Why is a doper snorting bath salts my problem?

[njtosd]

[quote=ILoveRegulation]
Interesting. The Unabomber was also well-educated (PhD in Mathematics).[/quote]

Is your conclusion that all well educated people are the same as the Unabomber?
I think you might need to go back and take a course or two in logic.

My point is this – it is economically impossible to eliminate cancer causing compounds from the environment. The question is the level at which toxic chemicals actually cause biological injury. Spreading pseudoscience doesn’t do anyone any good.

[Arraya]

Modern economics is pseudoscience and we have no problem spreading it – but that is another discussion

[Arraya]

Modern economics is pseudoscience and we have no problem spreading it – but that is another discussion

[Arraya]

Modern economics is pseudoscience and we have no problem spreading it – but that is another discussion

[Arraya]

Modern economics is pseudoscience and we have no problem spreading it – but that is another discussion

[Arraya]

Modern economics is pseudoscience and we have no problem spreading it – but that is another discussion

[ILoveRegulation]

[quote=njtosd]
My point is this – it is economically impossible to eliminate cancer causing compounds from the environment. The question is the level at which toxic chemicals actually cause biological injury. Spreading pseudoscience doesn’t do anyone any good.[/quote]

My point is that there is an ethics and morality component to setting pollution levels. The ‘best available technology’ standard eliminates shenanigans from ‘scientists’ and regulators who are in bed with the companies they are supposed to be regulating.

[ILoveRegulation]

[quote=njtosd]
My point is this – it is economically impossible to eliminate cancer causing compounds from the environment. The question is the level at which toxic chemicals actually cause biological injury. Spreading pseudoscience doesn’t do anyone any good.[/quote]

My point is that there is an ethics and morality component to setting pollution levels. The ‘best available technology’ standard eliminates shenanigans from ‘scientists’ and regulators who are in bed with the companies they are supposed to be regulating.

[ILoveRegulation]

[quote=njtosd]
My point is this – it is economically impossible to eliminate cancer causing compounds from the environment. The question is the level at which toxic chemicals actually cause biological injury. Spreading pseudoscience doesn’t do anyone any good.[/quote]

My point is that there is an ethics and morality component to setting pollution levels. The ‘best available technology’ standard eliminates shenanigans from ‘scientists’ and regulators who are in bed with the companies they are supposed to be regulating.

[ILoveRegulation]

[quote=njtosd]
My point is this – it is economically impossible to eliminate cancer causing compounds from the environment. The question is the level at which toxic chemicals actually cause biological injury. Spreading pseudoscience doesn’t do anyone any good.[/quote]

My point is that there is an ethics and morality component to setting pollution levels. The ‘best available technology’ standard eliminates shenanigans from ‘scientists’ and regulators who are in bed with the companies they are supposed to be regulating.

[ILoveRegulation]

[quote=njtosd]
My point is this – it is economically impossible to eliminate cancer causing compounds from the environment. The question is the level at which toxic chemicals actually cause biological injury. Spreading pseudoscience doesn’t do anyone any good.[/quote]

My point is that there is an ethics and morality component to setting pollution levels. The ‘best available technology’ standard eliminates shenanigans from ‘scientists’ and regulators who are in bed with the companies they are supposed to be regulating.

[no_such_reality]

[quote=ILoveRegulation][quote=njtosd]
My point is this – it is economically impossible to eliminate cancer causing compounds from the environment. The question is the level at which toxic chemicals actually cause biological injury. Spreading pseudoscience doesn’t do anyone any good.[/quote]

My point is that there is an ethics and morality component to setting pollution levels. The ‘best available technology’ standard eliminates shenanigans from ‘scientists’ and regulators who are in bed with the companies they are supposed to be regulating.[/quote]

You mean like the scientist with the fake degree that made up the research for the California Air Resources Board’s diesel rules?

[no_such_reality]

[quote=ILoveRegulation][quote=njtosd]
My point is this – it is economically impossible to eliminate cancer causing compounds from the environment. The question is the level at which toxic chemicals actually cause biological injury. Spreading pseudoscience doesn’t do anyone any good.[/quote]

My point is that there is an ethics and morality component to setting pollution levels. The ‘best available technology’ standard eliminates shenanigans from ‘scientists’ and regulators who are in bed with the companies they are supposed to be regulating.[/quote]

You mean like the scientist with the fake degree that made up the research for the California Air Resources Board’s diesel rules?

[no_such_reality]

[quote=ILoveRegulation][quote=njtosd]
My point is this – it is economically impossible to eliminate cancer causing compounds from the environment. The question is the level at which toxic chemicals actually cause biological injury. Spreading pseudoscience doesn’t do anyone any good.[/quote]

My point is that there is an ethics and morality component to setting pollution levels. The ‘best available technology’ standard eliminates shenanigans from ‘scientists’ and regulators who are in bed with the companies they are supposed to be regulating.[/quote]

You mean like the scientist with the fake degree that made up the research for the California Air Resources Board’s diesel rules?

[no_such_reality]

[quote=ILoveRegulation][quote=njtosd]
My point is this – it is economically impossible to eliminate cancer causing compounds from the environment. The question is the level at which toxic chemicals actually cause biological injury. Spreading pseudoscience doesn’t do anyone any good.[/quote]

My point is that there is an ethics and morality component to setting pollution levels. The ‘best available technology’ standard eliminates shenanigans from ‘scientists’ and regulators who are in bed with the companies they are supposed to be regulating.[/quote]

You mean like the scientist with the fake degree that made up the research for the California Air Resources Board’s diesel rules?

[Author]

Posts