Quote from: steve folkster on May 14, 2015, 06:21:51 AM
Nobody is discussing global warming.

I am very disappointed to find no real sources sent to refute these things but just literally regurigiations of things like calling me a liberal, which I am not, etc.

Anyone can discuss in such a manner.

There have been as I wrote over 50 studies on this topic from all over the world.  That is the topic of uranium.

You brought up depleted uranium originally.  Are you changing up on us?

Quote
The US air force itself admits that it likely causes increase cancer rates.

To think that anything written here remotely questions these diverse judgments is abusrd.

I was hoping this site was fact based.  It is not.

Falsely calling me a liberal is a pathetic attempt at refuting over 50 studies and the conclsuions of the US gob.

The point is, it is like global warming.  Academia cranks out peer-review paper after peer-review paper telling us we're going to be underwater and the ice caps are melting away, yet we know it's crap.  How do we know it's crap?  Because we're not underwater, and the ice caps are just fine.  Same thing with your attempt to provide proof.  You can post links to data of all day long, but I need to see evidence that soldiers are in danger of negative affects of depleted uranium.

If any of us thought there was any danger to soldiers, we would be very much against it.  We're not liberals; we support our militiary.  All you have to do is provide some real evidence that soldiers are harmed by depleted uranium.  With all the intellect of academia behind you, this should be pretty easy.

Quote from: taxed on May 14, 2015, 08:48:50 AM
You brought up depleted uranium originally.  Are you changing up on us?

The point is, it is like global warming.  Academia cranks out peer-review paper after peer-review paper telling us we're going to be underwater and the ice caps are melting away, yet we know it's crap.  How do we know it's crap?  Because we're not underwater, and the ice caps are just fine.  Same thing with your attempt to provide proof.  You can post links to data of all day long, but I need to see evidence that soldiers are in danger of negative affects of depleted uranium.

If any of us thought there was any danger to soldiers, we would be very much against it.  We're not liberals; we support our militiary.  All you have to do is provide some real evidence that soldiers are harmed by depleted uranium.  With all the intellect of academia behind you, this should be pretty easy.

Its quite clear I meant depleted uranium.  Evasive comments are pointless.

I am not getting into the climate science thing.

What I will say is I provided you 50 sources of such.  There are also sources I didn't include from the WHO, Gulf war vet committees, the US air force, etc.

Are you saying that all peer reviewed articles or journal studies are bogus?

Quote from: steve folkster on May 14, 2015, 09:39:27 AM
Its quite clear I meant depleted uranium.  Evasive comments are pointless.

I am not getting into the climate science thing.

What I will say is I provided you 50 sources of such.  There are also sources I didn't include from the WHO, Gulf war vet committees, the US air force, etc.

Are you saying that all peer reviewed articles or journal studies are bogus?

NO! We're saying, puking up a bunch of links as a way of obfuscating doesn't fly!
Try one, and we'll debate it.

Quote from: taxed on May 14, 2015, 08:36:18 AM

Eatin dirt on that one.

Quote from: steve folkster on May 14, 2015, 09:39:27 AM
Its quite clear I meant depleted uranium.  Evasive comments are pointless.

I am not getting into the climate science thing.

What I will say is I provided you 50 sources of such.  There are also sources I didn't include from the WHO, Gulf war vet committees, the US air force, etc.

Are you saying that all peer reviewed articles or journal studies are bogus?

What exactly are you discussing/debating? You started out making outrageous statements concerning "Human rights" violations by the US then when board members fired back you asked the question like "what human rights violations does the US commit" when I gave you an answer you didnt respond and now you are jumping around with this "depleted Uranium" BS.....

Pick a topic, stay with it, provide proof and answer back when people respond to your queries instead of using the "shotgun effect" spraying missles around in hopes you can hit a target.

Quote from: Billy's bayonet on May 14, 2015, 10:39:55 AM

What exactly are you discussing/debating? You started out making outrageous statements concerning "Human rights" violations by the US then when board members fired back you asked the question like "what human rights violations does the US commit" when I gave you an answer you didnt respond and now you are jumping around with this "depleted Uranium" BS.....

Pick a topic, stay with it, provide proof and answer back when people respond to your queries instead of using the "shotgun effect" spraying missles around in hopes you can hit a target.

I think this is what you call a SHILL. 

Quote from: Solar on May 13, 2015, 07:26:25 AM

Now it's insult America.
The Obama administration has, once again, complained to the United Nations about alleged American human rights violations–and boasted about liberal policies like Obamacare as the solution.
The so-called "human rights" problems cited in the report include:

(1)
Police brutality, including the Michael Brown case in Ferguson, Missouri
Discrimination against Muslims who want to build or expand mosques
Voter identification laws in Texas and elsewhere
Predatory lending in home mortgages
Suspension of black children in schools

(2)
Women earning "78 cents on the dollar" (a false statistic)
In addition, the report boasts of progress in the following areas:
Promoting same-sex marriage
Fighting discrimination against transgender children in school

(3)
Executive action on illegal immigration
Helping illegal alien children who cross the border
Protecting privacy rights against government surveillance
Trying to close the Guantánamo Bay prison for terror detainees
Revoking "torture" memos for interrogating terrorists

(4)
Passing Obamacare
Expanding food stamps
Regulating "carbon pollution" to fight climate change

The apologetic, left-liberal report echoes one filed by the Obama administration five years ago, during which the State Department proudly told the Human Rights Council that the administration opposed Arizona's new immigration law, among other alleged American misdeeds.

http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2015/05/11/obama-complains-to-un-about-us-human-rights-violations/

Whoever came up with the term, "Marxist Apology Tour" did well.     Also, I am glad to see that handy list of members of the UN Human Rights Commission.

So, here we have detailed examples of four of the primary Divide and Conquer prescriptions from the Cloward Piven subversive communists.  I have taken the liberty to separate the examples of the original post and number them, one through four.

1) Black and White, a shared subset of Rich and Poor, which is the communist staple, an Obama specialty.
2) Male and Female, flagrantly divisive with multiple intentions, not the least of which is to divide the American family, create a confusing basket of competing political and economic alliances,
cause birth rates to fall, and weaken the moral fiber of America's backbone population.
3) International Ethnic and Religious animosities.  Deserting The State of Israel and the use of Hispanic and Islamic immigration are two examples at the tip of the iceberg.
4) Government and the Private Sector.  The end game category, since the goal is a fundamental transformation of democratic republics into Soviet client states.

Those are four "divide and conquer" categories singled out on this Marxist Apologetic.

Quote from: Billy's bayonet on May 14, 2015, 10:39:55 AM

What exactly are you discussing/debating? You started out making outrageous statements concerning "Human rights" violations by the US then when board members fired back you asked the question like "what human rights violations does the US commit" when I gave you an answer you didnt respond and now you are jumping around with this "depleted Uranium" BS.....

Pick a topic, stay with it, provide proof and answer back when people respond to your queries instead of using the "shotgun effect" spraying missles around in hopes you can hit a target.

I made no such statements.

I cited 50 articles, the US air force, and veterans of war, among others, as evidence that depleted uranium causes cancer and reproductive health issues.

I am still awaiting a response from some on those issues.

SO far I got a pitcher of a baseball player sliding into base and requests for evidence.

Here is more:
"When DU explodes, it produces a very fine uranium dust. When children play near wrecked tanks, they can absorb this dust through their skin, their mouths and their airways. A 2002 study at the University of Bremen in northern Germany found that chromosomal changes had occurred in Gulf war veterans who had come into contact with uranium ammunition."
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/researchers-studying-high-rates-of-cancer-and-birth-defects-in-iraq-a-873225.html

SInce you refuse to read the new 50 soruced compilation study Ill go back further.

Now go ahead and be quick to defend what could have been harm to US troops for some reason I don't know.

Shouldn't we err on the side of caution here?

Quote from: steve folkster on May 14, 2015, 01:46:55 PM
I made no such statements.

I cited 50 articles, the US air force, and veterans of war, among others, as evidence that depleted uranium causes cancer and reproductive health issues.

I am still awaiting a response from some on those issues.

SO far I got a pitcher of a baseball player sliding into base and requests for evidence.

Here is more:
"When DU explodes, it produces a very fine uranium dust. When children play near wrecked tanks, they can absorb this dust through their skin, their mouths and their airways. A 2002 study at the University of Bremen in northern Germany found that chromosomal changes had occurred in Gulf war veterans who had come into contact with uranium ammunition."
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/researchers-studying-high-rates-of-cancer-and-birth-defects-in-iraq-a-873225.html

SInce you refuse to read the new 50 soruced compilation study Ill go back further.

Now go ahead and be quick to defend what could have been harm to US troops for some reason I don't know.

Shouldn't we err on the side of caution here?

I'm still waiting for evidence that DU is harmful to our soldiers.  Do you need more time to search?

Quote from: steve folkster on May 14, 2015, 01:46:55 PM
I made no such statements.

I cited 50 articles, the US air force, and veterans of war, among others, as evidence that depleted uranium causes cancer and reproductive health issues.

I am still awaiting a response from some on those issues.

SO far I got a pitcher of a baseball player sliding into base and requests for evidence.

Here is more:
"When DU explodes, it produces a very fine uranium dust. When children play near wrecked tanks, they can absorb this dust through their skin, their mouths and their airways. A 2002 study at the University of Bremen in northern Germany found that chromosomal changes had occurred in Gulf war veterans who had come into contact with uranium ammunition."
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/researchers-studying-high-rates-of-cancer-and-birth-defects-in-iraq-a-873225.html

SInce you refuse to read the new 50 soruced compilation study Ill go back further.

Now go ahead and be quick to defend what could have been harm to US troops for some reason I don't know.

Shouldn't we err on the side of caution here?

I see you discovered what we already knew, that there has not been a link made between DU and cancer.
You see, you fell for leftist talking points as your article illustrates.

Quote"Mystery in Iraq: Are US Munitions to Blame for Basra Birth Defects?"

But as we all know, the left believes the evidence to be irrelevant to the far more serious "Claims" they make as in "The evidence is irrelevant; it's the seriousness of the charge that matters" think Anita Hill.

So, you see what happened here? This is why we are a fact based forum.
Even when it makes the right look bad, exposing the truth is by far more important in the long term than trying to obfuscate the way the rino and progressives do.

Is there a possibility that DU causes cancer? You bet, but until they prove the claim, it's nothing more than a leftist weapon to be used against a superior military power, US.

Quote from: Solar on May 14, 2015, 02:15:13 PM
I see you discovered what we already knew, that there has not been a link made between DU and cancer.
You see, you fell for leftist talking points as your article illustrates.

But as we all know, the left believes the evidence to be irrelevant to the far more serious "Claims" they make as in "The evidence is irrelevant; it's the seriousness of the charge that matters" think Anita Hill.

So, you see what happened here? This is why we are a fact based forum.
Even when it makes the right look bad, exposing the truth is by far more important in the long term than trying to obfuscate the way the rino and progressives do.

Is there a possibility that DU causes cancer? You bet, but until they prove the claim, it's nothing more than a leftist weapon to be used against a superior military power, US.

Is he saying we are bad on human rights because we don't err on the side of DU causing cancer in our troops?  I'm confused.

Quote from: taxed on May 14, 2015, 02:22:41 PM
Is he saying we are bad on human rights because we don't err on the side of DU causing cancer in our troops?  I'm confused.

Nah, he's just reaching, or like Billy referred to as firing a shotgun and hoping to hit something, anything.

Oh, this thread's about depleted uranium?  Human-skin blocks its alpha-particles, standard military battle-dress and boots block its beta-particles.  That only leaves its gamma rays, which we're already bombarded with every second of our lives.

Where's the problem? 

DU shells and armor are sheathed in steel.  DU isn't exposed, for gosh sakes.  I think you have to remain in skin-contact with raw DU for 250 straight hours to reach the 50 Roentgen Equivalent in Man (rem) stage.  -And that's only centralized to area of the body its touching.

I thought Dems believed in science.



   

Quote from: kit saginaw on May 14, 2015, 03:39:12 PM
Oh, this thread's about depleted uranium?  Human-skin blocks its alpha-particles, standard military battle-dress and boots block its beta-particles.  That only leaves its gamma rays, which we're already bombarded with every second of our lives.

Where's the problem? 

DU shells and armor are sheathed in steel.  DU isn't exposed, for gosh sakes.  I think you have to remain in skin-contact with raw DU for 250 straight hours to reach the 50 Roentgen Equivalent in Man (rem) stage.  -And that's only centralized to area of the body its touching.

I thought Dems believed in science.



   

Apparently, if you mainline it, it could make you ill, which is proof the US is bad on human rights.

Quote from: taxed on May 14, 2015, 03:45:39 PM
Apparently, if you mainline it, it could make you ill, which is proof the US is bad on human rights.

Yeah, about as deadly as lead poisoning which leads to death. But then, isn't that the purpose of lead bullets, to kill? 

Damn, we're horrible on human rights!