NASA delays test of space station urine recycler
And here's me thinking it was in the Carling 'brewery'.
Monday, March 23, 2009
CAMPAIGN - Action Earth
I'm often not big on campaigns, but this one looks OK:
actionearth.org.uk
A bit of sponsorship in there, but that's fine. Plus some nice funding for nifty local activities.
actionearth.org.uk
A bit of sponsorship in there, but that's fine. Plus some nice funding for nifty local activities.
PR COVERAGE - And it's Rubbish... thankfully
They do say it's the awards from your peers that mean the most.
rubbish-diet-awards-2009
I'll go along with that:)
rubbish-diet-awards-2009
I'll go along with that:)
Stupid is as Stupid does
I am going to see the Age of Stupid.
I am going to do so because I have heard about it, it sounds interesting, it may be worth a gander and I'll learn something.
The producers must be thrilled.
However, they might not be so pleased that I am going with an eyebrow now cranked, and not in a good way. And it's their fault.
The rage of stupid
This bit, especially, did not help: the site's managers are taking no chances. Their comment box carries a legend that somewhat undermines this apparently glowing feedback. It reads: "Any comments from climate deniers/sceptics will be deleted."..the site's managers are taking no chances. "
That smacks of a slight lack of confidence from the off, and also suggests that balance may not be uppermost. Which means the science I see may not be the science there is.
You know, I may wait for a few more reviews where all 'sides' are allowed to comment free of censorship/agenda/narrative enhancing, etc, and then decide whether I'll go.
Now, was/is that the intention?
I am going to do so because I have heard about it, it sounds interesting, it may be worth a gander and I'll learn something.
The producers must be thrilled.
However, they might not be so pleased that I am going with an eyebrow now cranked, and not in a good way. And it's their fault.
The rage of stupid
This bit, especially, did not help: the site's managers are taking no chances. Their comment box carries a legend that somewhat undermines this apparently glowing feedback. It reads: "Any comments from climate deniers/sceptics will be deleted."..the site's managers are taking no chances. "
That smacks of a slight lack of confidence from the off, and also suggests that balance may not be uppermost. Which means the science I see may not be the science there is.
You know, I may wait for a few more reviews where all 'sides' are allowed to comment free of censorship/agenda/narrative enhancing, etc, and then decide whether I'll go.
Now, was/is that the intention?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)