San Francisco toxic air quality

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
This was a momentary flurry of headlines based on some research that climate change denialists love to cite to impugn the entirety of climate science.

And speaking of pollution, the science on that was derided for decades as well and right-wing governments still routinely destroy air pollution protections.

And speaking of truly dodgy science, governments relied on science from automotive manufacturers about clean diesel and now our air is polluted once again!

We can agree on pollution but I remember as a tiny kid in the last 70s , that the hysteria was the next ice age
 

dgold44

G.O.A.T.
What makes you think 98% of scientists in any discipline are "quacks"? The Global Warming Theory has been around for about 50 years, long before it became a "profitable scam."

But, again, even if you think Global Warming is a crock of crap, you must at least agree that pollution is a very real problem and that in order to control it exactly the same measures must be undertaken as those to control Global Warming. If so, what are you complaining about?
I am not the bogeyman because I share a different train of of reason and different conclusions !!!
 

Genious at Work

Hall of Fame
We can agree on pollution but I remember as a tiny kid in the last 70s , that the hysteria was the next ice age
Science reacts to new evidence and improves its conclusions over time. If you went to a doctor in the 1850s today you would be appalled by some of the treatments back then. That doesn't make science invalid.
 

movdqa

Talk Tennis Guru
Science reacts to new evidence and improves its conclusions over time. If you went to a doctor in the 1850s today you would be appalled by some of the treatments back then. That doesn't make science invalid.
Science is a process of hypothesis, experimentation and validation or invalidation. The validation can be false when new information comes in.

There can be problems with the process though. The peer-review process is supposed to weed out a lot of problems but it only works if there are people to look critically at conclusions presented. There is also fabrication, copying of work, or presenting evidence of research which really doesn't make any sense.

Many years ago, I read a research paper written by the Dean of Georgetown Law. There was one thing that she wrote that I knew was wrong. I looked at her citation and she just said something that someone wrote in another paper. I looked at that paper and it was a citation in a third paper. I looked at that citation and it was a fourth paper that cited a "non-academic publication". The non-academic publication, of course, provided no evidence for its assertion. So yeah. One huge potential problem is if you cite research that is outdated or just wrong because the research paper wasn't done properly, but, you just happened to find the words that you were looking for in a literature search.

So I look at research with a grain of salt; because you have to be careful what it says and doesn't say and you have to look at who wrote it, where it was published, what the commercial interests are. A coworker told me that his girlfriend worked for a major pharmaceutical and the CEO was interested in the quality of their research. So he asked a bunch of their researchers to see if they could reproduce the results of some 50 papers. They weren't able to do so. The conclusion from his girlfriend is that there's a lot of pressure to publish.

What's even more fun is trying to figure out the research situation where your life depends on it. That's when you really care if what you come across is valid or not.

What's really galling is how the press writes up research papers. I've often found that the contents of an article bear no resemblance to the original paper - that is if it can be found. A lot of stuff is still behind paywalls.
 

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
And the AGW hypothesis has been through this process, with all its virtues and vices, and is currently now the best available hypothesis. Its opponents put forward ideology posing as science.

The degree of the changes, and the scope of the practical measures to avoid them, is disputed. But the fact is that most of the political measures taken so far are very conservative.

Science is a process of hypothesis, experimentation and validation or invalidation. The validation can be false when new information comes in.

There can be problems with the process though. The peer-review process is supposed to weed out a lot of problems but it only works if there are people to look critically at conclusions presented. There is also fabrication, copying of work, or presenting evidence of research which really doesn't make any sense.
 

Genious at Work

Hall of Fame
Science is a process of hypothesis, experimentation and validation or invalidation. The validation can be false when new information comes in.

There can be problems with the process though. The peer-review process is supposed to weed out a lot of problems but it only works if there are people to look critically at conclusions presented. There is also fabrication, copying of work, or presenting evidence of research which really doesn't make any sense.

Many years ago, I read a research paper written by the Dean of Georgetown Law. There was one thing that she wrote that I knew was wrong. I looked at her citation and she just said something that someone wrote in another paper. I looked at that paper and it was a citation in a third paper. I looked at that citation and it was a fourth paper that cited a "non-academic publication". The non-academic publication, of course, provided no evidence for its assertion. So yeah. One huge potential problem is if you cite research that is outdated or just wrong because the research paper wasn't done properly, but, you just happened to find the words that you were looking for in a literature search.

So I look at research with a grain of salt; because you have to be careful what it says and doesn't say and you have to look at who wrote it, where it was published, what the commercial interests are. A coworker told me that his girlfriend worked for a major pharmaceutical and the CEO was interested in the quality of their research. So he asked a bunch of their researchers to see if they could reproduce the results of some 50 papers. They weren't able to do so. The conclusion from his girlfriend is that there's a lot of pressure to publish.

What's even more fun is trying to figure out the research situation where your life depends on it. That's when you really care if what you come across is valid or not.

What's really galling is how the press writes up research papers. I've often found that the contents of an article bear no resemblance to the original paper - that is if it can be found. A lot of stuff is still behind paywalls.
Of course, all that you say is true. But this is not about Science itself, but about the process in which particular scientists or scientific, educational, or corporate organizations follow. The same way you can't criticize the concept of Justice because of a few corrupt judges, or problems in the US legal system, you really can't criticize Science. But definitely look at the fruits of scientific endeavour critically, as anything else produced by human beings.
 

Genious at Work

Hall of Fame
What US state do you live ??
I live in a state of stupor when I read some of your messages. Why are you interested about my home state? You live in Vegas, man. The dirtiest, raunchiest, most outlaw-like city in the Union (except Washington D.C., of course.)
 

dgold44

G.O.A.T.
I live in a state of stupor when I read some of your messages. Why are you interested about my home state? You live in Vegas, man. The dirtiest, raunchiest, most outlaw-like city in the Union (except Washington D.C., of course.)
Vegas it depends on the part and we have some of the best weather, food and entertainment in the world .
Too embarrassed to reveal your snake hole city to me ???
 

movdqa

Talk Tennis Guru
Of course, all that you say is true. But this is not about Science itself, but about the process in which particular scientists or scientific, educational, or corporate organizations follow. The same way you can't criticize the concept of Justice because of a few corrupt judges, or problems in the US legal system, you really can't criticize Science. But definitely look at the fruits of scientific endeavour critically, as anything else produced by human beings.
It's quite time-consuming to look at a paper critically unless you are an expert in the fields discussed in the paper. Your alternative is to go through all of the references, and then go through the references in those paper which can lead to looking at tens, hundreds or thousands of papers. The vast majority are unfamiliar with what research is or the process and there are absolutely problems with research product and ways to circumvent the process.

I leave one example which has some really big ramifications for research institutions in the United States:

Duke University in Durham, North Carolina, is on the verge of settling a case brought by a former employee who claims the university included faked data in applications and reports for federal grants worth nearly $200 million.
...
In his suit, Thomas alleged that Duke biologist Erin Potts-Kant—who has now had 17 papers retracted, including many that reported on work done with her supervisor, pulmonology research William Michael Foster—included fraudulent data in 60 grant applications and reports. Potts-Kant had earlier pleaded guilty to embezzling more than $25,000 from Duke; that case prompted university officials to scrutinize her lab.

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/11/duke-university-settle-case-alleging-researchers-used-fraudulent-data-win-millions

I'm quite amazed that this could happen in a place like Duke. But, why wasn't this caught in the peer-review process? If you don't have a seriously critical peer-review process, then garbage can slip through the cracks. In this case, it was a lot of garbage. Why didn't anyone try to reproduce the results?

Well, okay, here's another case:

“Individuals and institutions that receive research funding from NIH have an obligation to conduct their research honestly and not to alter results to conform with unproven hypotheses,” said Acting U.S. Attorney William D. Weinreb. “Medical research fraud not only wastes scarce government resources but also undermines the scientific process and the search for better treatments for serious diseases. We commend Brigham and Women’s for self-disclosing the allegations of fraudulent research at the Anversa laboratory, and for taking steps to prevent future recurrences of such conduct.”

...

“Today, Partners Healthcare and Brigham and Women’s Hospital resolved allegations of fraud perpetuated by several scientists who worked for them,” said Harold H. Shaw, Special Agent in Charge of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Boston Field Division. “This settlement demonstrates the FBI’s commitment to ensuring that taxpayer dollars are not wasted, and that organizations that receive these funds are truthful in their dealings with federal agencies like the NIH and in the research findings they present to the scientific community, and the public, as a whole.”

https://www.justice.gov/usao-ma/pr/partners-healthcare-and-brigham-and-women-s-hospital-agree-pay-10-million-resolve

Brigham and Women's is a teaching hospital for Harvard Medical School and HMS is just next door.
 
C

Chadalina

Guest
Water is not wet.
How would you describe it? My point was we dont agree on science, its fact or not.

I live in a state of stupor when I read some of your messages. Why are you interested about my home state? You live in Vegas, man. The dirtiest, raunchiest, most outlaw-like city in the Union (except Washington D.C., of course.)
All those words and non were asked for :) Which state do you live in though?
 

Genious at Work

Hall of Fame
How would you describe it? My point was we dont agree on science, its fact or not.



All those words and non were asked for :) Which state do you live in though?
Science is a process that produces theories. Not all theories enjoy the same degree of acceptance. It's a validation game.

Water is not wet, because only matter that can absorb or be covered by water is wet. Water can't absorb water or be covered by it, it is water.

My home state... it's public knowledge. But what is the point?
 

Genious at Work

Hall of Fame
Vegas it depends on the part and we have some of the best weather, food and entertainment in the world .
Too embarrassed to reveal your snake hole city to me ???
LOL. Are you serious? What does my home state or city have to do with anything? You are aware that Michael Savage lives in San Francisco, don't you? Is your point that people who live in blue states are scum and there is nothing but good God-fearing folk in the red states? Are you for realz? LOLLLLLL
 

dgold44

G.O.A.T.
LOL. Are you serious? What does my home state or city have to do with anything? You are aware that Michael Savage lives in San Francisco, don't you? Is your point that people who live in blue states are scum and there is nothing but good God-fearing folk in the red states? Are you for realz? LOLLLLLL
Savage is extremely fussy about everything
He hates the heat. He hates humidity . He hates cold and rain
He is one of favs !!!

You at least believe in god ??? I demand to know your location !!!
 

dgold44

G.O.A.T.
LOL. Are you serious? What does my home state or city have to do with anything? You are aware that Michael Savage lives in San Francisco, don't you? Is your point that people who live in blue states are scum and there is nothing but good God-fearing folk in the red states? Are you for realz? LOLLLLLL
Now you will disclose where you live ????
You seem pretty moderate ???
 

Genious at Work

Hall of Fame
I'd suggest wearing a heart rate monitor while listening to Savage. You may be amazed at what you find.
Say what you want about Dr. Savage, but the man is a master of his craft (not sure if this is a good thing or a bad thing) and hugely entertaining. I've talked to people who have had contact with him, and in real life he is a very reserved, kind, and moderate fellow.
 

Genious at Work

Hall of Fame
Savage is extremely fussy about everything
He hates the heat. He hates humidity . He hates cold and rain
He is one of favs !!!

You at least believe in god ??? I demand to know your location !!!
You jump straight into the jugular, don't you? After watching the Sureshs videos multiple times, not only do I believe in God, but I also think he was extra inspired the day he made Sureshs. I am from the San Francisco Bay Area.
 
C

Chadalina

Guest
Say what you want about Dr. Savage, but the man is a master of his craft (not sure if this is a good thing or a bad thing) and hugely entertaining. I've talked to people who have had contact with him, and in real life he is a very reserved, kind, and moderate fellow.
He is getting a little bit sensitive since abc booted him. Pushing his book and podcast, alot of "do you know who i am". Been listening to him since the 90's.

I replied already. You could have read this thread to know where I am from.
Just popped in was curious where you lived since you insulted Dgolds (vegas is a dump though :D ). You typed many words in your reply, but not the one i was looking for :)
 

movdqa

Talk Tennis Guru
Say what you want about Dr. Savage, but the man is a master of his craft (not sure if this is a good thing or a bad thing) and hugely entertaining. I've talked to people who have had contact with him, and in real life he is a very reserved, kind, and moderate fellow.
His job is to keep you listening to sell you advertising. I see no difference between what he does and click-bait.

Worse yet, he attempts to get people angry and mad - because it keeps them listening. Maybe the unhappy mental state is addictive.

I am not kidding about wearing a heartrate monitor while listening to him. I have been wearing one for three months after a trip to the ER for a cardiac event and have learned what all sorts of things do to your cardiac health.
 
C

Chadalina

Guest
Worse yet, he attempts to get people angry and mad - because it keeps them listening. Maybe the unhappy mental state is addictive.
I think he is funny. Do you feel that way because of his topic or his tone?
 

movdqa

Talk Tennis Guru
I think he is funny. Do you feel that way because of his topic or his tone?
I see the effect that it has on people who listen to him.

People send me emails with a short description and a link to a YouTube video. I hate this stuff - if you want to send me information, send it to me in text so I can read it quickly with ads all over the place or wasting time on slow audio. Savage is the same thing. I try not to listen to this stuff - it's extremely inefficient, even those times when it may be factually correct.
 
C

Chadalina

Guest
I see the effect that it has on people who listen to him.

People send me emails with a short description and a link to a YouTube video. I hate this stuff - if you want to send me information, send it to me in text so I can read it quickly with ads all over the place or wasting time on slow audio. Savage is the same thing. I try not to listen to this stuff - it's extremely inefficient, even those times when it may be factually correct.
I listen to his streams the next day. Commercial free, live radio is unbearable. I used to listen to dan lebatard show on espn, but its 28 mins of show and 32mins of commercials.

There was one caller who didnt like him, called him a plant picker, was very funny since he is a botanist :)
 

movdqa

Talk Tennis Guru
I listen to his streams the next day. Commercial free, live radio is unbearable. I used to listen to dan lebatard show on espn, but its 28 mins of show and 32mins of commercials.

There was one caller who didnt like him, called him a plant picker, was very funny since he is a botanist :)
I read the Wall Street Journal for news. A much more efficient transmission mechanism.
 

dgold44

G.O.A.T.
He is getting a little bit sensitive since abc booted him. Pushing his book and podcast, alot of "do you know who i am". Been listening to him since the 90's.



Just popped in was curious where you lived since you insulted Dgolds (vegas is a dump though :D ). You typed many words in your reply, but not the one i was looking for :)
I need my savage fix every now and then and he has both facts and entertainment but he bashes the fake gop as much too
 

dgold44

G.O.A.T.
Vegas main problem is guns guns guns and the age rage of 25-55 is mostly all genetically damaged folks
The older folks and younger ones are very nice and normal
 

Genious at Work

Hall of Fame
His job is to keep you listening to sell you advertising. I see no difference between what he does and click-bait.

Worse yet, he attempts to get people angry and mad - because it keeps them listening. Maybe the unhappy mental state is addictive.

I am not kidding about wearing a heartrate monitor while listening to him. I have been wearing one for three months after a trip to the ER for a cardiac event and have learned what all sorts of things do to your cardiac health.
I'm using one of those heartrate apps which measure the subtle different coloration changes in your finger, but I haven't used it while listening to Michael Savage. I actually haven't listened to him in a few months.

I see your points and I will not contest them. The guy is very intelligent and the most interesting radio host I know of, and part of that has to do with his personality. You have to take the bad with the good. At least he is very transparent. Most people will manipulate you going in the other direction (pretending they are better and more moderate than they actually are.) Michael is funny as heck too. Those nicknames he comes up with are spot on.
 
Last edited:

Genious at Work

Hall of Fame
Savage I love but mark levin is zzzzz
Savage has calm down much since the late 90s
LOL Mark Levin. Savage has said often that he sounds like Groucho Marx's grandmother getting a hysterectomy without anesthesia. He can't pick on him and the Wallbanger much now though because they are in the same network. Anyway, I don't listen to Savage when I do because I agree 100% with what he says, as he tends towards demagoguery a lot, I listen to him for the entertainment value. Tom Leykis used to be great for that too before the network he was in changed format about 9 years ago.
 

Genious at Work

Hall of Fame
He is getting a little bit sensitive since abc booted him. Pushing his book and podcast, alot of "do you know who i am". Been listening to him since the 90's.



Just popped in was curious where you lived since you insulted Dgolds (vegas is a dump though :D ). You typed many words in your reply, but not the one i was looking for :)
HEHE. Wait, Savage got dumped by the network? I had no idea. What happened?
 
C

Chadalina

Guest
HEHE. Wait, Savage got dumped by the network? I had no idea. What happened?
https://radioinsight.com/headlines/170763/ben-shapiro-to-go-national-as-michael-savage-cuts-back-to-one-hour/
Hmm says he will still be on for an hour. "He will host the daily afternoon show as well as a separate daily podcast in January." Maybe 1hr on abc and 2 on podcast, he made it sound like he was cut. Will have to listen closer

I use this link, but will have to go to his site soon.
http://www.wabcradio.com/savagepodcasts/
 

dgold44

G.O.A.T.
https://radioinsight.com/headlines/170763/ben-shapiro-to-go-national-as-michael-savage-cuts-back-to-one-hour/
Hmm says he will still be on for an hour. "He will host the daily afternoon show as well as a separate daily podcast in January." Maybe 1hr on abc and 2 on podcast, he made it sound like he was cut. Will have to listen closer

I use this link, but will have to go to his site soon.
http://www.wabcradio.com/savagepodcasts/
Yes cut because they hate his politics !!
He will still be heard on a few radio station and new podcast
 
C

Chadalina

Guest
Yes cut because they hate his politics !!
He will still be heard on a few radio station and new podcast
Ben Shapiro is taking over, he is like a younger version in a debate. I like him though, could see him as president when he gets older.

Strange disney/abc is hiring these guys. Guess they cant resist the money.
 
Top