If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Addicting Info)   Comrade Lamar Szmith of Soviet Texasz introduces bill to require Politburo approval before being allowed to publish any scientific papers. до свидания моя родина   (addictinginfo.org) divider line 246
    More: Sick, politburos, scientific papers, gold standards  
•       •       •

6699 clicks; posted to Politics » on 04 May 2013 at 1:34 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



246 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-05-04 09:40:03 AM
Is this some kind of surprise? When government pays for something, it will feel entitled to tell you what to do with the money. If you want to study the mating habits of left-handed red-headed Hooters girls unencumbered, get your money from private sources. Problem solved.
 
2013-05-04 09:41:21 AM
I with they'd stop beating around the bush and introduce legislation to turn the US into a Theodemocracy which is what they want to do.
 
2013-05-04 09:42:10 AM

m3000: Thanks to Texas gerrymandering and splitting Austin up into 6 different districts, this asshat is my representative. I went from one of the most liberal house members (Lloyd Doggett) to the most derpiest without ever changing addresses back in 2010.

But all my letter writing and calling won't make a difference, since thanks to gerrymandering, the rest of his district will vote for him as long as he doesn't insult the Jesus. Our system is so farked up.


So slip an insult to Jesus into his teleprompter. Problem solved!
 
2013-05-04 09:42:59 AM

jjorsett: Is this some kind of surprise? When government pays for something, it will feel entitled to tell you what to do with the money. If you want to study the mating habits of left-handed red-headed Hooters girls unencumbered, get your money from private sources. Problem solved.


Again, beneficial research is not necessarily profitable. Thus, the private sector wouldn't touch it, because the private sector is concerned with profit.
 
2013-05-04 09:46:55 AM

bighairyguy: He's qualified to do this because he once took a course in POLITICAL science.


I never understood that. It's a liberal arts degree, yet it has science in the name. There's nothing wrong with liberal arts degrees, or science degrees, it's just stupid to call one the other.
 
2013-05-04 09:49:05 AM

The Name: Benevolent Misanthrope: Congressman Lamar Smith is a leading example as to the disconnect within the Republican Party and reality. His "improvement" would compromise scientific research, and dismantle what little America has left for integrity.

Too late.  I dont think anyone sees America as having scientific or political integrity any more.

Yeah, it's sad.  When we elected the Teabaggers to the House in 2010, we pretty much told the world, "We give up on doing big and ground-breaking things that help mankind."


And leading up to the 2014 election, the world responds back: 'So, did you fully learn your farking lesson yet?'
 
2013-05-04 09:49:33 AM

tankjr: ScaryBottles: AverageAmericanGuy: The government shouldn't be in the business of funding research anyway.

This is such an obviously idiotic statement I don't even have to make a joke about your impressive stupidity. Thanks a lot jerk!

You done bit on one of our more infamous trolls.

/Welcome to Fark.


I know it's been said before, but does it really count as trolling if it's something that some people actually believe and say?
 
2013-05-04 09:49:37 AM
Forget terrorists.  This is a much bigger threat to America.
 
2013-05-04 09:56:35 AM

The All-Powerful Atheismo: skullkrusher: The All-Powerful Atheismo: skullkrusher: brichter: When future historians are autopsying the corpse of the american empire, I think this kind of thing is going to be very interesting.

People blindly accepting claims that an article makes without actually reading what it refers to?

you're right, the article was inaccurate.  They just have to approve that the research follows the board's political agenda BEFORE instead of after.

That's way better.

the author of TFA just made some shiat up

Point and you are in no danger of a mid-air collision


Look man, I tend to agree that this bill is patently ridiculous.  But Skullcrusher has a valid point.  Nowhere in that bill does it say that anyone needs to get approval from any house or senate committee prior to publishing.  All the bill states is that the NSF must ensure and certify that a grant application meets some absurdly vague and stupid guidelines.  You can certainly argue the merits of this inane bill, the article DOES just make shiat up.
 
2013-05-04 09:56:48 AM

fusillade762: Here guys, I'll save you the trouble (though the draft is only 2 pages long):

[i39.tinypic.com image 471x552]

"Finest quality", "Ground breaking", "Utmost importance"? How does anyone get away with trying to pass a law with such vague-ass language?



Meh...it's been done.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
 
2013-05-04 09:58:16 AM

jjorsett: Is this some kind of surprise? When government pays for something, it will feel entitled to tell you what to do with the money. If you want to study the mating habits of left-handed red-headed Hooters girls unencumbered, get your money from private sources. Problem solved.


And if you are studying something important to the future of the country, but it stands in the way of the agenda outlined by Lamar Smith's donors?  Just out of luck on that one, I suppose?

This is why you people are so dangerous.  What did this country do to you that was so heinous that you'd pretend this is a good idea just to bring us down?  What imagined slight was so insulting?  I'd really like to know.
 
2013-05-04 09:59:23 AM

Alphax: LOLWUT?


I expect he just forgot which alt he was logged in as.
 
2013-05-04 10:02:13 AM

Apos: This was expected when the noted anti-science Texan was appointed to the Congressional Committee on Science, Space and Technology

Damn terrifying that this jackass has this much political clout.


and subcommittee
 
2013-05-04 10:02:57 AM

dickfreckle: dickfreckle: You didn't fark with America in, I dunno, 1969.

Yes, I know that plenty of guerrillas farked with us in 1969. I just meant that at the time America was something to have pride in. Dude, a man walked on the moon to spite the Soviets. These days we seem to eschew science and tech.


Big deal, Politburo landed man on the Sun
 
2013-05-04 10:03:16 AM
111 comments and no one's mentioned Lysenkoism yet?
 
2013-05-04 10:05:57 AM

Spaced Lion: In Soviet Texas, Alamo remembers you!


The Lone Red Star State
 
2013-05-04 10:06:14 AM

brichter: When future historians are autopsying the corpse of the american empire, I think this kind of thing is going to be very interesting.


"Death appears to have been caused by blindness and trauma caused by fingers rupturing eardrums"
 
2013-05-04 10:08:34 AM
Yet another reason I no longer vote for the Stupid party.

/Bobby Jindal's words
 
2013-05-04 10:09:47 AM
Spot the Difference:
www.50states.com
www.theflagshop.co.uk
 
2013-05-04 10:09:55 AM

heinekenftw: brichter: When future historians are autopsying the corpse of the american empire, I think this kind of thing is going to be very interesting.

"Death appears to have been caused by blindness and trauma caused by fingers rupturing eardrums"


'So they stupided themselves into extinction.'
 
2013-05-04 10:13:13 AM
It's also interesting how the party of small government is now sticking its nose into science.
 
2013-05-04 10:13:37 AM

TheMysteriousStranger: The bill says research should not duplicate other research.

I guess Lamar Smith (CCCP-TX) has never heard of replication and independent verification.  If anything there should be more duplication than there currently is.


Well, that's how that influential paper on national debt/austerity vs. growth got debunked, and they can't be having that happen.
 
2013-05-04 10:14:02 AM

KWess: fusillade762: Here guys, I'll save you the trouble (though the draft is only 2 pages long):

[i39.tinypic.com image 471x552]

"Finest quality", "Ground breaking", "Utmost importance"? How does anyone get away with trying to pass a law with such vague-ass language?


Meh...it's been done.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."


The 2nd Amendment wasn't really vague until the lawyers got a hold of it.

/I'm surprised there hasn't been any legal arguments yet about what "free" is supposed to mean in the amendment.
 
2013-05-04 10:17:56 AM

skullkrusher: why would you link to the bill in question if your plan is to dishonestly characterize what it says?


Huh. The bill reads to me like it tells them to insure that only one person is working on a problem at a time, and all research is immediately applicable (with an emphasis on national security) The only reporting to congress I see is telling them how they're going to do it.

So basically, it's worse than what the article says, in terms of learning about the world if not in terms of being close to Soviet style control over science.
Mind you, it's still someone who doesn't understand or like science trying to tell scientists what science is.
 
2013-05-04 10:18:41 AM
Maybe this is intended to scare people away from seeking government funding, thus reducing the size of government?
 
2013-05-04 10:20:10 AM

s2s2s2: Maybe this is intended to scare people away from seeking government funding, thus reducing the size of government?


Your tacit approval of this sort of thing is noted.
 
2013-05-04 10:27:12 AM

Epoch_Zero: s2s2s2: Maybe this is intended to scare people away from seeking government funding, thus reducing the size of government?

Your tacit approval of this sort of thing is noted.


You have a well developed ability to infer humor implied.

Comments from Epoch_Zero will now appear in Idiotic Yellow.
 
2013-05-04 10:37:26 AM

s2s2s2: Epoch_Zero: s2s2s2: Maybe this is intended to scare people away from seeking government funding, thus reducing the size of government?

Your tacit approval of this sort of thing is noted.

You have a well developed ability to infer humor implied.

Comments from Epoch_Zero will now appear in Idiotic Yellow.


Funny. I have you Farkied in Sh*t Brown


/wonder why
 
2013-05-04 10:37:28 AM

jjorsett: Is this some kind of surprise? When government pays for something, it will feel entitled to tell you what to do with the money. If you want to study the mating habits of left-handed red-headed Hooters girls unencumbered, get your money from private sources. Problem solved.


No, it's not surprise. Just like you, Lamar Smith had the pre-conceived notion that government should suck, so he's trying to make sure it does.
 
2013-05-04 10:40:58 AM
More accountability with government funds should always be appreciated by the taxpayer.
 
2013-05-04 10:46:12 AM

Shaggy_C: More accountability with government funds should always be appreciated by the taxpayer.


You're begging the question as to whether there's a big problem with "waste" going on, here, as well as the question about how this bill could remedy it.
 
2013-05-04 10:46:33 AM
I haven't gotten physical with anyone for maybe 30 years but I would love to punch that POS bastard in the head repeatedly.
 
2013-05-04 10:48:11 AM

make me some tea: Benevolent Misanthrope: Congressman Lamar Smith is a leading example as to the disconnect within the Republican Party and reality. His "improvement" would compromise scientific research, and dismantle what little America has left for integrity.

Too late.  I dont think anyone sees America as having scientific or political integrity any more.

Pretty much. We've ceded that to the Asians and the Europeans.


When, not if, the next "big thing" in science and technology happens, it will happen in Europe or China, and we will be the country left out in the cold.
 
2013-05-04 10:49:18 AM

Shaggy_C: More accountability with government funds should always be appreciated by the taxpayer.


How is having a meeting with a committee to come up with some vague metric going to make any difference?
 
2013-05-04 10:49:31 AM

Brainsick: s2s2s2: Epoch_Zero: s2s2s2: Maybe this is intended to scare people away from seeking government funding, thus reducing the size of government?

Your tacit approval of this sort of thing is noted.

You have a well developed ability to infer humor implied.

Comments from Epoch_Zero will now appear in Idiotic Yellow.

Funny. I have you Farkied in Sh*t Brown


/wonder why


You don't know?
 
2013-05-04 10:51:30 AM

fusillade762: Here guys, I'll save you the trouble (though the draft is only 2 pages long):

[i39.tinypic.com image 471x552]

"Finest quality", "Ground breaking", "Utmost importance"? How does anyone get away with trying to pass a law with such vague-ass language?


Go read any 10 Congressional bills at random.

Hide any weapons or cutlery in the house before you do.
 
2013-05-04 10:51:53 AM

Shaggy_C: More accountability with government funds should always be appreciated by the taxpayer.


Someone else who doesn't understand science funding I see.
 
2013-05-04 11:00:07 AM

Mrtraveler01: Shaggy_C: More accountability with government funds should always be appreciated by the taxpayer.

How is having a meeting with a committee to come up with some vague metric going to make any difference?


It'll cost more, so there's that.
 
2013-05-04 11:03:37 AM

m3000: Thanks to Texas gerrymandering and splitting Austin up into 6 different districts, this asshat is my representative. I went from one of the most liberal house members (Lloyd Doggett) to the most derpiest without ever changing addresses back in 2010.

But all my letter writing and calling won't make a difference, since thanks to gerrymandering, the rest of his district will vote for him as long as he doesn't insult the Jesus. Our system is so farked up.


The system isn't the problem, you're out numbered and surrounded by idiots, that's the problem.
 
2013-05-04 11:20:36 AM
For those with short memory, Lamar Smith is also the person responsible for SOPA.  Good god, what a terrible human being.
 
2013-05-04 11:21:41 AM
I'd rather see all legislation be reviewed by the scientific community.
 
2013-05-04 11:21:51 AM

Mrtraveler01: How is having a meeting with a committee to come up with some vague metric going to make any difference?


One could ask the same about any hearing, really.  The vaguely-worded bill is a concern, of course; but I'm not opposed to having recipients of government grants defend their use of those grants before the legislature.  If you're making a living on the taxpayer's dime, the taxpayer's representatives have a duty to ensure you're using those funds appropriately.  I don't think anyone here would have a problem if this same this process were occurring with regards to other contracts with the government; maybe it's just because it is research that we are all up in arms, which, while reasonable because, after all, it is Texas, is starting us down the path of a bit of a 'slippery slope' argument is it not?
 
2013-05-04 11:26:50 AM

Infinite Monkeys In Front Of A Computer: I'd rather see all legislation be reviewed by the scientific community.


no we gave it to the Chinese grad. student. she's now using it to build a better China. happy?
 
2013-05-04 11:27:22 AM

thurstonxhowell: Just like you, Lamar Smith had the pre-conceived notion that government should suck, so he's trying to make sure it does.


The above would explain a lot about American politics.
 
2013-05-04 11:27:32 AM

Shaggy_C: Mrtraveler01: How is having a meeting with a committee to come up with some vague metric going to make any difference?

One could ask the same about any hearing, really.  The vaguely-worded bill is a concern, of course; but I'm not opposed to having recipients of government grants defend their use of those grants before the legislature.  If you're making a living on the taxpayer's dime, the taxpayer's representatives have a duty to ensure you're using those funds appropriately.  I don't think anyone here would have a problem if this same this process were occurring with regards to other contracts with the government; maybe it's just because it is research that we are all up in arms, which, while reasonable because, after all, it is Texas, is starting us down the path of a bit of a 'slippery slope' argument is it not?


Ah, so you definitely don't understand science funding.  You could have just said that from the beginning, you know.
 
2013-05-04 11:29:34 AM

Shaggy_C: Mrtraveler01: How is having a meeting with a committee to come up with some vague metric going to make any difference?

One could ask the same about any hearing, really.  The vaguely-worded bill is a concern, of course; but I'm not opposed to having recipients of government grants defend their use of those grants before the legislature.  If you're making a living on the taxpayer's dime, the taxpayer's representatives have a duty to ensure you're using those funds appropriately.  I don't think anyone here would have a problem if this same this process were occurring with regards to other contracts with the government; maybe it's just because it is research that we are all up in arms, which, while reasonable because, after all, it is Texas, is starting us down the path of a bit of a 'slippery slope' argument is it not?


Why should we leave it up to a bunch of politicians to determine whether a scientific study is valid or not?

That just seems to leave it open to a lot of abuse by those with an agenda.
 
2013-05-04 11:31:09 AM

Mrtraveler01: Shaggy_C: Mrtraveler01: How is having a meeting with a committee to come up with some vague metric going to make any difference?

One could ask the same about any hearing, really.  The vaguely-worded bill is a concern, of course; but I'm not opposed to having recipients of government grants defend their use of those grants before the legislature.  If you're making a living on the taxpayer's dime, the taxpayer's representatives have a duty to ensure you're using those funds appropriately.  I don't think anyone here would have a problem if this same this process were occurring with regards to other contracts with the government; maybe it's just because it is research that we are all up in arms, which, while reasonable because, after all, it is Texas, is starting us down the path of a bit of a 'slippery slope' argument is it not?

Why should we leave it up to a bunch of politicians to determine whether a scientific study is valid or not?

That just seems to leave it open to a lot of abuse by those with an agenda.


al gore is a perfectly promulent scientificianologist!
 
2013-05-04 11:32:08 AM

Great_Milenko: we will be the country left out in the cold.


we invented global warming - - we'll not be cold.
 
2013-05-04 11:35:41 AM

Harbinger of the Doomed Rat: Ah, so you definitely don't understand science funding. You could have just said that from the beginning, you know.


You're right; I forgot that most scientists live as paupers.  The money they receive from grants is used in their experiments, normally as fuel for the Bunsen burners, though sometimes they also place stacks of hundred dollar bills in different liquids like sulfuric acid or liquid nitrogen.
 
2013-05-04 11:38:46 AM

utah dude: Mrtraveler01: Shaggy_C: Mrtraveler01: How is having a meeting with a committee to come up with some vague metric going to make any difference?

One could ask the same about any hearing, really.  The vaguely-worded bill is a concern, of course; but I'm not opposed to having recipients of government grants defend their use of those grants before the legislature.  If you're making a living on the taxpayer's dime, the taxpayer's representatives have a duty to ensure you're using those funds appropriately.  I don't think anyone here would have a problem if this same this process were occurring with regards to other contracts with the government; maybe it's just because it is research that we are all up in arms, which, while reasonable because, after all, it is Texas, is starting us down the path of a bit of a 'slippery slope' argument is it not?

Why should we leave it up to a bunch of politicians to determine whether a scientific study is valid or not?

That just seems to leave it open to a lot of abuse by those with an agenda.

al gore is a perfectly promulent scientificianologist!


Is Al Gore asking for a government subsidy for research?

No...

Then what was your point again?
 
Displayed 50 of 246 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report