Wild Bill

Moonbox, it only seems screwy if you believe the initial premise - that environmental taxes are designed to improve or protect the environment. They are not! They are designed to transfer wealth from 'us' to 'them'. That is why Kyoto exempted the biggest polluters on the planet. It is why carbon can be traded instead of actually reduced. It is why Russian and China can take all those used car batteries we dutifully take to a recycling station and on the way across the water to supposedly be safely recycled they are simply dumped overboard! It is all a scam! Some are in on the scam and others prefer not to see the scam in favour of "feeling good". And that is the long and the short of it!

"Mon dieu! Look at the name on that store sign! There's...an apostrophe!"

You're right in principle, Boges. Still, it all depends on your personal taste. Myself, I have an OTA setup. I get my channels from Toronto and Buffalo. For me that's enough. I am not that much of a sports watcher. I do listen to Jays baseball and TigerCat games on the radio. I like to follow a game with my ears while my hands are doing work. All the over the air channels I receive are full HD. Also, the nature of the signal is such that you either have perfect reception or none at all. "Snow" is a thing of the past. I get my PBS and TVO science and political documentaries. There are very few new entertainment shows that I watch. Except for Ozzy and his family, reality TV bores my butt off! Anything like the Khardashians makes me consider poisoning myself rather than watch. I would cheerfully murder any 'Survivor' folks. I do watch a few dramas, like NCIS. If I miss an episode, I can always pull it off the Web and feed it thru an HDMI port. Actually, what I enjoy most from OTA is that many stations broadcast alternate channels filled with classic programming. During my "loogan" years I never watched much tv, being out 'gallivanting'. So I missed MASH, WKRP, Barney Miller and others the first time around. Now I can catch them on OTA, including many shows from the Golden Years - the 1950's. So again, it is all a matter of taste. The fact that Ricky Lake is back on daytime TV is not nearly enough to bring me back to cable or satellite service.

Working within the system was not an option for him, CC. He had taught for 35 years. Judging by the experience of anyone who has tried to work within the education system, he would have needed another 35 years to affect any change! Meanwhile, students keep being graduated who are severely handicapped in their usefulness to an employer.

Benz I don't know if you were around back then or if being a Quebecer, you had any idea of how TROC felt anyway but you can blame Mulroney for the failure of Meech. The deal was almost signed when it came out that ol' Lyin' Brian was saying different things in french than in english! He was so anxious to close the deal that he started to play games with the truth. At that point TROC, who were already starting to feel like they were being pushed too quickly to be able to read the "fine print", lost confidence in Brian. He is a politician, after all! People outside of Quebec rejected Meech not because they thought Quebec didn't deserve such a deal. They rejected it because they thought Mulroney was pulling a scam! The average person didn't understand the Meech deal. Near the end, nobody could keep up with all the changes happening to it anyway. Those were the two things that led to the massive rejection of Mulroney and by association the entire PC Party - the idea that Meech was a scam where he made different promises in french than english in order to get Quebec to sign and of course, the GST. Years later we added the Airbus affair to the list. It is entirely possible that TROC might have supported Meech or Charlottetown if Brian had not pushed it too far, like a salesman who is just so "slick" that he starts to make his customer feel suspicious and uncomfortable.

"Romney told a Virginia Beach, Va., television station he would not include the military in the spending cuts he is proposing to cut down the U.S. deficit." Waldo, after seeing a news clip about tensions between Japan and China over some islands in undersea oil territory relating how Obama called for more American military presence in Asian waters, only to be told that he no longer has sufficient assests, I would expect the next American president to simply outsource their military to China, as they have done with their manufacturing industry!

Waldo, what has that got to do with the price of eggs? Legislators have passed rules and regulations that were scientific nonsense since time immemorial. It wasn't that long ago that an American state tried to legislate the value of Pi! http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/805/did-a-state-legislature-once-pass-a-law-saying-pi-equals-3 "It happened in Indiana. Although the attempt to legislate pi was ultimately unsuccessful, it did come pretty close. In 1897 Representative T.I. Record of Posen county introduced House Bill #246 in the Indiana House of Representatives. The bill, based on the work of a physician and amateur mathematician named Edward J. Goodwin (Edwin in some accounts), suggests not one but three numbers for pi, among them 3.2, as we shall see. The punishment for unbelievers I have not been able to learn, but I place no credence in the rumor that you had to spend the rest of your natural life in Indiana." So forgive me if I take the idea that something has been ruled or regulated with a grain of salt. Wasn't there a king once who tried to order the tide?

Manny, that is the article I cited several posts ago! Did you actually read it all the way through? It supports exactly what I said! Although it starts off with reporting what Gilles-Eric Seralini and his study had said it goes on to say that "proper" scientists have held him in disrespect for years for being so poor at basic science with his methodology. Read the whole thing, Manny! Again, the man is a quack of the highest order!

Ah punked, have we not established long ago that those that did not vote can be taken as having supported the side of the losers anyway? You know, like with those arguments about how Harper hasn't got a mandate and his share of the popular vote doesn't represent a majority - and so on and so forth.

Manny, obviously you came in late and didn't read the previous posts. You have cited a proven quack! He has a history of using very poor science and ignoring proper statistical and scientific methodology in his projects. That's why no one except the anti-GM movement listen to him. He's just a shill for them.

Nothing is safe. It is always easy to criticize. Much harder to offer an alternative Not a single soul died at Three Mile Island. How many people have died mining coal? Perhaps we should all just go back up in the trees and scratch ourselves all day!

First off, if the majority of the population wanted to ban GM foods I would respect their decision. However, I would immediately start a kitchen garden of my own in my backyard. Without GM foods we may all be getting a bit hungry in the future. If I wasn't one of the ones who participated in the decision to ban the solution I don't see any reason why I should have to share in the hunger. As for taxing the rich, the fact that you would interject such a statement in a scientific discussion is telling, Michael.

Michael, left wing politics has never been big on science and the scientific method. Neither has ANY politics, I would say! People with a political agenda often try to pervert their opinions and biases with a veneer of "science". Like an advocate of Intelligent Design, they try to dazzle the reader with pseudo-scientific mumbojumbo that he won't understand anyway. The science rarely works. It is just being used as glamour for the gullible. "A volt of potential will shove an ampere of current through an Ohm of resistance." This is a scientific fact, devoid of any politics. It is easily proven and always consistent. "A child should never be given a zero to prevent harm" is not the same thing at all. It is merely someone's opinion. It is not in any way scientific, or at least, as scientific as Ohm's Law.

Indeed, I do agree with that idea! Say anything you want! However, if I disagree I will oppose you if you try to make your idea affect me and mine. As for your words of "so long as I AGREE that it is right" - AT LAST! YOU ARE FINALLY STARTING TO SEE! Michael, that is exactly what people say! In this case, parents feel no need to bone up on educational studies to make up their opinions. They have their opinions already and for them that is enough. They think the principal with his no zeroes policy was wrong and the dissenting teacher was absolutely in the right. Supporting free speech is NOT the same as sanctioning any cockamamie idea that someone puts forth! Anyway, that is enough for the parents, as far as they are concerned. They have made up their minds and feel no need to justify it to anyone. They pay the taxes and they want the type of education THEY respect! They do NOT give carte blanche faith in the system! Only a blithering idiot would! In this instance, I happen to agree with the parents as well. I don't think this principal should retain his job. Not only do I think he is not sufficiently qualified, I think he is an outright quack! However, as a populist if the parents happened to agree with him I would support their right to their decision. I would just try to get my own children the hell out of there!

Michael, I think you need a coffee! NO ONE is going to support conscientious objection carte blanche! ALWAYS people will first decide if they do or do not agree! Suppose someone calls for adopting Sharia Law across all of Canada. They may be acting in good conscience. They may be sincere. They are NOT going to get widespread support! Most people, outside of those idiots of the Occupy movement, do not support any and all conscientious objection when it has effects on themselves and their own. If a teacher defied his bosses and started to teach the pedophilia beliefs of NAMBLA, who call for adults having sex with children, would you expect parents to support him as a conscientious objector? People support what they believe in. Conversely, they will not support something in which they do not believe. That is just human nature.

Bless you Michael! Once again, your elitism shines through. On this we must agree to disagree. I simply don't share your confidence in "experts".

Not at all, Michael. I have no problem if a sufficiently large enough portion of the population seeks something like listing food ingredients. I would have no problem if it became a populist issue to make astrology mandatory. That being said, I would still feel free to to comment on how I found the people driving such things to be absolutely loony! I believe it is only by allowing people to feel the negative consequences of their actions that they can learn. Reality checks are not just the best teachers but with many people today perhaps the ONLY teaching they will heed! I believe as a society we have allowed too much elitism into our governance. Worse yet, many elitists in positions of social power have been acting as enablers, cocooning us from the real world. If people are not allowed to make mistakes and learn from them, you end up with an extremely loopy society that thinks they can have anything they want, simply as an exercise of political power. They start to believe they can have cheap imports and still keep their jobs, and other premises that just don't hold water.

Carepov, like with most of these kinds of issues, the anti-GM folks don't think in terms of specific good and bad factors. They think in terms of an "overall feeling". They have a romantic idea of traditional farming, with no knowledge of bugs, worms and blight. The only thing they have ever grown themselves are some bean seeds in a jar full of wet tissue paper.

Who are those who are paying, Michael? Is it not the parents? Why should the principal be the one to decide a no zero policy? Should this not have been a board level decision? Perhaps even an election plank for school board trustees when running for the office?

Nicotine is also in tomatoes, BTW. Here is a link for you: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/20/us-gmcrops-safety-idUSBRE88J0MS20120920 "Tom Sanders, head of the nutritional sciences research division at King's College London, noted that Seralini's team had not provided any data on how much the rats were given to eat, or what their growth rates were. "This strain of rat is very prone to mammary tumors particularly when food intake is not restricted," he said. "The statistical methods are unconventional ... and it would appear the authors have gone on a statistical fishing trip." "David Spiegelhalter of the University of Cambridge said the methods, statistics and reporting of results were all below standard. He added that the study's untreated control arm comprised only 10 rats of each sex, most of which also got tumors." It seems that professional scientists also find a great deal of fault with the study mentioned in your video clip.

I looked up "elitist" in the dictionary. Amazing likeness! Man, if you carry on like this when and if you become a full time teacher, I will expect we shall see lines of parents carrying pitchforks and lit torches storming your school.

Michael, people support him because they see the policy of no zeroes as a very, very bad thing. Mr. Dorval looks like a hero, for taking a stand against something that is very negative to the welfare of students. Or do you think people should always obey orders? How popular was that at Nuremberg? Electing climate scientists? How is that relevant? I wasn't aware that such scientists are in positions of public authority over children. As for limits to populism, of course I see such, where appropriate. Electing doctors seems a ridiculous statement. Elect them to what? Members of Parliament? If you meant CHOOSING your own doctor I would agree.

Well, nicotine is not corn or wheat. Besides, the anti-smoking movement has never cared about the evil additives in cigarettes such as arsenic. They are against nicotine in any form, any where. If you grew your own like organic lettuce they still would not want you to smoke it and would deny you the right to do so, often even in your own home.

Sorry. I wasn't really on Mr. Canada's side in this thread. Also, before I can calm down enough to give you a civilized response, could you please edit out the name "Celine Dion" and replace it with "Rush"?

Well, you seem to be the one complaining that Mr. Dorval has a great deal of public support. As a point of interest, it would appear that the principal who fired him has NONE! Also, apparently the school board never made a district wide no zero policy. It seems the principal did it on his own. As I've said many times Michael, I am a populist. I have little to no faith in bureaucracies to be competent. I prefer to investigate each one for myself before I lend them my confidence. I believe the people have a right to what they want, even if they are wrong! I would even feel quite comfortable with the idea of principals being elected by the community they serve.