[George M. Middius[_4_]]

President Balack Obama is seizing the bull by the horns:

"Obama moves to separate politics, science

As President Obama reversed his predecessor's limits on embryonic stem-cell
research, he signaled a clear shift in tone from the Bush administration on
a broad range of issues. Obama directed the White House Office of Science
and Technology Policy 'to develop a strategy for restoring scientific
integrity to government decision-making.'"
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/03/09/obama.science/index.html


This must be very distressing for those who 'know' that the answers to
mankind's problems cannot be found in mundane laboratories.

Who's praying now, Witlessmongrel?


--

" This one was highlighted by MM to draw attention while I think
it's not the most aggregious provision but it still has issues."

-- Scottie Witlessmongrel, self-described excellent writer, Feb. 22 2009

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Mar 9, 6:32*pm, ScottW2 wrote:

*Much ado about nothing IMO.
If embryonic stem cells were that promising the venture capitalists
would be funding the research and government could concentrate on
doing what it needs to do.

Here is reason to doubt that you ever attended a research university.

Look at this, 2pid!

The discovery is published as an advanced access online paper in the 4
March issue of Nature and was the work of Drs Ashley Haase and Pat
Schlievert, principal and co-investigator, respectively, in the
Department of Microbiology at the University of Minnesota, and
colleagues.

Haase, Schlievert and colleagues discovered that a compound called
glycerol monolaurate (GML) applied as a vaginal gel stopped
transmission of the nonhuman primate version of HIV, known as SIV.

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/141196.php

Of course the University of Minnesota is funded by venture
capitalists. LoL.

What an imbecile.

[calvin coolidge]

On Mar 9, 4:32�pm, ScottW2 wrote:
On Mar 9, 4:02�pm, George M. Middius wrote:

President Balack Obama is seizing the bull by the horns:

"Obama moves to separate politics, science

As President Obama reversed his predecessor's limits on embryonic stem-cell
research, he signaled a clear shift in tone from the Bush administration on
a broad range of issues.

� Funny, congress hasn't reversed their legislation prohibiting
development of new lines.

Congress is a very different place than it was in 2001. This will
happen.


�Much ado about nothing IMO.
If embryonic stem cells were that promising the venture capitalists
would be funding the research and government could concentrate on
doing what it needs to do.

You need to do a little more reading on the subject. Kind of like
Dubya did.

[calvin coolidge]

On Mar 10, 10:42�am, ScottW2 wrote:
On Mar 10, 10:12�am, calvin coolidge
wrote:





On Mar 9, 4:32 pm, ScottW2 wrote:

On Mar 9, 4:02 pm, George M. Middius wrote:

President Balack Obama is seizing the bull by the horns:

"Obama moves to separate politics, science

As President Obama reversed his predecessor's limits on embryonic stem-cell
research, he signaled a clear shift in tone from the Bush administration on
a broad range of issues.

Funny, congress hasn't reversed their legislation prohibiting
development of new lines.

Congress is a very different place than it was in 2001. This will
happen.

Much ado about nothing IMO.
If embryonic stem cells were that promising the venture capitalists
would be funding the research and government could concentrate on
doing what it needs to do.

You need to do a little more reading on the subject. Kind of like
Dubya did.

�You mean like on how there are 70 some FDA approved treatments from
adult stem cells and none from embryonic?

That depends upon your view of the FDA. And your knowledge of the work
being done elsewhere in the world.


Shallow meaningless retorts are boring.

Your lack of response to my comment about Congress makes your comment
seen pretty shallow and meaningless, I agree. It makes me sad to think
of the work that could have been done in the US over the last 8 years
that might have yielded more results on the embryonic front.
Partisanship is a concept straight out of the Middle Ages.

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

calvin coolidge said:

Shallow meaningless retorts are boring.

Your lack of response to my comment about Congress makes your comment
seen pretty shallow and meaningless, I agree.

You're new here, so maybe you you don't understand how obtuse ScottieDog
really is. In Scottie's world, he is perfect and therefore entitled to
complain about others doing exactly what he does. However, since everybody
else is in league with Mistress Jenn and/or the Lord High Editor, Scottie is
also entitled to ignore any criticisms directed at him.

It makes me sad to think
of the work that could have been done in the US over the last 8 years
that might have yielded more results on the embryonic front.
Partisanship is a concept straight out of the Middle Ages.

Scottie can only define his 'opinions' and 'viewpoints' by disagreeing with
'liberals'. If John Kerry or Nancy Pelosi or [gasp!] Al Gore advocates a
certain position, Scottie 'knows' that the converse position is much
'better'.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Mar 10, 11:31*am, ScottW2 wrote:
On Mar 9, 9:08*pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"





wrote:
On Mar 9, 6:32*pm, ScottW2 wrote:

*Much ado about nothing IMO.
If embryonic stem cells were that promising the venture capitalists
would be funding the research and government could concentrate on
doing what it needs to do.

Here is reason to doubt that you ever attended a research university.

Look at this, 2pid!

The discovery is published as an advanced access online paper in the 4
March issue of Nature and was the work of Drs Ashley Haase and Pat
Schlievert, principal and co-investigator, respectively, in the
Department of Microbiology at the University of Minnesota, and
colleagues.

Haase, Schlievert and colleagues discovered that a compound called
glycerol monolaurate (GML) applied as a vaginal gel stopped
transmission of the nonhuman primate version of HIV, known as SIV.

*I'm sure that comes in handy for you after a late night at the
karaoke bar. *LoL.

As Stephen recently pointed out: when 2pid has no response to an
argument he resorts to personal attack or changes the subject.

He also has a need to attack those who are more accomplished and more
talented than he is. LoL.

Our child-like 2pid is *so* predictable. LoL.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Mar 10, 1:10*pm, ScottW2 wrote:

*The argument is for basic research only the gov can fund.
If we were only 8 years away from viable treatments the venture
money (which is struggling to find a place for decent investment
opportunities)
would be all over it.

So if we're, say, 10-12 years away from a cure for some cancers we
should just forget about it since nobody can make some quick money.

Say, 2pid, can you list any technologies that have come as a result of
government investment in research? I can list a bunch. LoL.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Mar 10, 12:42*pm, ScottW2 wrote:
On Mar 10, 10:12*am, calvin coolidge
wrote:





On Mar 9, 4:32 pm, ScottW2 wrote:

On Mar 9, 4:02 pm, George M. Middius wrote:

President Balack Obama is seizing the bull by the horns:

"Obama moves to separate politics, science

As President Obama reversed his predecessor's limits on embryonic stem-cell
research, he signaled a clear shift in tone from the Bush administration on
a broad range of issues.

Funny, congress hasn't reversed their legislation prohibiting
development of new lines.

Congress is a very different place than it was in 2001. This will
happen.

Much ado about nothing IMO.
If embryonic stem cells were that promising the venture capitalists
would be funding the research and government could concentrate on
doing what it needs to do.

You need to do a little more reading on the subject. Kind of like
Dubya did.

*You mean like on how there are 70 some FDA approved treatments from
adult stem cells and none from embryonic?

Circular reasoning noted.

Shallow meaningless retorts are boring.

Then quit posting, 2pid, and shallow meaningless retorts will be
reduced by about 85%.

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Shhhh! said:

Say, 2pid, can you list any technologies that have come as a result of
government investment in research? I can list a bunch. LoL.

Velcro?

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Mar 10, 4:42*pm, George M. Middius
wrote:
Shhhh! said:

Say, 2pid, can you list any technologies that have come as a result of
government investment in research? I can list a bunch. LoL.

Velcro?

No, but satellites, microwaves, radar, GPS, the Internet and now a
potential solution to lower AIDS rates in cultures where wearing a
condom isn't likely to happen come to mind.

[calvin coolidge]

On Mar 10, 11:10�am, ScottW2 wrote:
On Mar 10, 10:59�am, calvin coolidge
wrote:





On Mar 10, 10:42 am, ScottW2 wrote:

On Mar 10, 10:12 am, calvin coolidge
wrote:

On Mar 9, 4:32 pm, ScottW2 wrote:

On Mar 9, 4:02 pm, George M. Middius wrote:

President Balack Obama is seizing the bull by the horns:

"Obama moves to separate politics, science

As President Obama reversed his predecessor's limits on embryonic stem-cell
research, he signaled a clear shift in tone from the Bush administration on
a broad range of issues.

Funny, congress hasn't reversed their legislation prohibiting
development of new lines.

Congress is a very different place than it was in 2001. This will
happen.

Much ado about nothing IMO.
If embryonic stem cells were that promising the venture capitalists
would be funding the research and government could concentrate on
doing what it needs to do.

You need to do a little more reading on the subject. Kind of like
Dubya did.

You mean like on how there are 70 some FDA approved treatments from
adult stem cells and none from embryonic?

That depends upon your view of the FDA. And your knowledge of the work
being done elsewhere in the world.

�Do we need US gov. to fund work being done elsewhere in the world?

You mean like invading countries to spread democracy?



Shallow meaningless retorts are boring.

Your lack of response to my comment about Congress makes your comment
seen pretty shallow and meaningless, I agree.

�I expect Congress to act as well. I'm kind of surprised the president
is making a big deal of his decress absent congressional actions.

I have no idea what a decress absent congressional action is.

�It makes me sad to think
of the work that could have been done in the US over the last 8 years
that might have yielded more results on the embryonic front.

�The argument is for basic research only the gov can fund.
If we were only 8 years away from viable treatments the venture
money (which is struggling to find a place for decent investment
opportunities)
would be all over it.

Where did I say "viable treatments"? In 8 years we could have begun a
journey. This isn't about instant gratification.

[calvin coolidge]

On Mar 10, 11:07�am, George M. Middius
wrote:
calvin coolidge said:

Shallow meaningless retorts are boring.

Your lack of response to my comment about Congress makes your comment
seen pretty shallow and meaningless, I agree.

You're new here, so maybe you you don't understand how obtuse ScottieDog
really is. In Scottie's world, he is perfect and therefore entitled to
complain about others doing exactly what he does. However, since everybody
else is in league with Mistress Jenn and/or the Lord High Editor, Scottie is
also entitled to ignore any criticisms directed at him.

It makes me sad to think
of the work that could have been done in the US over the last 8 years
that might have yielded more results on the embryonic front.
Partisanship is a concept straight out of the Middle Ages.

Scottie can only define his 'opinions' and 'viewpoints' by disagreeing with
'liberals'. If John Kerry or Nancy Pelosi or [gasp!] Al Gore advocates a
certain position, Scottie 'knows' that the converse position is much
'better'.

Well, I may be new here but I've seen his type a hundred times before.
You guys seem to be doing a really good job of handing his ass to him,
so I'll back away from the wreckage.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

Where did I say "viable treatments"? *In 8 years we could have begun a
journey. This isn't about instant gratification.

You're going to lose 2pid with long-range thinking like this.

[calvin coolidge]

On Mar 10, 6:16�pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote:
Where did I say "viable treatments"? �In 8 years we could have begun a
journey. This isn't about instant gratification.

You're going to lose 2pid with long-range thinking like this.

Let me guess. He's a Republican.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Mar 10, 8:33*pm, calvin coolidge
wrote:
On Mar 10, 6:16 pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"

wrote:
Where did I say "viable treatments"? In 8 years we could have begun a
journey. This isn't about instant gratification.

You're going to lose 2pid with long-range thinking like this.

Let me guess. He's a Republican.

Well, he claims he isn't but he only gets upset with Dems.

Draw your own conclusion.

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

calvin coolidge said:

?I expect Congress to act as well. I'm kind of surprised the president
is making a big deal of his decress absent congressional actions.

I have no idea what a decress absent congressional action is.

Could Scottie be yapping about watercress? Pass the salad!

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Mar 10, 11:06 pm, wrote:
On Mar 10, 5:57 pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"

wrote:
On Mar 10, 4:42 pm, George M. Middius
wrote:

Shhhh! said:

Say, 2pid, can you list any technologies that have come as a result of
government investment in research? I can list a bunch. LoL.

Velcro?

No, but satellites, microwaves, radar, GPS, the Internet and now a
potential solution to lower AIDS rates in cultures where wearing a
condom isn't likely to happen come to mind.

The first fove of those 6 were MILITARY, are you for more MILITARY
spending?

Duh.

"During a speech at Tuskegee University, President (and iPod user)
George W. Bush told his audience, "the government funded research in
microdrive storage, electrochemistry and signal compression."

And a lot of other things. Research at virtually every research
university is funded by the government at one level or another.

No, you aren't, you liberal left ****.

Duh. What will $100 billion in aircraft carriers do for us, dummy?
Give us the "next generation" of propellor? What has the F-22 given
us, besides a plane that functions only 62% of the time, has no known
adversary, and cannot fly with any stability without assistance from
computers? Did you know if a chip goes out that plane will "land" like
a lawn dart?

Say, Bratzi, 2pid's afraid to answer this one: where would you cut
defense spending?

A follow-on: do you have rabies?