious and so biased. Will it be noted by NYT or any NYT readers?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OrwellwasRight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 01:32 AM
Response to Reply #54
57. Interesting point
Do you have any data to back up the different format of the coverage (actual clips v. summarizing by the talking heads)? I'm not challenging your statement, I'm just wondering if there is something published to which we can cite in letters to the ed, etc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NAO Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 01:44 AM
Response to Reply #57
60. Just personal observation, day to day on CNN and MSNBC
It was quite obvious, and when I noted it I immediately realized it was responsible for the feel that 'people did not know Kerry' - they felt the 'knew' Bush because they saw and heard him talking on the TV.

The worst instance of this was during October when Bush got an entire hour (!) of TV time for 'an important foreign policy speech' that turned out to be his stump speech with some stuff about Iraq and a few barbs against Kerry thrown in. The networks fell for it a second time, and Kerry never got equal time. He had to pay $$ for ever little 30 second spot.

I do hope the Columbia Campaign Desk or FAIR or some other media watchdog group was monitoring this and could produce hard statistics.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OrwellwasRight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 02:04 AM
Response to Reply #60
67. WORD.
I think that the networks should have given Kerry an hour of free time the following day to compensate for broadcasting that campaign speech instead of a "major foreign policy speech."

Oh yeah, that was the old America, in which there was an "equal time rule." Now, there are just memory holes. :mad:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bettyellen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 05:18 AM
Response to Reply #54
83. that's the same tactic the british press used with irish nationalists...
on television, even when they would interview them you would never hear words coming out of their mouths, they would subtitle them. the result would be planting doubt or creating a disconnect. very stange that it's spread to this country....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fedsron2us Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 08:26 AM
Response to Reply #83
94. The UK press were being directly censored
by the British government. They may have been craven not to resist but at least everyone knew what was going on. The restrictions were taken out in October 19 1988 when Douglas Hurd introduced a notice under clause 13(4) of the BBC Licence and Agreement and section 29(3) of the Broadcasting Act 1981 prohibiting the broadcast of direct statements by representatives or supporters of eleven Irish political and military organisations. The restrictions have subsequently been seen to have been an own goal by the authorities. Governments have got a lot more savvy about these matters since that time. They have learned how to lean on the media without direct recourse to the law. Of course, they have been helped by the fact that control of broadcasting and the press is now concentrated in the hands of a relatively few companies and individuals. It is this corrosive indirect manipulation of the media that makes the DU so important. The analysis of the news that I get on LBN and elsewhere acts as a way of filtering out all the bias. I know that there are plenty of crazy conspiracy theories knocking about on the boards but I am prepared to weed out the nutcases myself. Anyway, just occasionally one of these apparently barking mad people will turn out to be telling the truth so it is a good idea not to close your mind to them completely. I think Skinner and the moderators do an excellent job most of the time. They certainly do not require any lectures on how to run the boards from the NYT.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bettyellen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 01:53 PM
Response to Reply #94
187. Oh I know they were, it's just strange that many tv stations were doing
the same thing to Kerry without any laws forcing them to. It makes me wonder exactly how planned it was, because if i didn't know about it happening in the UK , i might have thought it was more or less coincidental. I saw simply saying that there's a precedent for it, and journalists should have been aware of it.
The only reason that I knew about it in the UK was that I worked on the sound crew for a documentry about human rights abuses back then, and a lot of the victims had very heavy accents and were pretty difficult to understand. None of us could make out some of what they said, and it was hard making people repeat their painful stories over and over again. But we wanted to avoid the subtitles at all costs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
anarchy1999 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 01:54 AM
Response to Original message
62. Typical divide and control. Attack DU, not the real problem.
Edited on Mon Jan-03-05 01:57 AM by anarchy1999
If DU is being attacked in mainstream media, it is serious. We are a force to be reckoned with, if we can keep ourselves together. I believe we can and we will.

on edit:
I would suggest we attack back tomorrow morning to media, the Congress, every single person we can reach with facts and articles and investigative reports and demand accountability from our "4th Estate". DO YOUR JOB!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mike Niendorff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 11:57 AM
Response to Reply #62
156. re: "We are a force to be reckoned with"

I agree 100%.

What Skinner has done here is outstanding. He has created a space for progressive discussions that can actually survive the *massive* attacks that the RW throws at us, and where a community can even thrive and grow in spite of these attacks. That is one hell of an accomplishment. However, it has to be understood that as our defenses evolve, so will the RW's methods of trashing us. For a long time, I've been a proponent of the "good faith" model for activist communities like this, and this is why. Rather than having a crisis each time some RW nut comes up with a new way to skirt the rules and trash the site, we should simply have enough faith in our own judgment to be able to call a spade a spade and act accordingly. If that means that a few genuinely "good faith" nuts get bumped along with the stealth freepers, well, I'm sorry, but I can live with that. This isn't a self-esteem forum, this is a place for building coalitions and strategies for getting the RW out of power before the damage gets even worse. DU has made a name for itself by taking this charge seriously, and I hope that this never changes, even if it does require some tough decisions along the way.


MDN

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Art_from_Ark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 02:00 AM
Response to Original message
66. "Myths"???
As in "stories about non-existent gods"???

:wtf:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RandomKoolzip Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 02:12 AM
Response to Original message
71. Do you know WHY those threads are being derided in the mainstream press?
BECAUSE THEY DESERVE TO BE DERIDED. Anyone who thinks that the Bush administration caused the earthquake/tsunami is not thinking clearly. We are not GI Joe fighting Cobra. We are not battling the Legion of Doom or some other cartoon supervillains; jesus, does it even need to be said? They're flesh and blood motherfuckers, and the crimes they've committed IN REALITY are enough to be outraged about. No need to invent science fiction about the Bush team; the truth is already fucked-up enough.

The Bush Administration is home to some of the most evil men on the planet, BUT THEY ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR EVERY SHITTY THING THAT HAPPENS IN THE WORLD.

This is just like when sober, reasonable people start to talk about, say, the discrepencies in the official story of the JFK assassination or the Plame outing, and then along comes some doofus with spinning eyes yowling about chemtrails: the listener/reader remembers the crazy-assed bullshit about chemtrails, associates it with the legitimate research done on the more reasoned subjects, and in his head, forever links ANY conspiracy reaserch with kooky krap that would make David Icke look like James Randi.

This is why I can't get my wife to read about the odd circumstances surrounding RFK's murder, or about the CIA's involvement in assassinations and covert plots. Because of the nutball crackpot shit she's heard concerning UFO's and chemtrails and mind control, and the attendant associatons made in the media, she'll never open her mind to the legitimate stuff.

Shame on any DUer who helped to propagate this bullshit earthquake theory. Thanks for muddying the waters again......
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OrwellwasRight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 02:19 AM
Response to Reply #71
73. Good point; maybe you should make a thread with this as the lead
so more folks will read it.

:thumbsup:

BTW, I went to a lecture several years ago by a journalist (I think he was French) who had written a book about the RFK conspiracy you refer to. Even though I recall few details now (and I didn't have the spare $$ at the time to buy his book), I left convinced that he made a solid case.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RandomKoolzip Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 02:39 AM
Response to Reply #73
74. Ah, why bother.....people will believe what they want to believe.
And placing it as its own thread wil just bring the woo-woos out of the woodwork.

(I must credit DUer Dookus for some of the above terminology. Nice vocab, Dook!)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Disturbed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 04:39 AM
Response to Reply #74
78. NYT should clean up their act.
Picking on DU does show me that they are trying to discredit any voices of opposition to the Shrub Junta. When DU hits 100K the Corp Media will start hitting even harder.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tanyev Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 08:38 AM
Response to Reply #78
97. Exactly.
Not all that long ago, DU would have been too insignificant to even rate a mention in the NYT. Now we are getting mentioned in the MSM, but usually with derision. Hmmmm. Wonder where that talking point came from?

And how sad it is it when the NYT is writing about bloggers reporting the news, instead of reporting the news?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beware the Beast Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 09:08 AM
Response to Reply #71
106. Thank you, thank you, a million times thank you!
You succinctly made many points I have only thought of saying. Disasters happen, people. I think it makes many feel comfortable in times of crisis to shift blame upon whatever "boogeyman" they see fit. You can come at me with any variety "documented evidence" and "reliable sources" you see fit but I am standing clear on this: Bush is not to blame for the tsunami; blame Earth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChavezSpeakstheTruth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 09:13 AM
Response to Reply #106
108. Koolzip and I went to Highschool witha kid named Earth. I don't think its
fair to blame him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Beware the Beast Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 09:14 AM
Response to Reply #108
109. I would have blamed God,
but ODB's kid had nothing to do with this, either! :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChavezSpeakstheTruth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 09:27 AM
Response to Reply #109
115. That settles it the Earthquake was caused by General Zod - had ta be!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mcscajun Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 09:26 AM
Response to Reply #71
114. You said it all...
Edited on Mon Jan-03-05 09:27 AM by mcscajun
...and no matter how many people have tried with facts, links and plain common sense to sway the Tin-Foil Hat Brigade, they just keep spinning in circles and screaming conspiracy.

We have GOT to get a grip, here. We have enough REAL problems to deal with without manufacturing more. And no matter how much power the Bush Administration gathers to itself, there is a limit to what even they are capable of...really.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jmcgowanjm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 10:50 AM
Response to Reply #71
136. Notice you can't find that DU link? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jmcgowanjm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 11:29 AM
Response to Reply #71
151. Straw Man

A. Imagine somebody making a great fuss showing how
brave they are by demolishing a straw man.

B. The Fallacy of the Straw Man is the opposite of the Principle
of Charity.

Principle of Charity: Make your opponent's argument as
good as it can be.

C. Fallacy of the Straw Man: Make your opponent's
argument look ridiculous so that you can easily demolish it.

D. Example #1: (on the issue of
abortion)

People for Pro Choice are arguing that we ought to murder
little children.

(That is not the position of people who are Pro
Choice.)

E. Example #2: (on national health
care)

People against national health care think that greed for profit
can solve all our medical problems.

F. Politicians are particularly fond of the Straw Man Fallacy.
(It ought to be a black mark against them even to try such
a
tactic, put the public seems to tolerate it.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mike Niendorff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:25 PM
Response to Reply #71
166. Very well put.

Legitimate inquiry requires credibility, and there is simply no excuse for playing into the delegitimization of our own movement. If people aren't clear on this yet, I hope they get clear on it pretty quick.


MDN




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-05-05 12:55 AM
Response to Reply #71
301. It's called "muddying the waters" and it's just a good old fashioned
technique to direct attention away from real issues. We roll our eyes at it, but the NYT prints it.
If I didn't already know this about the NYT, it would be good to know. But once you do know, they only discredit themselves by continuing to publish their bias so openly.
The number of people who see this about the Times are growing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zann725 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 04:39 AM
Response to Original message
77. What was the Gandhi quote: "First they laugh at you, then..."
Let 'em laugh. They're coming to the blogs in search of the REAL news...since they don't cover it any more. Then they try and pick out a few "food for thought" quotes to try and dismiss us...so THEY can be top dogs again!

Laugh if they want, but they keep tuning in, I bet...
And not just to laugh at us! Gotta get their news somewhere!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UpInArms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 08:40 AM
Response to Reply #77
98. my first thought too, zann725 - here's the quote:
"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."

Mahatma Gandhi


You ready for the "fight"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tinoire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 04:48 AM
Response to Original message
80. Unlike the NYT, DU doesn't have blood on its hands. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
goforit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 10:48 PM
Response to Reply #80
268. So true!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sherilocks Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 05:10 AM
Response to Original message
82. Lighten up folks, the article was fair
Read the whole article!

If anyone thinks that some of us aren't prone to conspiracy theories, check out the conjecture here on the death of Robert Matsui.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x1115738#top

Personally, I find a lot of these theories fun to read and I learn a lot from all the rebuttals and searching through the links.

Expect a lot of new chimp haters joining us today, courtesy of the NYTimes article. And maybe a few trolls as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fiona Donating Member (993 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 05:19 AM
Response to Original message
84. I'm glad the NYT
did a story on the woeful state of science education in America. It's unfortunate they found their fodder on DU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HysteryDiagnosis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 06:20 AM
Response to Original message
87. 15,300 hits for HAARP Earthquakes search on Google. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 06:25 AM
Response to Original message
88. Crappy propaganda reporting runs wild in mainstream media!
Lets examine the New York time shall we:

The New York Times Company publishes The New York Times, the International Herald Tribune, The Boston Globe and 16 other newspapers; owns eight network-affiliated television stations and two New York radio stations; and has more than 40 Web sites including NYTimes.com and Boston.com.
http://www.nytco.com/company-properties.html

Wanna find out what corporate interests own the New York times? Well don't bother looking on their Investors -> F.A.Q. page, cause all you'll find there are links to how to invest, and how well the paper does financially.
http://www.corporate-ir.net/ireye/ir_site.zhtml?ticker=nyt&script=1801

A huge part of DU has devoted itself to covering ELECTION FRAUD, yet reaction to "the tsunami" here at DU, of all places, is the news story they decide to cover. In the tradition of such excellent reporting, the point of the article seems to be to make the people here searching for the truth look like wackos.

Tell ya what New York Times, how bout you get your coverage of election fraud up to the level of DU before you start in on us. Jealous of our freedom to speak our minds are ya? Why don't you go do some real reporting and ask Ken Blackwell the list of 36 questions Rep. Conyers asked, yet he refused to answer. Here's a link to those questions just in case fair elections ever become "in style" or "the current thing" like Scott Peterson.
http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/ohblackwellltr12204.pdf
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lindashaw Donating Member (921 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 06:30 AM
Response to Original message
89. Geez, remind me to never post on DU. My post had the header:
Another dumb question about earthquakes, or something like that. And we did have some discussion about my post. Little did I know that it would end up in the New York Times.

Advice: Be careful what we say here! Mercy!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catchawave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 08:32 AM
Response to Reply #89
95. Yes, I remember that discussion....
Also that I didn't think any question was dumb that provoked such an intelligent and educational discussion !
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jmcgowanjm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:26 PM
Response to Reply #89
167. Here's your Post, lindashaw
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Zanti Regent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 06:31 AM
Response to Original message
90. Go to hell, Screw York Times!
Edited on Mon Jan-03-05 06:31 AM by The Zanti Regent
Worthless bunch of ass kissing Nazis!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spooked Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 06:42 AM
Response to Original message
91. An attempt to discredit DU
but why? lol
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ganja Ninja Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 07:36 AM
Response to Original message
92. This from a "news" paper that carried the Bush lies about the war
without questioning any of it. They don't have much credibility left so they decided to point a finger and laugh a DU.

Hey NY Times! We were right about Bush, the WMD's, the reasons for the war and all the other crap that's come down the pipe from this administration. As long as you continue to print the lies, spin and right wing disinformation of people like Judith Miller and William Saf-Liar we're laughing right back at you. If the editors of the times need a good laugh they need only to pull up some of your issues from before the war. Tin foil hats indeed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UpInArms Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 07:41 AM
Response to Original message
93. "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then
you win."

Mahatma Gandhi
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mad_Dem_X Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 09:01 AM
Response to Reply #93
104. Great quote! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jpgray Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 09:12 AM
Response to Reply #93
107. Except sometimes you only merit constant and unabating laughter
And then you don't do anyone much good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Merlin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 09:01 AM
Response to Original message
105. Don't care what they say about us. AS LONG AS THEY USE OUR NAME!
Nobody would give a damn about DU if we hadn't developed a hell of a lot of clout over the past couple of years.

Eat your heart out, NYT, WizBang and Feeperland!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
underpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 09:22 AM
Response to Reply #105
112. Yep any publicity is good publicity
let people log in or just lurk and find out what DU is all about.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
buddysmellgood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 09:17 AM
Response to Original message
110. NYTimes reporters are reading your posts. Good job Duers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mattclearing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 09:54 AM
Response to Original message
118. The New York Times is Amateur Hour.
I posted this in another related thread, but thought it was worth bringing here, in case the freak who wrote this comes here.

Any real journalist will tell you that this is poorly written. "For people who hate the Bush Administration?" That's unattributed statement of belief. You don't do that as a journalist.

A journalist is supposed to show that people hate the Bush Administration through quotation and exposition: i.e.:

"Tasteblind, a poster at Democratic Underground said, 'That Bush Administration is a pack of shit-eating criminals, thieves, and lunatics.' Such derision towards the Bush Administration at Democratic Underground is common."

That would be proper. The New York Times is totally amateur hour.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
atommom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 10:35 AM
Response to Reply #118
125. I had the same feeling as I read this article. It reads like something
out of a student newspaper. But at a student newspaper, the writer would be critiqued for being so lazy, and the whole thing would have been a learning experience. I doubt that will happen in this case. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 10:53 AM
Response to Reply #125
138. I agree it sounded very amateurish...But, we know why it was written...
Thanks for mentioning that...Lot's of folks here aren't looking at "why" it was written...and why it seems like it belonged in a student newspaper...:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alaintex Donating Member (82 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:03 PM
Response to Reply #118
157. Another trick that all the MSM uses ...
Another trick that all the MSM uses is to start a paragraph as a statement of fact, then hide behind some anonymous quoter, i.e.:

"The Bush Administration is a pack of shit-eating criminals, thieves, and lunatics according to their critics."

But I think they probably do it against both sides.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marions ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 05:56 PM
Response to Reply #118
227. Yes, Journalist sinks to Foxlevel
I agree with tasteblind who said:
"Any real journalist will tell you that this is poorly written. "For people who hate the Bush Administration?" That's unattributed statement of belief. You don't do that as a journalist."

We do have to counter this kind of media spin, because readers will often make snap judgments based on an opening paragraph without reading the rest. Send emails to NYT.

This line at least should have been "a site where people often question the policies of the Bush administration." 'Hate' is too strong to describe the beliefs of such a large and diverse group. Very misleading...but so inflammatory that it will draw the curious to DU and then they can decide for themselves.

I am inspired and encouraged by those at DU who are calling the MSM on this stuff. NYT taking this particular post out of thousands --so grossly unfair--it's enough to make one formulate conspiracy theories...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Massachusetts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 10:10 AM
Response to Original message
121. "online gathering place for
people who hate the bush administration".


Would there be an article if it was anything different?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leesa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 10:19 AM
Response to Original message
123. Thank goodness we aren't perpetuating myths like 9-11 was done
by a guy on dialysis living in a cave in Afghanistan. Would hate to be irresponsible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
atommom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 10:26 AM
Response to Original message
124. Damn, I need to get this person's job...
If I can surf DU all day and cherry-pick a few posts to write on, and then get published by the NYT, I think I've discovered my dream job!

Still annoys me that the media always searches out the flashy controversies and virtually ignores the good informative conversations that we have here. And I'm still waiting for the MSM to notice that the true loonies are not here, but at Freeperville. For true irrationality and spite, you need look no further.

Last of all, THIS IS NOT A BLOG!

There. Now I feel better. ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
noamnety Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 10:38 AM
Response to Original message
126. Eavesdropping on conversations makes for good journalism
Next week, I hope to see the NYT report on a random conversation they overhead in Starbucks. And the next week, a conversation they listened in on at a bar.

If they could do that AND keep us up to date on all the critical info related to Paris Hilton, they'll be the envy of Fox.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nashville_brook Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 09:20 PM
Response to Reply #126
260. better than Wonkette -- she's just running Craig's List ads - eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Carni Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 10:42 AM
Response to Original message
127. I am sure they called people warning of nuclear fallout *cranks* too
What kind of a *NUT* would have claimed that wearing a wide brimmed hat might not protect you from *invisible death rays* during nuke tests?

What sort of a tin foil hatter would have thought that cigarettes (lucrative as they are) could cause cancer?

It's just a good damned thing we have always been able to put our trust in the firm hand of the American Government--if these crackpots had their way, the damned fools would be insisting on alternate energy mandates and God knows what else!

(In summation: If the media is starting with the *crackpots and nuts* stuff already...maybe there really IS something to the theory that Bush's wreckless policies played a role in this horrific disastor!)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
atommom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 10:48 AM
Response to Reply #127
130. The first doctor to say docs should wash their hands
to avoid the spread of disease was a "crank," too. He died in disgrace. Whether they're right or not, people with unpopular ideas often get the shaft from the rest of society.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 10:53 AM
Response to Reply #127
139. How Do You Feel About Chemtrails?
The government denies that commercial jets are spraying mind-control chemicals on populated areas. So if they deny it, there must be something to it, eh? :eyes: What astounding logic!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:38 PM
Response to Reply #139
168. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 01:27 PM
Response to Reply #168
181. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Carni Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 04:48 PM
Response to Reply #181
221. I *attacked you personally*
My initial comment about the media having their fangs out about "cranks" etc on DU and then stating that maybe there is some validity to the weird theories if the media is on it this quick
was tongue in cheek.

It was in fact sarcasm.

Of course I have no "proof" that global warming, or bombs, or whatever else has contributed to this earthquake and I never stated that I thought that in the first place.

I stated that I can't prove some of the more offbeat theories that I have seen on DU WRONG.

I have no right to call some of these people *cranks*

I am not the board monitor, no one died and left me the final authority on what DU posters want to think or post.

I do know that I don't give a rat's ass what some idiotic column in the newspaper that brought us *Judith Miller and her Weapons of Mass detruction* bullshit writes about the forum.

As far as the right is concerned the whole of DU is based on "conspiracy theory" (Remember? They think Bush won-TWICE)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 06:53 PM
Response to Reply #221
235. Ah... Okay. It Was Sarcasm. Thanks For The Explanation.
Edited on Mon Jan-03-05 07:01 PM by arwalden
>> "I *attacked you personally*" <<

Well, yes you did. When you confuse the message with the messenger and start making baseless accusations that I'm "flaming" or that I'm motivated by a desire to appear to be "more intelligent"... then yes... indeed you have made it personal. You're attacking me, instead of attacking my message.

>> My initial comment about the media having their fangs out about "cranks" etc on DU and then stating that maybe there is some validity to the weird theories if the media is on it this quick
was tongue in cheek. <<

Oh. Tongue in cheek. Ya know... that just completely escaped my notice. My apologies.

>> It was in fact sarcasm. <<

Sarcasm. Hmmm. Okay.

Sarcasm often difficult to decipher when the text is lacking body language like a raised eyebrow, a coy glance, wink, smile or laughter. Minus vocal inflection it's also easy to miss.

>> Of course I have no "proof" that global warming, or bombs, or whatever else has contributed to this earthquake and I never stated that I thought that in the first place. <<

Okay. Did someone accuse you of making those claims? Shame on them... whoever they are.

>> I stated that I can't prove some of the more offbeat theories that I have seen on DU WRONG. <<

Well... that's because it's IMPOSSIBLE to prove a negative. (For example, if I told you that I can levitate, but I only do it when I'm alone, you couldn't prove me wrong either. That would be trying to prove a negative as well.)

>> I have no right to call some of these people *cranks* <<

LOL. Well, if you say so! I'm certainly in no position to argue with you about that. I imagine that's probably true that you don't have the right to do that.

No worries... I don't mind calling cranks and crackpots what they really are... when it doesn't conflict with DU rules.

>> I am not the board monitor, no one died and left me the final authority on what DU posters want to think or post. <<

Uh... okay? I'm a little confused what you're getting at here, Carni. Certainly, in theory, people are free to have and post their opinions... but in practice, it cannot be denied that DU is becoming known for its crackpots.

>> I do know that I don't give a rat's ass what some idiotic column in the newspaper that brought us *Judith Miller and her Weapons of Mass detruction* (sic) bullshit writes about the forum. <<

Okay. I'm not sure what that has to do with anything. Are you confusing me with someone else? Or you having an argument with someone else simultaneously in your reply to me?

>> As far as the right is concerned the whole of DU is based on "conspiracy theory" (Remember? They think Bush won-TWICE) <<

Never mind about my previous question. I think you just answered it for me.








Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 07:59 PM
Response to Reply #235
245. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 08:30 PM
Response to Reply #245
252. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
HeeBGBz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 04:48 PM
Response to Reply #168
222. No Questions and no deviation from the collective paradigm
Thinking again? What were you thinking. Don't embarrass the people that count.

Kick out all the tinfoilers. Forget about the foolishness that arises in the Lounge, it's the tinfoil that offends the masses.

You are going to need bodies to fight the current regime. Don't run them all off, you may need them someday.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Carni Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 05:09 PM
Response to Reply #222
224. How am I running him, or her, *out*
I made for all practical purposes a joke in my first post and got a lecture on logic and being a crank--that's rich.

Don't embarrass the *people who count*

Pardon me...I thought every poster here "counted" and was entitled to an opinion, but apparently not.










Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HeeBGBz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 05:28 PM
Response to Reply #224
225. I got some splainin to do
"Don't embarrass the people that count."

Was referring to those who are embarrassed by tinfoil theories and how it seems that viewpoint is the only one that matters. Yes. Everyone counts. That was the point I was trying to make.

"Don't run them all off, you may need them someday."

Again was not referring to you, Carni, but to those who would like to ban those with tinfoily thoughts.

Sorry. I should have clearly stamped the SARCASM label on my post.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Carni Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 05:36 PM
Response to Reply #225
226. I realized that AFTER I posted
Sorry!

I agree with you completely :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Moderator DU Moderator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 09:29 PM
Response to Reply #168
261. All of you, cut it out.
Sheesh.

On this board, please restrict yourself to discussing the posted issues, not aspects of the person posting them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
goforit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 10:42 PM
Response to Reply #127
266. Carni, ya tell it like it is:"Tin foil hatterinfer cigaretts cause cancer"
Edited on Mon Jan-03-05 10:43 PM by goforit
Yah you go NYT!!!

Carni will tell ya where ya stand!!

Hats off to you!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 10:47 AM
Response to Original message
129. ** THIS IS EMBARRASSING ***
Edited on Mon Jan-03-05 10:48 AM by arwalden
Why are these uninformed cranks and crackpots gathering here at DU? It makes DU look bad and by association, it makes many Democrats look bad too.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KoKo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 10:55 AM
Response to Reply #129
140. The guy who wrote the article is ***EMBARRASSING*** Don't take it
Edited on Mon Jan-03-05 10:55 AM by KoKo01
so seriously. Look behind why it was written in such a juvenile way..

I agree with "Crisco" The "Grey Lady's drawers are showing," in this. :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 11:13 AM
Response to Reply #140
149. Actually... I Was ** EMBARRASSED ** At DU's Kooks And Cranks BEFORE
this article was written. I have very little concern in this article itself or for what the writer's motivation might have been.

Just set the article aside for a moment and we're still left with the embarrassing fact that there is a prolific (yet loud and cantankerous and whiny) minority of ill-informed, undereducated, superstitious, paranoid cranks who have wandered in to DU and simply STAYED.

I suspect it could have been ANY other discussion forum of any flavor (politics, home improvement, travel, retirement... whatever) and they would have been just as happy. It just happened that a few of them took up residence here and now they are attracting their kook friends to discuss cranky theories that have absolutely NO basis in scientific fact. Any any attempts to rebut with scientific fact are scorned. :eyes:

THAT'S what's really ** EMBARRASSING **! That article itself means nothing to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GOPFighter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 11:46 AM
Response to Reply #149
153. OK, Devils advocate here.
This is a public forum whose membership is broad, very broad. A lot of what I read here makes me cringe, but to be perfectly honest, much of my knowledge and views when I was a teen or early 20s was pretty spotty. I'm sure some things I might have written back then would embarrass me today. In fact, even now I occasionally write something that turns out to be a howler, and I learn from it. DU is a great educational forum. I assume when someone writes something stupid, they soon realize how dumb their post was and learn from it (or get pissed and leave).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
atommom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 11:52 AM
Response to Reply #153
155. I agree! And I think that forums like this can be very educational
for anyone who is openminded enough to rethink his/her positions. We have a great variety of people here, with many different kinds of knowledge and expertise, and they're all quite willing to poke holes in our arguments and show us different ways of looking at things.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:15 PM
Response to Reply #155
160. Heh heh heh.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GOPFighter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:54 PM
Response to Reply #160
171. Is that...
Heh heh heh :thumbsup:

or

Heh heh heh :thumbsdown:

:evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:14 PM
Response to Reply #153
159. How Can Someone Realize "How Dumb Their Post Was" When
in many cases, rebuttal isn't permitted?

>> DU is a great educational forum. <<

For some things, yes.

>> I assume when someone writes something stupid, they soon realize how dumb their post was and learn from it (or get pissed and leave). <<

Don't be too sure about that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DireStrike Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 02:14 PM
Response to Reply #159
194. Rebuttal "isn't permitted"?
By who?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SemperEadem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 02:30 PM
Response to Reply #159
197. I agree with you on this one
>> I assume when someone writes something stupid, they soon realize how dumb their post was and learn from it (or get pissed and leave). <<

Don't be too sure about that.


Exactly. I've seen the above mentioned type of poster who digs in and seems to spend the next 4 hours checking and rechecking their 'my posts' to keep the stupidity of their groundless argument going.

And interestingly, it's been quite recently that I've seen a rise in this sort of 'poster' here at DU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alaintex Donating Member (82 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:18 PM
Response to Reply #153
161. First of all, the devil doesn't need an advocate...
But that's a whole other issue.

Your acknowledgment about sometimes being a knucklehead (my word, not yours) when you were younger should not be justification for others to be knuckleheads today.

When my teenagers do dumb things I correct them. When my wife tells me that I did dumb things as a kid and I sound just like my father all I can respond with is that my father was right, and I was wrong back then.

I agree with you that when someone writes something stupid, they soon realize how dumb their post was and learn from it (or get pissed and leave).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lib_1138 Donating Member (143 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 08:04 PM
Response to Reply #161
246. I think Devil's Advocate is a term used as part of Canonization
The Church selects someone who is responsible for taking the "anti" position when someone is up for Sainthood. That person is called "the Devil's Advocate."

If you already knew that, I am sorry if I pontificated where it was not needed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ashmanonar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-08-05 05:17 PM
Response to Reply #246
305. lol
interesting choice of words..."pontificated" *

isn't a devil's advocate (advocatus diaboli) also someone involved in choosing a new pope? if i'm not mistaken, he finds out everything possibly dirty on a chosen bishop who has been plausibly chosen as the pope, in order to find out if this person is suitable or not...

*: the reason i think it's interesting wording is that the word pontificate's original meaning has to do with the office of pontiff, or the pope...either that was a linguistic slip or some damn clever referencing...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mike Niendorff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:46 PM
Response to Reply #149
169. well said.

and seconded.


MDN
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
goforit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 10:53 PM
Response to Reply #149
270. Whats wrong with "kooks and cranks" whom have evidence????
Anybody who tells the truth here is considered a kook
or crank by this thug regime.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
murray hill farm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 01:54 PM
Response to Reply #129
188. uninformed cranks? Crackpots?
"uninformed crank" and "crackpot" are like beauty..it is in the eye of the beholder....if it embarrasses you to be associated with open discussion because u want to be seen by the media in the USA as one who only takes part in...as seen through the eyes of the NYT..as appropriate and scientific acceptable...and not subject to ridicule and criticism, then a scientific journal is a better place for you to post..and be associated with since u then do not have to suffer the embarrassment of belonging here...be sure it is a scientific discussion that only allows mention of already scientifically pr oven theories though..cause otherwise....embarrassment!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 06:15 PM
Response to Reply #188
228. The Plural Of Anecdote Is Not "Data".
An "open discussion" is not a substitute for fact.

I never knew that facts were subjective... like beauty. Interesting.

I am sorry if I gave you the impression that I was *personally* embarrassed... that is not true. I have no reason to be personally embarrassed. --- Instead, I am embarrassed that DU is developing a reputation as being a gathering point for crackpots and kooks.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 06:34 PM
Response to Reply #228
231. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 07:34 PM
Response to Reply #231
242. Mexicoxpat, Any Problems That Concern Me Go Far Beyond...
... what the impact of that particular thread may have. It's the sum total of everything put together.

Yes, I'm well aware of the little verbal device, gimmick, of making an absurd suggestion by putting in the the form of a question. In doing so, the person who makes the statement can always claim "but I was just asking" or "I never said for sure".

You know... if enough tabloid headlines ask "Is Tom Cruise Gay?" without providing any evidence, they've already planted the notion that Tom Cruise is gay. --- When an absurd or controversial question is asked in that manner, the author wants the reader to assume the answer is "yes".

Indeed... I'm quite aware of how that works.

>> but what u see as crackpots and kooks is subjective...your label is the part of you that is subjective...and thus in the eye of the beholder that is you. <<

That's a bit of a stretch. When someone states "facts" (or things that they believe to be true) such as the earth being flat or that magnets cure cancer (things that have NO basis in scientific fact or theory and which are easily disproved) then these folks are indeed cranks and crackpots.

>> Soooooo, scientifically speaking, before u call any of us such names again, be sure you have scientific proof of it...at least a researchable link...that says we are certifiably wacko or kooky or cractpots. <<

I see... you want me to prove-a-negative. You want me to DIS-prove the absurd claims rather than putting the burden of proof where it BELONGS... which is on the person who is MAKING the claim in the FIRST PLACE. :eyes:

Good grief!





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
murray hill farm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 09:05 PM
Response to Reply #242
256. OK..i see your point!!
and i agree..to a point! My concern is that ..well..you never know what may appear to be "way out there" one day..may change the next...and a question..which this was..and a legitimate one from the perception of the questioner..should be respected..rather than label the person as a kook or crackpot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bill McBlueState Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 11:09 PM
Response to Reply #228
273. keeper
"The Plural Of Anecdote Is Not 'Data.'"

Man, that's a keeper. Thanks!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
satori Donating Member (198 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 10:48 AM
Response to Original message
132. World renowned scientist-The Earth as a weapon in 21st Century of Wars
Third World Network
The Earth as a weapon in 21st Century of Wars
By Rahab S Hawa

While scientists, governments and concerned groups worry about increased industrial emissions of greenhouse gases and its effects on the planet, the role of the military in climate change has been ignored.

When environmental crises occur, it is usually only the civilian economy that is called upon to rectify the balance, while military programmes are rarely taken to task, says Dr Rosalie Bertell, renowned scientist and nuclear activist.

At the Peoples Health Assembly in December 2000 in Dhaka, Bangladesh, Dr. Bertell revealed to a shocked and incredulous audience that the latest weapons in the arsenal of the US military is Planet Earth itself ... and weather will be one of the worst destructive weapons by the year 2025.

Dr. Bertell was referring to how engineered earthquakes and tornadoes could wreak havoc on populations and nations.

http://www.twnside.org.sg/title/hawa2.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
atommom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 10:50 AM
Response to Original message
134. BTW, how is it that the news stories never mention this forum (LBN),
and what a great collection of information we have here? Anyone browsing through here can learn a great deal in a very short period of time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 10:50 AM
Response to Original message
135. They didn't quote my favorite tinfoil hat theory
The pumping of oil from wells in Indonesia caused the earthquake that triggered the tsunami, ergo it's all Bush's fault.

:tinfoilhat:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chovexani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 11:00 AM
Response to Original message
142. Who cares about the NY Whore Times?
As far as I'm concerned they have even less credibility than the NY Post.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNN0LHI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 11:06 AM
Response to Original message
144. Hey NYT. Who was right about the Iraq war and all them WMDs?
Still have that compulsive liar Judith Miller working for your rag, do you? You should be ashamed to still have her on your payroll. But you do. That says a lot.

Don

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
progressivebydesign Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 01:12 PM
Response to Reply #144
177. Truer words have never been written! BRAVO! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jmcgowanjm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 11:08 AM
Response to Original message
145. Could someone find this DU link?
"The entire Pacific Ocean is slowly but surely closing in on
itself. What happened is that the floor of the Indian Ocean
slid over part of the Pacific Ocean, releasing massive tension
in the Earth's crust.

"That's it. No mystic injury to the Gaia spirit or
anything."

Because this poster quoted is as bad as the first poster.

1- this quake had nothing to do with
the Pacific Ocean-unless you want to get into
Harmonic Resonance.

2-the "floor" of the Indian Ocean "slid"
UNDER the (enough!)-Sunda Plate right where the
Australian Plate joins both.

3 And this event is not over:
http://www.iris.edu/seismon/

http://volcano.und.nodak.edu/vwdocs/volc_images/southeast_asia/indonesia/toba.html

And, BTW, NYT, since you're here. when do you plan on
releasing the raw exit poll data from Nov 2,
and how long do you think you'll be able to square
BushCo's 40something approval rating and his
"overwhelming" 58million votes?

While it's frustrating that we still can't see the exit polls,
let's thank the media for at least resolving one thing for us
today. Now we know why we don't see stories about the
election on the evening news. Their refusal to release the
exit polls shows us categorically that there is a concerted
effort on behalf of the major media outlets to consciously
prevent the information from getting out. It's not simple
oversight, and it's not because they don't think it's
newsworthy. Now we know. They are withholding
information from us.
Now that that's been resolved, we can move on to the
next question: What are they (you NYT!) hiding, and why?

http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2004/1044
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SemperEadem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 02:34 PM
Response to Reply #145
199. look at post 167
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Isere Donating Member (920 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 11:13 AM
Response to Original message
148. Now's the time to take out our tinfoil hats
along with our dancing shoes.

http://eclectech.co.uk/mindcontrol.php

In fact, this link should be posted after every silly, over-the-top post like the ones cited in the NYTimes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SemperEadem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 02:38 PM
Response to Reply #148
200. that is so silly!!!!
but cute!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lady lib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:04 PM
Response to Original message
158. Will this result in self-censorship?
Will you now think twice before posting because maybe, just maybe, your post will be published and derided? I hope not. Personally, I like the the free-flowing exchange of ideas - wacky or not - that are really a form of brainstorming. You take the good and leave the bad, and learn something or look at an issue in a different way, as a result.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onager Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:18 PM
Response to Reply #158
162. Typical of the post-1990's NYT
The troubles at the Times started LONG before their current craven Bu$h-worship and their mindless cheerleading for the Iraq cluster-Cheney.

Go WAY back to Jeff Gerth's "reporting" on Whitewater. He was talking to every Clinton-hating crank in Arkansas. People who told him he was being set up by racist kooks like "Justice Jim" Johnson were ignored......even when those people were Arkansas Republicans.

EVERY sleazy rumor was dumped straight onto the TIMES front page. And nobody at the TIMES would ever admit it, but there was clearly one reason for this: the TIMES wanted its very own Watergate scandal, and nothing was going to stand in their way. And if no scandal existed, they would invent one.

You know, I've actually written for publication, though not for such a distinguished (chuckle) rag as the Old Grey Lady. Believe it or not, children, long ago publications used to employ people called "fact-checkers." The TIMES must have fired all their fact-checkers around 1991 in a cost-saving move.

Of course, Gerth went on to another journalistic coup: persecuting the scientist Wen Ho Lee.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jmcgowanjm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:21 PM
Response to Original message
163. Here's the Derided Thread
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cheswick2.0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:23 PM
Response to Original message
165. so is the NYT saying the war in Iraq is NOT responsible for the tsunami?
Edited on Mon Jan-03-05 12:27 PM by Cheswick2.0
D'OH! LOL

What I would like to know is when they are going to do a piece on how DU was MONTHS ahead of the rest of the country on realizing the Iraq war was not about WMD?

On Edit: I wanted to add that I think the article is somewhat fair. I am not sure why they felt they needed to quote some conservative about DU.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lady lib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:59 PM
Response to Reply #165
173. I thought gay Swedes caused tsunamis
You do know God hates those sodomites}(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lindashaw Donating Member (921 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 12:58 PM
Response to Original message
172. OKAY! ENOUGH! I am not a crackpot and all the things...
I'm being accused of. All I did the other day was ask a question. I said in my header that it was a dumb question about earthquakes. I am a 65-year-old woman, and I am NOT all the ugly names that posters on this site are calling me.

I posed my question because I once wrote a piece on my friend, Millie Hughes, who was an astronaut on the space shuttle Columbia. That piece was published in an international magazine. Millie said that the earth has a glow about it that dead planets, like the moon, do not have. She said that the earth is a living thing, and you can see that from outer space. She also said that she saw the smoke from the Kuwait oilfield fires, and it had traveled almost around the globe.

My question about earthquakes was not a crazy question -- about whether or not mankind could hurt this planet and set it up for disasters to happen.

Why the NYT picked my post to print, I don't know. But okay, you all win. I will not be coming back to DU. I've been coming here since before the war, but even an idiot can tell when they've outlived their welcome.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lady lib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 01:04 PM
Response to Reply #172
174. Your question wasn't crazy
and I think the vast majority of posts are supportive. Please stay.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GOPFighter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 01:08 PM
Response to Reply #172
175. Whoa
Hey Linda, you said right up front that your post might contain a stupid question. It generated a lot of good comments and I think a lot of people learned from it. After reading your initial post I think the NYTs had no right to use your post to deride you, DU, and blogs in general. I hope you won't leave DU, you were very upfront when you posted. That should have been the end of it. For that, I think the New York Times owes you a big apology!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cheswick2.0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 01:08 PM
Response to Reply #172
176. I agree with you
I don't see anything wrong about asking a question. Ignore the lousy rightwing reporter for the NYT and the rude people here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fedsron2us Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 01:19 PM
Response to Reply #172
178. Your question was far from crazy for a General Discussion board
Don't be upset because some lazy journalist at the NYT picked up on it because he could not be bothered to write some original copy to earn his salary. Unfortunately, some of the people who post on DU board do not seem to realise that the rest of us are not all science honors graduates. A little more civility and understanding on their part would seem to be in order.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Minstrel Boy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 02:24 PM
Response to Reply #172
196. Please don't be run off by the few who crave the respect of those
who will always find a cause to hold us in disdain.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Child_Of_Isis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 03:58 PM
Response to Reply #172
214. I believe the Earth is a living thing.
Edited on Mon Jan-03-05 03:59 PM by Child_Of_Isis
And that mankind can hurt this planet and set it up for disasters. But, I also believe that she, she being Mother Earth, will shake us off like so many pesky fleas before we EVER destroy her.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HeeBGBz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 04:10 PM
Response to Reply #172
215. I'm sorry, Linda, that you were treated rudely.
Some people are way too harsh in their ability to communicate. Knowledge snobs. Overcompensating for lack of heart, IMO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nothing Without Hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 04:14 PM
Response to Reply #172
216. PLEASE STAY!! What the NYT article showed ...
Edited on Mon Jan-03-05 04:18 PM by Nothing Without Hope
...if anyone will actually read it, is how information is exchanged and people can learn in this environment. That was the whole reason you asked your question, right? You wanted to get other peoples' input. Well, you did. There is a colorful array of points of view and backgrounds at this site, and that is one of its great strengths IMO. Even though it can be irritating at times.

Your question about earthquakes was absolutely not a crazy question. And many of the people who responded to it didn't treat it like one, they played it straight and gave information and their own opinions. If some people were rude, including the NYT reporter, that's not your fault. It's theirs, and it is indeed a fault.

I didn't contribute to your thread when you asked your question, but I did to several others that asked various similar questions about the cause of the Indonesian earthquake. I replied, as some did in this thread, with geology-based answers and links to threads with fuller explanations. That's what you were after, right? Getting more information so you could understand and make up your mind. DU is a good place to do that. In fact, I think it's damn-near unique in the range of human experience, knowledge, and points of view it draws upon.

In my opinion, the NYT owes you a big apology. The article is one more example, as if we needed one, of how reporters are often willing to intrude and embarrass people and distort situations in order to produce a "better" story. That's NOT YOUR FAULT. And it's not DU's fault, either. This is a forum where all can come if they are reasonably well-behaved, so opinions and backgrounds are going to be all over the page. I rather like that. If some want to try to puff themselves up by ridiculing people who have a different point of view or educational background, they should know that they don't do themselves any favors in acting that way. In fact, they look pretty juvenile and petty when they do.

Please stay.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Carni Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 04:53 PM
Response to Reply #172
223. We don't all think you are a *crank*
You have every right to post your opinions and screw anyone that tells you otherwise.

I don't see how in the hell making the observation that mankind is hurting the planet is the stuff of fantasy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WorseBeforeBetter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 01:11 AM
Response to Reply #172
280. This thread goes on forever...
and I haven't read it fully b/c it's late here on the nasty 'ol liberal East coast and I need to get to bed, but have you considered a letter to the editor? Is DU responding to the NYT? There are many well-informed, scathingly funny members on this site; surely DU can come up w/ some sort of memorable response. Or is that against the rules?!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NashVegas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 02:10 PM
Response to Reply #172
300. Your Question Was a Great Question, Linda
Never be afraid to ask questions, even stupid ones. It's still the best way invented to get answers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chimpanzee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 01:25 PM
Response to Original message
180. Any goofball can post a whacky conspiracy theory
but DU tends to separate the wheat from the chaff quickly and either debunk or support the theory with facts. I don't think the NYT quite figured that out completely.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 01:36 PM
Response to Reply #180
184. Really?
>> DU tends to separate the wheat from the chaff quickly and either debunk or support the theory with facts. <<

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chimpanzee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 01:56 PM
Response to Reply #184
191. That's my experience.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 02:15 PM
Response to Reply #191
195. Okay. Whatever.
Maybe it's your suggestion that this "tends to" happen is what I have difficulty with. That's so subjective and vague that it could mean many different things to different people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chimpanzee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 10:37 PM
Response to Reply #195
265. Jezus - it was just a comment!
Are you going to dissect every sentence I post here? I think 'tend' is a proper word for the meaning I intended. It is MY opinion, not yours. You have the right to your own opinion, just don't nitpick on mine. Thank you very much!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 11:08 PM
Response to Reply #265
272. Chimpanzee... Here's My Reply.
>> Are you going to dissect every sentence I post here? <<

Mercy me! A question like that would lead one to believe that I'm following you around from forum to forum just nitpicking "EVERY SENTENCE YOU POST HERE". :eyes:

The facts you assert are incorrect. I don't do that!

However... I will point out when someone is being vague and when their ambiguity makes it difficult to figure out exactly where they are coming from. Without providing detailed examples, that's what I was trying to do.

Whoops. I'm embarrassed. It looks like my OWN attempts at being brief and my decision NOT to go overboard by providing examples, it looks like I'm guilty myself of being vague. Sorry.

Here... maybe this will help to explain what I meant.

Judging from your original "tends to" claim, and the proud, reassuring tone of the message, one might assume that DU has a good record of distinguishing fact from fiction. But consider this...

If false information posted on DU is corrected 51% of the time, then one still could accurately claim that it "tends to" be corrected. Unfortunately, that would leave 49% of the false information unchallenged and uncorrected. (Wow! Forty-nine percent. That's not very impressive and certainly not something worth bragging about.)

Or, if disinformation was corrected 95% of the time, someone could still say "tends to" be corrected. Even though this is less precise and understated, it's still technically accurate.

This is what I meant by vague responses being able to be interpreted differently. Your meaning wasn't clear, that's all. Everyone does it, including me. No need to be so defensive. I'm sorry that if my response to your message has distressed you.

-- Allen


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chimpanzee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 11:00 AM
Response to Reply #272
289. I'm afraid I don't agree with you at all.
Why don't you go challenge some other innocent poster.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arwalden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 11:38 AM
Response to Reply #289
293. Chimpanzee...
... okay, you disagree. If you have no further on-topic arguments to make in support of your message or that refute my message, then why not just leave it at that?

I fail to see the point of making that other personal comment. :eyes:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chimpanzee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-05-05 01:52 PM
Response to Reply #293
302. I don't. If you don't want me to reply, then stop replying
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tx_dem41 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #191
198. I hardly ever see that happen....
usually everybody just gets ticked off and goes home.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sterling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 06:57 PM
Response to Reply #198
237. But the arguments are posted for others who are more objective
to reference. It is a great tool for those who know how to use it. Not everyone gets the same thing from DU.

Not everyone benefits from it's potential equally. Some refuse to use it as anything other than a pissing contest.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Northern Perspective Donating Member (67 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 01:32 PM
Response to Original message
183. Dare to be DU
They just wanted to report on the PEW research related to "blogs" and used one DU thread as a hook. There are a thousand thousand examples (uh-oh...hyperbole!)of DU, KOS, et al. "self-correcting". So, it's not as derisive as it might seem. It is, as someone else pointed out, "lazy reporting".

NYT could go to the freeper site and see someone arguing that the world is flat, gravity is a liberal conspiracy and there were WMD.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SheepyMcSheepster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 01:47 PM
Response to Original message
186. those crazy nuts at DU who didn't believe Iraq had WMD's..................
what were they thinking?!!??

how out of touch from reality these people must be! /sarcasm
:eyes:


the fact that DU is getting negative attention is due to:

a. someone feeling threatend by it

or

b. a way for opponents to drive wedges



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AngryAmish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 01:55 PM
Response to Original message
189. Don't you realize the NYT is the enemy?
They spout pro-Bush propaganda at every opportunity. They got us into the war.

They must be crushed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lady lib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 02:12 PM
Response to Reply #189
193. What newspaper would you recommend?
I ask because having given up on the right wing press in Arizona, I just subscribed to the NYT. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NAO Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 03:06 PM
Response to Reply #193
203. AZ Daily Star is not bad - UK Guardian is best - BuzzFlash
Edited on Mon Jan-03-05 03:08 PM by NAO
The Arizona Daily Star, Tucson's newspaper is pretty good. It's fantastic compared to the reich-wing rag sheet published in Phoenix, The Arizona Republic.

The UK based Guardian (online or in print) is an excellent source of news.

http://buzzflash.com is an excellent news resource - the very best I know of on the web - it's like a progressive news clipping service, and a link I vist daily.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lady lib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 06:36 PM
Response to Reply #203
232. Thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Coastie for Truth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 02:04 PM
Response to Original message
192. All sorts of wacko theories....
I live between America's two favorite earthquake fault lines -

(1) the San Andreas - the one that runs through Northridge-Los Angeles and just west of California Highway 1 (Pacific Coast Highway) by the Cliff House in San Francisco,

(2) the Calaveras-Hayward - the one that runs under I-680 in the "South Bay" and right through the UC Berkeley Campus,

in the flood plain defined by Coyote Creek and the Guadalupe River, and in the Tsunami inundation plane at the southern tip (Alviso-Fremont-San Jose) of San Francisco Bay -- and I have been through quakes and mini-stsunamis and through (and now teach) the numerous and various and sundry "Living on the Fault Line- Earthquake Preparedness" courses that are ubiquitous out here. Just like the quakes and tsunamis themselves.

These events are as natural as earthquakes and volcanoes, and - once you know the epicenter of a deep ocean quake - and have the "hydro charts" of the ocean bottom - as predictable as tracing Highs and Lows on a weather map.

The hardware (weather data buoys, weather data satellites) are 30 plus years old.

The math models are equally old.

    I sat through a seminar on the math models and data collection hardware in my Coast Guard days -> shortly after one hit Alaska



The only problem is the implementation of the high resolution buoys and satellites nominally "dedicated" to tsunamis. Implementation means $$$$.

The theory had been that you position the hardware where the threat is highest. The threat, while worldwide, is highest around the Pacific "Ring of Fire." If you take a strict college text book definition (the nature of the disturbance, not the magnitude) there must be several dozen very low magnitude tsunamis a year around the Pacific, and a fraction of that number in the whole rest of the world.

Although you folks on the East Coast - there is a mega fault in the mid-Atlanic (Atlantic Trench) where Africa and South America are moving apart.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Psephos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 08:17 PM
Response to Reply #192
249. Faults where plates are moving apart are not the problem...
...it's the faults where tectonic plates are colliding and subducting (diving under each other) that create the killer quakes. Big tsunamis are much rarer than big quakes, because to create a tsunami requires a vertical displacement of underlying seafloor, pushing up like a big piston. Quakes tend to have greater motion horizontally than vertically, as plates scrape past each other.

"there is a mega fault in the mid-Atlanic (Atlantic Trench) where Africa and South America are moving apart."

East Coasters may have other worries, even including tsunami worries, but an East Coast tsunami won't come from an plate collision in the Atlantic. If there is an Atlantic coast tsunami, it would likely come from a collapse of a major section of the continental shelf. A few years ago, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute researchers found big cracks in parts of the shelf that could lead to collapse...but no one knows whether these cracks are ancient and stable, or more recent, and less stable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 02:46 PM
Response to Original message
201. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Mike Niendorff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #201
207. lol ... "democrat moderates"

Amazing how some people just can't bring themselves to utter that scary word "democratic".

lmao :D


MDN




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Susang Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 03:39 PM
Response to Reply #201
208. Right......
I'm sure that's exactly it! :freak:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheKingfish Donating Member (263 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 08:54 PM
Response to Reply #201
254. Thanks Rush but go to hell n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GoddessOfGuinness Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 02:52 PM
Response to Original message
202. What's wrong with lindashaw's question?
I think it demonstrates a hell of a lot more thought than the "wrath of god" opinions that the WP published the other day.

She didn't claim to be an expert; and frankly I find it appalling that there are so many non-experts here who are so quick to rake her over the coals. I expect no less from the rethuglican camp...that's the only way they can stay alive. But surely we Democrats can treat our own with the respect they deserve.

Lindashaw, I hope you'll reconsider your decision to leave DU...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
murray hill farm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 03:13 PM
Response to Reply #202
204. Linda..do not leave..
we do need people like u to dare to ask the questions..that others here are too insecure to ask because there will always be some one who will jump on them and accuse them of being wrong! If no one poses such questions, then we all here must confine all discussions and all questions of what has already been researched and proven..we will live in the past only...we will not look at possibilities until they are safely proven..we will be afraid to speak less we are looked upon as cranks or uninformed wackos. This is not the world that we want...and it is not the DU that we want..where we are treated with disgust because we dare to ask those unpopular questions. we need people like u here...those who dare to think..and speak..and question...without first asking ourselves if this can be proven..or if we will be attacked for daring to speak.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HeeBGBz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 04:23 PM
Response to Reply #202
218. Well said, GofG
Just because your belief system is different from another is no reason to ridicule and deride another's thoughts. That is right winger programming.

Great way to bring people together to stand up to the real enemy. /sarcasm]
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slutticus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 03:26 PM
Response to Original message
205. Jeez. Talk about stirring up the nest.
Everyone just needs to chill for a bit.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, no matter how outrageous. I many times complain about "tin foil hat" stuff on DU, but that doesn't mean that I want the people who discuss this stuff to leave.

If I think a theory is outrageous, I will post a reply saying so and why I think it is incorrect. There are just as many skeptics on DU as there are "tin foilers". That's a good balance.

Let's not eat our own over some publicity, which may turn out to get us many great new members.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gorbal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 09:41 PM
Response to Reply #205
263. Your so right
If anyone feels like arguing, go to Yahoo news messages boards or somewhere freepers hang and argue with them. So much more fullfilling than arguing with your fellow DUer's believe me:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
davidinalameda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 03:30 PM
Response to Original message
206. face it
we do get our share of the reality challenged on here from time to time

this is a pretty good example
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GoddessOfGuinness Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 03:42 PM
Response to Reply #206
209. I don't agree
She asked a question, she neither claimed to be an expert nor attempted to present an opinion as fact. She asked.

I really think people need to go back to the DU link that was quoted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DownNotOut Donating Member (109 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 03:44 PM
Response to Original message
210. Don't assume that any news source
including the NYT is on our side. We will be discredited from every direction whenever possible.

Lets face it, Bush allowed this tragedy to happen for some of the same reasons he allowed 9-11 to happen. Its all a power grab aimed and being correctly positioned for the end game. Stay on your toes and keep fighting!


DownNotOut
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rainscents Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 04:23 PM
Response to Reply #210
217. At least...
DU is being read by others!!! Even they don't agree. :dem:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cocoa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 04:27 PM
Response to Original message
220. a very good story about DU
this reporter captures some important things about DU and blogs in general, which I've never heard expressed before.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 06:21 PM
Response to Reply #220
229. he could have went to a conservative blog and found the same?
I think so--as he initially wanted some lines to capture the readers attention.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cocoa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 06:30 PM
Response to Reply #229
230. he could have
and he could have made the same important point he made about DU, that beneath the garbage there's valuable stuff.

I remember a FreeRepublic thread right after the shuttle exploded, someone posted it here to highlight their usual nonsense, but if you went to the thread itself there was also some interesting information posted by Freeper space nuts who were following the launch and knew nearly everything about it, and were emotionally invested in it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kelvin Mace Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 07:00 PM
Response to Original message
239. I happen to know the reporter of this story and sent him
a note asking about it.

While I can't go into specific details, the gist was that pieces were trimmed from it, which resulted in the current story appearing "lopsided".

The main thrust of the article which seems to me now blunted was, while you can find goofy/offensive people on both sides of the political spectrum, the blogsphere is, unlike MSM, self-correcting in real time. This was pointed out as the medium's strength.

That's all I can say about it publicly, except for the fact that the omission of the link to DU was an error and is being corrected.

David Allen
www.thoughtcrimes.org
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maduroftime Donating Member (25 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 07:03 PM
Response to Original message
240. Just as long as they spell DU right ...
for the publicity:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The_Casual_Observer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 07:50 PM
Response to Original message
243. When did the content of forum threads start rating as news?
Answer: When they found one that made DU look silly or hysterical.

It really isn't any of the NYT business what is said here. From the looks of their own incompetent "investigative" skills leading up to the Iraq war and after, it would seem that they ought to be paying more attention to what goes on in their own offices instead.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robbedvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 08:05 PM
Response to Original message
247. The Gray lady feels neglected - needs to bitch
Edited on Mon Jan-03-05 08:06 PM by robbedvoter
Just think about it - if we only read their rag, we would have bought all the Chalaby BS, the Whitewater hoax and Judith Miller BS. As it is, we make up our own - so the fiction makers that pose as journalists feel threatened.
Tough titties, NYT!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
goforit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 08:27 PM
Response to Original message
251. This is great news!!!!.....Du is putting a dent in the administration!!!

:bounce::bounce::bounce:

NYT was probably ordered by that Rove guy because it
is hurting the administration's feelings!!!

The WH has never been able to take criticism!!!!

The whole world reads the DU !!!

I even think the NYT is jealous!!!


:bounce:Goooooooo DUrs!!!!!:bounce:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
satori Donating Member (198 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 08:45 PM
Response to Original message
253. Bhopal disaster expert -Background on the HAARP Project
Edited on Mon Jan-03-05 09:40 PM by satori
Background on the HAARP Project
Earthpulse Press
November 5, 1996
By Rosalie Bertell
PhD, GNSH

http://www.globalpolicy.org/socecon/envronmt/weapons.htm

Dr. Bertell directed the International Medical Commission - Bhopal which investigated the aftermath of the Union Carbide disaster in Bhopal, and of the International Medical Commission - Chernobyl, which convened the Tribunal on violations of the human rights of victims in Vienna, April 1996.

_________________________________________________


Military interest in space became intense during and after World War II because of the introduction of rocket science, the companion to nuclear technology. The early versions include the buzz bomb and guided missiles. They were thought of as potential carriers of both nuclear and conventional bombs. Rocket technology and nuclear weapon technology developed simultaneously between 1945 and 1963. During this time of intensive atmospheric nuclear testing, explosions at various levels above and below the surface of the earth were tried. Some of the now familiar descriptions of the earth's protective atmosphere, such as the existence of the Van Allen belts, were based on information gained through stratospheric and ionospheric experimentation.

The military implications of combining these projects is alarming. Basic to this project is control of communications, both disruption and reliability in hostile environments. The power wielded by such control is obvious. The ability of the HAARP / Spacelab/ rocket combination to deliver very large amount of energy, comparable to a nuclear bomb, anywhere on earth via laser and particle beams, are frightening. The project is likely to be "sold" to the public as a space shield against incoming weapons, or , for the more gullible, a devise for repairing the ozone layer.

According to Defence News, April 13 - 19, 1992, the US deployed an electromagnetic pulse weapon (EMP) in Desert Storm, designed to mimic the flash of electricity from a nuclear bomb. The Sandia National Laboratory had built a 23,000 square metre laboratory on the Kirkland Air Force Base, 1989, to house the Hermes III electron beam generator capable of producing 20 Trillion Watt pulses lasting 20 billionths to 25 billionths of a second. This X-ray simulator is called a Particle Beam Fusion Accelerator. A stream of electrons hitting a metal plate can produce a pulsed X-ray or gamma ray. Hermes II had produced electron beams since 1974. Thes devises were apparently tested during the Gulf War, although detailed information on them is sparce.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
goforit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 10:37 PM
Response to Reply #253
264. Where is Kirkland AFB ?.........Great info!!!
"The Sandia National Laboratory had built a 23,000 square metre laboratory on the Kirkland Air Force Base, 1989, to house the Hermes III electron beam generator capable of producing 20 Trillion Watt pulses lasting 20 billionths to 25 billionths of a second."

This is absolutely incredible!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nashville_brook Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 09:02 PM
Response to Original message
255. this person was only wondering out loud?? since when is that rumoring?
and everyone who flamed them ought to be ashamed.

if you can't ask questions and ponder our impact on the earth on this forum? well, hell, i don't want any part of it either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
goforit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 10:47 PM
Response to Reply #255
267. Don't worry...LOL!!!....NYT (WH) knows how close to the truth it might be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lovuian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 09:17 PM
Response to Original message
259. NYT is starting to realize the DU is where to get Information LOL
Isn't that awesome!!! And those poor souls lost in those countries!!!

Its kinda sad for Bush that people dislike him so much they blame him for the earthquake!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gorbal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 09:32 PM
Response to Original message
262. Your being watched, you heard it here first
Edited on Mon Jan-03-05 09:35 PM by gorbal
(does her hair to look good for the cameras)

I thought most of the "conspiracy theories" posted on that thread were pretty toungue and cheek.

Besides not seeming to understand this, the article isn't that bad. I don't know what to say about the NYT, I stopped reading it after awhile because I can't really afford it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chicago Democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 11:25 PM
Response to Original message
276. On Balance a relatively fair article...
:)

Good press.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Old Mouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 11:33 PM
Response to Original message
278. This article contains NOTHING newsworthy
yet is in print in a major world newspaper. Please think about that.

This is the first real attempt to discredit DU in the eyes of the public.

While we have had freepers in our forums for quite some time, recently they have been joined by others more coordinated and professional in agitating discord among ourselves. Now a NYT article headlines us as irrational.

The heat has been turned up on us a notch. This may or may not mean we have been successful in irritating people in power, but it does mean we have gained their attention and reaction.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kelvin Mace Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 11:26 AM
Response to Reply #278
291. This wasn't an attempt to discredit DU
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Old Mouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 12:07 PM
Response to Reply #291
294. Thank you for the clarification
but the editing of the article destroyed almost all trace of the original argument. Topic paragraphs are all most readers have time for these days.

Did your friend suggest the story to his editor, or was it assigned?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kelvin Mace Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 12:12 PM
Response to Reply #294
295. His idea
but not his regular editor editing.

David Allen
www.thoughtcrimes.org
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Strelnikov_ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-03-05 11:47 PM
Response to Original message
279. The Poster Was Just Expressing A New Age/Earth Religion View
I think the NY Times has too much time on it's hands if they are pursuing stories like this.

Are they going to run articles on every New Age and Native American board that expresses these views?

I really thought that this board was above the kind of race to conformity we are seeing here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Desertrose Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 01:18 AM
Response to Original message
281. AHEM.... You guys take a good look at the LOUNGE lately?
If you are "worried" about how DU looks...mayeb we should think twice about the LOUNGE being open to the public...its sure not like it used to be....but I never go there anymore cause there is a lot going on in the other forums that is of way more of interest to me ......

BTW...I didn't know we were here for the neocons...I thought it was a place for linerals to hang out & chat and discuss what is important to us....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Psephos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 01:50 AM
Response to Reply #281
282. I say don't hide anything. It is what it is; anything else w/b a lie. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gandalf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 05:33 AM
Response to Original message
285. They ridicule these things only when they cannot ignore them
Edited on Tue Jan-04-05 05:34 AM by gandalf
...I guess.

When it was impossible to ignore 9/11 conspiracy theories because many people started to become interested in them, they were ridiculed in coordinated media attacks (at least, this was the case in Germany, where about 20% of the population thinks BushCo could have engineered 9/11).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
neweurope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 05:43 AM
Response to Original message
286. DU isn't the only place where people have speculated.
Also I think it's absolutely nothing to be ashamed of even if some speculations turn out to be ridiculous: MUCH more important to the NYT should be the fact that people ARE speculating - that is: That the USA have a government that folks think CAPABLE of these things... but all that's just smoke, never a fire, right?

Diego Garcia News:
(Unfortunately this is a part two - couldn't find part one, no idea who the interviewed/interviewer is)

http://article.wn.com/link/WNATC38D6E5C58AD2856F5F3532DBC6CC368?source=templategenerator&template=diegogarcianews/headlines.txt

Q: Have tidal waves figured in weapons research?
A: Yes.
Secret wartime experiments were conducted off the New Zealand coast to create a bomb that would trigger tidal waves, according to government files declassified in Auckland. But the tsunami bomb was never fully tested and the war ended before the project was completed. Its mastermind was Thomas Leech, an Australian professor who was the dean of engineering at Auckland University from 1940 to 1950. He set off a series of underwater explosions that caused mini tidal waves at Whangaparaoa, north of Auckland, in 1944 and 1945. The New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade contain details of the research, known as Project Seal, in 53- year-old documents released.
Q: Is it possible for a nuclear explosion to have triggered the Macquarie quake in some way and indirectly caused the changes that led to the Sumatra quake and the Asian tsunami?
A: It is possible that a very large explosion might have triggered the first quake directly in some way or that repeated prior testing could have induced changes that led to the quake indirectly, but research on the fall-out of nuclear testing is so highly classified that little is known of the possible impact. The US has not ratified the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, leaving the door open to future US testing despite an extended moratorium. There has already been a strong move toward resumption of testing since 2002. Now earth-penetrating nukes (bunker busters) and mini-nukes might provide the pretext.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Carni Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 01:25 PM
Response to Reply #286
297. Thanks for this post it is very interesting
Now THIS is what I like to see on DU and it's what I come here for...aren't we here to exchange ideas and share sources?

I find this article fascinating and if I want to do further checking as to it's validity...search engines are only a few keystrokes away.

Then I can draw my own conclusions based on my own verification of the credibilty of the publication and the authors.

I don't come here to watch people call each other crackpots in a rude fashion and rag about talking points and the best image for DU
(esp. when the whole discussion has been generated by some quotes from a right winged site and then recirculated via some editor at the NYT's)

I will definitely be checking this out further--I like to keep an open mind as opposed to telling others what to think.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nihil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 07:46 AM
Response to Original message
287. Maybe they're as touchy as certain people in this thread?
Given that the in one of the replies to the (alleged) "dumb question"
note:

> This only proves the the NYT can be scientifically ignorant too.
>
> Most reporters do not have science educations and make errors when
> they try to cover a science story.

If the lazy donkey of a NYT "journalist" happened to read this comment
and reacted in the same unpleasant way as some of the DU so-called
"sceptics", what better way to pour scorn on the unwanted opinions
than to cut & paste little snippets to their rag?

Two birds with one stone: not only do they feel "revenged" for the
slight but they also curry favour with their White House controllers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FULL_METAL_HAT Donating Member (673 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-04-05 11:14 AM
Response to Original message
290. We Know NYT is WATCHING...

THEY ARE PAYING ATTENTION


Let's give 'em something to talk about...

... and I'm not talking about lo-o-ove...

Over the next two days we will have an opportunity as one of the leading voices of reasoned dissent, to speak a message that can have an impact on the nation as a whole, if our message is relevant and serious.

On January 6th, 2005 America faces what is certainly the greatest challenge and opportunity to reaffirm the tenants and cornerstone of our democracy, as defined, "of the people".

Please take a moment now to step back from the overload of emotions experienced since November 2nd's disappointments and to re-focus your passion and energies for the landmark opportunity on January sixth of American Democracy to truly reflect the Constitution's foundation of our Goverment, in truth, being of the people.

The best is yet to come!

FULL_METAL_HAT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GOPBasher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jan-05-05 01:54 PM
Response to Original message
303. The most outlandish post gets in the NYT.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Oct 26th 2021, 01:35 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC