Gee, Franklin, I’m touched you remember my singular (well, two-part singular) foray into historic fiction. Thanks for reminding me — it was quite well received over in the forum for such fiction where I originally posted it.

Actually, it was “The Adventures of the USS Flyswatter” and “The Further Adventures of the USS Flyswatter,” that being the unofficial for the entirely-fictional USS Manchester in the first year after Pearl Harbor. Your title, while flattering as it works my own name in there, won’t work — I tried to keep the focus on the story, not the author.

I am honored that you still remember it, about a year after I finished it.

J.

Well, there’s that pesky budget deficit to show for it. A significant chunk of it at least.

Stem cell research, economic recovery, education reform to name just three.

Now. You prove it. You made the claim. Back it up. Show me where there has been no research into global warming. Show me where “liberals” have called for an end to research in environmental science, vouchers or anything.

I’m pretty sure I was asking whether or not you’re a typical hypocritical right-wing troll dildo, but your interpretation might be amusing. Have at it.

Pro-, but you’re not asking the question you think you’re asking.

Ahaha. Yeah, you should read his mini-novella “Jay Tea’s Silly Navy.” (Pretty sure that was the title)

And private insurance companies still won’t cover it.

And this is a great story.

Mm-hm. So SaveFarris, are you pro-stem cell research, or anti?

But you can’t argue with results — that’s the nature of science.

Nothing but dead ends? So you’d effectively stop all significant research in an area and then believe you’re making an honest point by declaring research in that area is clearly unproductive.

Please take your fingers out of your ears long enough to read the excerpt Rheinhard posted. Especially the part that says (paraphrased): You don’t get to hobble the horse and then declare that it can’t win any races!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stem_cell#Fetal

So fetal stem cells are in the same category as adult stem cells. I don’t know anyone who is in favor of using “fetal stem cells”. It’s ridiculous and it proves that your regurgitating nonsense.

Where you’re wrong, however, is that research into embryonic stem cells is not important simply because there are other types of stem cells that can be used. You cannot claim that Bush’s science policy is what spurred the development of this treatment for this girl. 1) This procedure happened in China. Bush gets no points for Chinese policy. 2) You cannot logically claim, even if this were to have happened in America, that we wouldn’t have reached a similar or better treatment FASTER if Bush hadn’t placed such restrictions on stem cell research. Just because other stem cells can be used does not mean that they are better or preferable.

Rheinhard is right on the money – Research is what we scientists do when we don’t know what we’re doing. We have our theories, and we have our scientific method to uncover truth in the natural world – but the truth is that we do not know factual information regarding natural phenomena until we conduct the appropriate experimental manipulations. And even then, we need to be able to replicate it. And even then, these conclusions are put under rigorous scrutiny from the scientific community.

Simply stated, Bush’s stem-cell research restrictions were a hindrance to the scientific process. A roadblock that is completely unnecessary, one which makes scientists’ jobs tough jobs tougher than they needed to be. Embryos are not babies, they are not sentient, they are quite literally balls of mostly-undifferentiated cells that cannot hear, smell, see, think, or recognize pain. These embryos are/were going to be thrown out in the trash. They would be better-used to serve humanity and science.