UCLA Cans Professor James Enstrom for Thought Crimes

UCLA Cans Professor James Enstrom for Thought Crimes

www.moonbattery.com

Under a hard tyranny, if professional intellectuals fail to toe the official line, they are imprisoned or killed. What happens to them in a soft tyranny? Ask Dr. James Enstrom, a professor at UCLA who has been fired for thought crimes:

Enstrom, an epidemiologist at UCLA's School of Public Health, … says his studies show no causal link between diesel soot and death in California — findings that … set him far apart from the pack and put him in direct conflict with the California Air Resources Board [CARB], which says its new standards on diesel emissions will save 9,400 lives betwe

(visit the link for the full news article)

This story about new standards of diesel admissions is based on questionable data that the State did not like. It will cost California $5.5 billion that could seriously impact the trucking industry, which is not in very good shape to begin with in California.

The California Air Resources Board [CARB], which says its new standards on diesel emissions will save 9,400 lives between 2011 and 2025 and will reduce health care costs by as much as $68 billion in the state.

Enstrom questioned the science behind the two key reports the emission standards on which they were based.

www.moonbattery.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Love moon battery, I am a moon bat hunter.

From the article-

One month after coauthoring an op-ed for Forbes.com expressing his concerns with these obviously pernicious regulations, Enstrom got a letter stating that he was getting canned because his "research is not aligned with the academic mission of the Department."

See, this is where things are leading. If you are not with the moon bats, you get fired.

Can anyone tell me that our government is becoming communist?

Attempt to go against the moon bats and get fired. Period.

Oh well, the rest of the US, get ready. Your taxes will necessarily have to sky rocket to pay for the moon bat states.

Oh, do you not hate moon bats?

This is perhaps the most important news of the day. There is far more to the story of James Enstrom than is contained in this tiny news story!

Science is for sale and used to support desired policy decisions including desired tax increases.

Read more here: tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com...
Twenty California state legislators, under the letterhead of Assemblyman Dan Logue, have written the Chancellor of UCLA, expressing concern that the firing of Professor James Enstrom after 34 years at the University appears to be an effort to silence his dissenting views on the health effects of fine particulate matter.

and put it together with this:

in.reuters.com... N+%2F+Formula+One+News%29

The U.N. climate panel should make predictions only when it has solid evidence and should avoid policy advocacy, scientists said in a report on Monday that called for thorough reform of the body.

And finally understand, science is being produced on demand for cash. The "truth" is a lie!

Tired of Control Freaks

Originally posted by saltheart foamfollower
Can anyone tell me that our government is becoming communist?

What does communism have to do with any of this?

And just out of interest, what does "moon bat" mean? First time I've seen it is in the link, seems kind've derogatory yet humourous (my kind of style )

[edit on 1-9-2010 by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi]

Poor guy, the establishment has invested a lot in reducing the use of commercial trucking along the western US.

The plans to decimate the trucking and transport industry on the west coast necessitate the institution of a 'transportation corridor' through the heartland of the country .... sound familiar? (think SPP or NAFTA)

Oddly, with all the human and narco-trafficking it should benefit the black market too.

You can't get in the way of that and not expect a struggle.

reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi


Communism-From wiki

Communism is a sociopolitical movement that aims for a classless and stateless society structured upon communal ownership of property

How do you go about this.

By the very acts of enforcing structured socialistic endeavors.

First off, cannot have any individual ownership of property. How do you go about that?

First off, you have to destroy the individual's ability to sustain oneself.

So, where does this component the OP has brought to our attention come in?

The state (government) makes it impossible for individuals to make a living. The state makes it impossible for individual states to sustain themselves. The state makes it impossible for regions to sustain themselves. The green and environmental movement is their vehicle.

Have you EVER heard of the Russians warning us of this?

Many of them have warned that the communists are coming for this country and the world.

Hmmm, one step at a time.

Here you go, a defector from the USSR video for you to MAYBE open your mind to the truth. Ever hear of Yuri Beznemov.

Just because you fall for the propaganda against those that warn of it, does not mean the rest of us do not.

The US was founded on the principle of sovereign individuals with the right to Life, Liberty and PROPERTY.



Answer the question good enough for you?

Definitely giving this one a bump.

Check in tomorrow.

Star and Flag!

Please read the story of Lysenko. Lysenko was a scientist recruited to the communism ideal and used the science to support political policy decisions in the Soviet Union during the communist revolution.

Read and weep what this one scientist did and how many people starved because of it.

TIRED OF CONTROL FREAKS

So sorry; forgot the link

en.wikipedia.org...

TIRED OF CONTROL FREAKS

Originally posted by saltheart foamfollower
reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi

 

The state (government) makes it impossible for individuals to make a living. The state makes it impossible for individual states to sustain themselves. The state makes it impossible for regions to sustain themselves. The green and environmental movement is their vehicle.

That's not communism, that's called "sustenance wage". It's when capitalist leaders have evolved enough over generations to owning the labour power of all of their workers under them (capitalist rule: one person can own the labour power of subordinates), and then controlling the lives of ordinary working people by giving them the least possible amount of money to survive on without the ability to easily pursue their own ambitions.

Communism most certainly DOES NOT do what you claim. I don't know what text book you read that in, but it's garbage.

Have you EVER heard of the Russians warning us of this?

Many of them have warned that the communists are coming for this country and the world.

Hmmm, one step at a time.

Yeah, those pesky communists. Almost as bad as those evil terrorists, or those damn red jackets, right?

Of course there were a handful of Russians who hate communism, because they are cowards who think they should be rich with large, excessive houses and mindless things like TV. Obviously they would talk crap about communism when the US government would gladly give them what they want. Same goes for some Americans who were sick of their corrupt and lying government and defected to the USSR so they could contribute to a real idealistic cause.

Just because you fall for the propaganda against those that warn of it, does not mean the rest of us do not.

I'm falling for propaganda? You have representatives in your government that preach about how evil our Canadian health care system is and why it will "corrupt" the American system; yeah, can't have those damn lower-class losers having basic rights to their quality of life, they have to pay for it like the rich do because $20,000 a baby or $1600 a bee sting allergy is totally affordable for the 26% of unemployed/underemployed Americans.

Your government is deathly afraid of communism because if the common American actually had neutral education on it, they would realize it would greatly improve their lives and give them a purpose, aside from giving it all for the benefit of rich masters.

The US was founded on the principle of sovereign individuals with the right to Life, Liberty and PROPERTY.

Yeah, founded on. It's nothing but fascism now.

Answer the question good enough for you?

Yeah, it answers a few questions

Enstrom questions the science behind the new emissions standards, and he has raised concerns about the two key reports on which they were based — exposing the author of one study as having faked his credentials and the panel that issued the other study as having violated its term limits.

I hope he can base his position in something more than faked credentials and term limits violation, neither of those things prove that they are wrong.

It looks like a case of too much politics and too little science, again.

How did this get to be a discussion of the relative merits of communism vs capitalism?

The issue here is the corruption of science. It is paying scientists to produce the right "results" to support pre-determined policy decisions.

It is about "framing" an issue with the "right" science so that a desired outcome will be supported by the population.

It is about a very very brave man who sticks to the principles of scientific enquiry and is being terminated for it.

The US government wants to enact regulation to control diesal particulate and is paying scientists to convince us that this particulate is killing us by the thousands. James Enstrom proved that this wasn't the case in California and was terminated for it.

He deserves our very public support!

If the US government wants to build something right down the middle of the states...so be it! But if that decision to build is unsupported in any way or if the "proof" that such a structure is required simply doesn't exist ....would the public then support such a structure...would they want to pay for it?

what about all the pork barrelling that such an endeavor would inevitably support.

Don't you have the right to vote on issues based on the facts as they exist and not on "bought and paid for science"

TIRED OF CONTROL FREAKS

Originally posted by TiredofControlFreaks


Science is for sale and used to support desired policy decisions including desired tax increases.


Tired of Control Freaks

I could not agree with you more... Science has become nothing but a tool to aid certain agendas and when there are real breakthroughs in science we either don't hear about it or findings are buried if they are a solution to a problem that is a big money maker.

Corporations will do anything to preserve the problem that they are the solution to.



[edit on 1-9-2010 by TV_Nation]

UPDATE

James Enstrom has been reinstated to his position until March 31 of next year. This will give him time to pursue an appeal process.

www.foxnews.com...

A longtime professor at UCLA, told that he would not be rehired because his "research is not aligned with the academic mission" of his department, says he's being fired after 36 years at the prestigious school because his scientific beliefs are "politically incorrect."

Enstrom questions the science behind the new emissions standards, and he has raised concerns about the two key reports on which they were based – exposing the author of one study as having faked his credentials and the panel that issued the other study as having violated its term limits.

TIRED OF CONTROL FREAKS


Mod Edit: External Source Tags Instructions – Please Review This Link.


[edit on 2/9/10 by argentus]

Originally posted by TiredofControlFreaks
The US government wants to enact regulation to control diesal particulate and is paying scientists to convince us that this particulate is killing us by the thousands. James Enstrom proved that this wasn't the case in California and was terminated for it.

Apparently that problem didn't exist when Enstrom said that there is no causal relationship between secondhand smoke and tobacco-related death, on a study paid by Philip Morris, something that the Fox News article also says but that you didn't quote.

He deserves our very public support!

If he presents a valid reason, yes.

Actually - if you are going to make allegations against James Enstrom.... you really should report the story accurately.

James Enstrom and another scientist by the name of Kabat starting a study back in the 1960's to determine if second-hand smoke caused disease in non-smokers.

The study was funded by the American Cancer Society and the study methodology was the gold standard of epidimiology. The study consisted of identifying non-smokers who were married to smokers as well as a control group of non-smokers married to non-smokers and would follow those people for almost 39 years to identify any diseases that may arise. The sample size was over 100,000 participants for each group.

The American Cancer Society funded the study for 38 years but yanked the funding just before Enstrom and Kabat could publish their findings. The reason....the results of the study showed that non-smokers married to smokers did NOT get lung cancer or heart disease at an incident rate greater than non-smokers married to non-smokers.

Enstrom and Kabat sought other sources of funding and ultimately, a tobacco company provided a mere $150,000. The report was extensively peer-reviewed. According to the editor of the British Medical Journal, it was the most extensively peer-reviewed study that it had ever published.

Although, Enstrom and Kabat were severely and personally attacked for the results of the study....to the point where the editor of the British Medical Journal resigned in protest...the fact is, that the science of the study was sound and the methodology could not be criticized.

What James Enstrom and Kabat have done is proven that particles in the size of 2.5 microns (or greater) are too large to enter the lungs very deeply and are coughed out. Sources of such particulate include tobacco smoke and diesal exhaust.

You bet they are gunning for him!

This is a link to the second-hand smoke study published by Enstrom and Kabat

www.bmj.com...

This is the final result:

Quoted from an outside source:

"Conclusions The results do not support a causal relation between environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality, although they do not rule out a small effect. The association between exposure to environmental tobacco smoke and coronary heart disease and lung cancer may be considerably weaker than generally believed."

This study and the study conducted by IARC (WHO based) both show the same result. There is no health effect from exposure to second hand smoke.

James Enstrom started web site called the Scientific Integrity Institute where he explains his side of the whole sordid affair.

This is every bit as big a scandal as climategate ever thought of being and far far more widespread.

www.scientificintegrityinstitute.org...

TIRED OF CONTROL FREAKS

reply to post by TiredofControlFreaks


Thanks for the explanation.

Now, to me, it looks that this is just the continuation of that story.