text:
Republicans and science
I'd like to beat this Republicans in science thing into the ground. First off, I'll admit there is some real hostility to science from the fundies. But I don't think that conservative opposition to stem cell research is rooted in hostility to science, it's rooted in the (admittedly non-scientific belief) that Jeebus loves 5-celled blastocysts as much or more than he loves post-birth human beings. It's the same with their dislike of the phrase "big bang". I don't think they're very against science except when it comes into conflict with the Bible or the invisible hand of the free market or some other principle that trumps science. They're not great about funding science when they're in power, it's true, but again, that's more because they don't like to fund anything except corporate welfare and the military; it's not specifically an anti-science thing.
If you read one of the more would-be intellectual conservatives, say Bobo or Jim Manzi, it's clear they think abstract Burkean principles (I'm never sure what they mean by this, but I think they do have some clear idea in their head) are more fundamentally true than findings arising from the scientific method. There's plenty of science that doesn't conflict with these principles, whatever they are, and all that science is fine.
But even at its most intellectually honest (and it rarely is anything approaching intellectually honest), conservatism puts principles ahead of empirical findings. The mission of would-be intellectual conservatives is to search out or create empirical findings that are in line with their own abstract principles.
A bunch of people said that engineers are more likely to be Republicans than research scientists. My guess, though, is that if the engineers are involved with research and experimentation, they are unlikely to be Republicans.
I don't mean this to sound too judgmental or condescending. And I know that some liberals also put abstract principles before all else. But with these constant establishment media wanks about "liberals drive a car like this beep beep, conservatives drive a car like this BEEP BEEP BEEP", I just wish there was some attempt to be honest about what the differences are.
Oh, they scoop up the fruits of science all right. And if they get a myocardial infarction they are the first to squeal about letting a scientist treat them.
Hypocritical jerks that they are.
At base, they want the world to confirm what they think. Instead of thinking about how the world actually is.
I don't think they're very against science except when it comes into conflict with the Bible or the invisible hand of the free market or some other principle that trumps science.
Nah, this isn't it. They've pretty much hit a point of anti-intellectualism that anything that could be made to sound funny to a 5th grader is not worth funding. That's why they just scan grant titles for things like bear DNA.
engineers are more likely to be pseudo-rationale glibertarians and Heinleiners.
It's inherently difficult to have a Conservative mindset and be on the forefront of scientific development. Almost antithetical, really.
It lies in the very definition of 'Conservative:'
Favoring traditional views and values; tending to oppose change.
2. Traditional or restrained in style.
3. Moderate; cautious.
That's almost the exact opposite of the mindset you need to be a successful scientist. Science is all about challenging boundaries and finding new ways to do things.
I don't think they're very against science except when it comes into conflict with the Bible
There may be places where conservatism does not conflict with science, but there are very few places where science does not conflict with conservative thought.
A. Engineers are more likely to be Republicans.
B. Engineers are likely to be Republicans.
These statements are not the same. (The first is true.)
A bunch of people said that engineers are more likely to be Republicans than research scientists. My guess, though, is that if the engineers are involved with research and experimentation, they are unlikely to be Republicans.
As someone who started out at NASA and is now working in what we'll call "National defense", I find this to be dead on.
Just a sample of one. Carry on.
Here's a classic post on the subject, from way back in 2004 – and yes, it's gotten worse: I miss Republicans:
No, seriously. Remember Republicans? Sober men in suits, pipes, who'd nod thoughtfully over their latest tract on market-driven fiscal conservatism while grinding out the numbers on rocket science. Remember those serious-looking 1950's-1960's science guys in the movies — Republican to a one…
We needed those guys. They were a dull but crucial part of the national dialogue. (And they knew their scotches. ) Now … a void. Simply put, if you are voting for these guys who call themselves Republicans, then you are voting for crazy air-rifle guy. You just walked up, nodded, and said: "Wow, I gotta get me a ladder."
Oh, they scoop up the fruits of science all right. And if they get a myocardial infarction they are the first to squeal about letting a scientist treat them.
Hypocritical jerks that they are.
This point came up over and over during the stem cell research debate. If the research found a cure for diabetes or Alzheimer's, you just know the conservatives would be lining up for days for the treatment, all the while screaming about those poor baby embryos.
Only heretics spread propaganda that goes against what the Bible teaches.
It was like that when Aristotle released his findings.
It's the same now.
So who wants to put $5 down that we'll see an ED Kain response about how libertarians, in contrast to conservatives, are not anti-science within 24 hours of this post's timestamp?
Ultimately, conservatism serves as a refuge from realty. Conservatives prefer to create their own reality rather than engage with the one that actually exists. While it is obvious that this style of thought is incompatible with science, one also wonders why conservatives are underrepresented in the arts. Perhaps imagination is as threatening to them as empiricism.
I don't think they're very against science except when it comes into conflict with the Bible or the invisible hand of the free market or some other principle that trumps science.
Well dude, seems to me nobody's anti-science for the sake of being anti-science – they're against it either when it conflicts with their ideology (religious right) or interests (big business). But the bottom line is that they are, indeed, anti-science.
It's the same with their dislike of the phrase "big bang".
Heh. Know the real irony about that? The Big Bang theory originally was proposed by a Catholic monk from Switzerland, and the secularists in the scientific community were suspicious of it for a time because the concept seemed too much like an attempt to legitimize Genesis (a universe created out of nothing).
But the Big Bang theory held up and stood the test of criticism, so the scientific community ended up accepting it. Fundies who criticize it as a secular liberal conspiracy are cutting off their nose to spite their face, and giving the scientists even less reason to take them seriously.
I don't think you're exactly wrong about any of this, but I think you're missing something. There's a strong strain of anti-intellectualism running through today's movement conservatism. There has to be, because so many of their beliefs are flatly contradicted by empirical evidence. They have to actively discredit the people who come up with evidence that shows that evolution happens or that global warming is a real threat or that trickle-down doesn't work. That's why in this country the hated "elitists" aren't the wealthy who use their power to further enrich themselves at our expense; oh no, the "elitists" are the pointy-headed academics. You can't trust those fuckers, they think they're better than you: so goes our cultural narrative.
It's Lizard Brain stuff. They don't think or reason – they just "feel". If they actaully stopped to think – they'd realize what greedy assholes they are. So they don't.
And now I have to spend Christmas with them. Bah, Humbug indeed.
sully linked to the sarewitz post where he notes that 6% of scientists are Republicans while 55% are Democrats," and then a quote from steinglass offering 3 hypotheses:
i could not resist sending this along to andrew:
The [Steinglass] challenge is, well, a no-brainer. The fact that his three hypotheses so completely miss the point, and the most interesting hypothesis, exposes him for the conservative thinker – and non-scientist – that he clearly is.
Doing good science compels the practitioner to actually think very openly, without preconceived notions of outcome or explanation. Conservatives, on the other hand and by definition, tack to the status quo. Their analyses of observations tend to move toward justifications of that status quo. When, in Kuhnian terms, the anomalies come too fast and furious for these justifications to make any sense within status quo terms, conservatives too often persist in their contradictions, executing increasingly remarkable intellectual gymnastics to achieve their goal. This reaches sometimes pathological extremes, but all you need to do is review the history surrounding the pursuit of paradigm shifts by Darwin, Freud, Einstein, not to mention those who were never able to witness their own vindication in their lifetimes (Mendel, Copernicus, and of course Galileo come to mind). It is not a stretch to see this same pattern in some of our more radical rightwing conservatives, particularly those within the grasp of the most conservative mind-ender of all, fundamentalist religion.
I'd add to this the fact that most scientists are dedicated enough to their life's vocation, or their pursuit of recognition for their efforts is so strong, that accruing money gets shoved way down on the priority list. They live modestly by comparison to most intellectual conservatives who tend to go into the financial industry; through that experience of living modestly for goals beyond money, they cannot understand any group of people who make it their life's goal to hoard resources and dollars, not to mention all the destructive fallout that accrues as a consequence of such greed.
There was also a recent finding that most youth who study economics in college, being fed the standard "conservative" interpretation of theories such as tax cuts increase jobs (demonstrably untrue) and deregulation violates smith's capitalist theory (also demonstrably untrue), are far more likely to vote Republican than other students, and tend to remain with that party for life.
Finally, this is such a silly question, like all those who wonder why there are so few conservative artists or actors or journalists or especially comedians. Again, a no-brainer. Comedians, like artists and scientists and journalists, are in the business of truth; if a comedian tries to make something funny out of something that is just not even true, it falls flat. Just as art and acting and journalism do.
To liberally (ahem) play with Colbert's wisdom, Truth – not truthiness – has a liberal bias.
If you only support science until it comes into conflict with religion, then you don't support science.
"liberals drive a car like this beep beep, conservatives drive a car like this BEEP BEEP BEEP"
For some reason, I cannot stop laughing at this. I mean, this is basically a distillation of every David Brooks column, right?
It's the same with their dislike of the phrase "big bang".
But there are so very many big bang-like conflicts that specific opposition has become general. When you speak to many of the rank and file they are convinced that 'Big Science' is out to get them. Part of this is simply anti intellectualism but part is also the result of an endless series of disagreements.
It is also the case that many conservatives only encounter some sciences when there is conflict. Few fundamentalists spend their time thinking about geology until a 'controversial' new discovery hits the front page.
Ummm… The party of Sarah Palin is NOT anti-science? The modern GOP is not only anti-science, they are actively anti-intelligence (not anti-intellectual, which is a different thing). Stupidity, ignorance, and blunderbuss shouting down of anything that is not in perfect alignment with the preconceptions are all worshiped in the GOP as it is currently constituted.
Just read this collection of links at the Discovery Magazine Bad Astronomy blog.
Even Dan Quayle, no mental giant, had more on the ball that the current crop of GOP "opinion-makers".
I have a suspicion that the statistic is wrong. Lots of conservative scientists and engineers work for the gummint and/or industry. But they work in jobs that don't encourage you to go public.
I'm telling ya… there are basically two reasons to be a Republican: an obsession with money or Jesus, and science is broadly incompatible with both.
What is (falsely) labeled "conservative" these days is more accurately authoritarianism.
What is (falsely) labeled "liberal" these days is more accurately conflict avoidance.
Both labels are absurd and we lose our ability to effectively communicate when we use definitions that are nonsensical or disingenuous. That is intimately related to the present difficulties with our democracy.
The very idea of "government by, of, and for the people" truly does demand that the people be educated, honest, engaged, concerned and knowledgeable. We can't use crazy word definitions and keep control of our whatever remains of our democracy.
Authoritarianism is inherently anti-knowledge.
Funny you mention the big bang. It's what I always bring up when people claim there's no such thing as a fundamentalist atheist.
The name "big bang" was coined by Fred Hoyle. He refused to believe in it because he thought exactly what the fundamentalist xtians do, that it disproved his religious belief. He thought it proved that there was a god, and the xtians think it proves there isn't one. Those are both idiotic beliefs.
Rejecting reality because it doesn't fit your pre-existing beliefs is far more common with conservatives and the religious, but not unique to them.
We all know what happens when you believe in things that you don't understand.
Do you not understand The Real Meaning of Conservatism, DougJ.
It means never having to say you're sorry, or wrong, or stupid, or evil.
Because the conservative elites are going to do your thinking for you.
Look at this particular assclown, razib khan/david hume of the Secular Racists blog.
He says the reason he is a conservative is because of human nature.
Visiting HotAir Commenter: Telling people they are stupid won't change their minds —especially if they are stupid.
David Hume: this is a very good, and depressing point.
Wow…..yah think? The GOP has selected for people-too-stupid-to-understand-ToE for years, and it's a Big Surprise to these guys that the base is homogeneously IQ-challenged?
But they are not surprised. They believe their base is too stupid to learn.
That is why conservatards never try to educate their base, prefering instead to tell them they have A RIGHT to believe in wrong, bad stupid shit like racism, anti-intellectualism, creationism, fetal personhood, homophobia and climatology denial.
And what is more…..to IMPOSE their wrong, stupid beliefs on the rest of us, because right now there are more of them.
as another research engineer in what was called the "defense industry" above, i think it's funny some of the hardcore conservative civilian employee. i'm not saying this is the norm or anything, i just think it's funny. and to be clear, many of these people are more the authoritarian bent of conservatism than much of anything economic.
Yeah, but only science that gets them closer to having sex with robots on another planet. This is also the one place they think government intervention and central planning is not only effective, but of paramount importance.
I think it is simply a matter that Republicans have devolved into a group where the mindset is that what I think is RIGHT. And any test, or evidence, or what have you that says different is wrong. Because I know I am right.
It's the triumph of ideology over everything else. Everything they believe hinges on them always being right. The Scientific Method puts that in jeopardy.
So, let me see if I have this straight, Doug: Conservatives oppose the methodology (and thus, underlying principles) of science, they oppose many of the results of science, and they target numerous scientific studies and individual scientists for ridicule, defunding, or investigation.
But they are not actually anti-science. OK.
@xian: I've had the same thought. There is some connection about designing out 'messiness' that connects engineers and libertarians. The phrase "This would work perfectly if only…" somehow connects with both.
@lllphd: Sully wont talk about Salam-Douthat stratification on cognitive ability or about Murrays upcoming book though.
Murrays book shows in his three classes of elites (intellectual elite, cultural elite, and business class elite) that the intellectual elite and the cultural elite have left the conservative building.
What the PEW survey actually shows is that 6% of scientists are republican……and 94% of scientists are NOT-republican.
I agree with commenters above about self interest and the attitudes of GOP politicians and Tea People towards science. They like it just fine if it benefits them, or the politicians' contributers. That is the real principle. It either has to benefit them financially or in terms of political support from religious extremists (the kind of nut who will vote on the basis of what a politician thinks about evolution).
The Bible appears to say that pi is equal to 3, so why no fuss about that? Our precious youth are put in danger of being sent to hell every day by being taught that pi is not equal to 3, yet no one says anything at all about it. Imagine that!
As for DougJ's statement that GOPers are not so hostile to 'hard' science in a previous post, I don't agree with that either. How do you separate global warming research from physics, chemistry and biology? How do you, these days, separate evolution from genetics and population biology? You cannot. You cannot even separate the humble field of systematics and taxonomy from evolution. So 'what kind of cactus izzat?' involves evolution.
Actually there are three issues here:
1) Validity of the scientific method,
2) What are the set of facts that we believe scientific method has settled and currently accept as true (or in some approaches, what is the probability that some statement of facts is true),
3) The use of those facts in social decision making.
The GOPers and religious extremists have no method and no principle. Their focus is on 2) and 3) and determined by what is to their short term political and financial advantage. As the political and financial calculus change, their positions on science will change. That is how the causality runs, and I think that is the best way to think about it.
And a lot of what we think of scientific discourse in politics today is really an attempt at social engineering of popular opinion and prejudice. For example, many of these GOPer politicians routinely say that people like me, liberals, progressives (whatever you call it) 'want' global warming to be true so I can impose my will on humankind. That has nothing to do with science and everything to do with political smears for political gain.
I neither want nor not want global warming to be true, I neither want nor not want any global warming to be caused by modern industrial society.
What I want is to use scientific method to help find out the truth. The GOP and Tea People do neither understand nor give a moldy fig about that, and will oppose that effort or support depending on how useful the conclusions are to them in the short run.
@Citizen_X: I think what he is saying is that, for Republicans, science like stem-cell research is bad. But science like "let's build a rail-gun and slap it on a destroyer" is good.
There's a strong strain of anti-intellectualism running through today's movement conservatism.
I agree, with the caveat that it's broader than anti-intellectualism. It's anti-professionalism, is the best way I can describe it; namely, the hostility to people who value Doing Their Job more than they value Doing What Conservative Ideology Requires. That covers nearly everyone.
You see it in science and academia because of the reasons we've discussed, but you see it elsewhere too. The hostility to military folk who didn't go along with the Iraq war craze (and in general to gay, Muslim, liberal and all other soldiers who don't fit their recruitment poster image of an All-American Badass). The hostility to those in the intelligence community who wouldn't support the Iraq war conclusions (to the degree that there's a mini-meme I've seen from commenters on conservative websites who believe the CIA was conspiring to undermine Bush). You can find an equivalent in nearly every professional field that connects with politics.
You say anti-intellectualism, I say the politicization of everything, and the development of parrallel "expert" communities that only say and do things that are politically acceptable. It's a staple of totalitarian regimes, by the way.
The engineers that I know that are Republican were raised Republican or vote with their wallet (or both).
@Citizen_X: Nailed it.
The GOP is actively hostile to science as a methodology. They like some of its results, and hate others, but they reject the entire method by which it works. How is this not anti-science? It's like saying old-earth creationists aren't anti-science because they accept the fact that the earth is old. Well bully for them, but it doesn't mean they support science as a process.
ETA: To clarify, "Science" isn't a collection of facts, it's a way to examine reality and determine how it works. Conservatives might be ok with some of the results of science, but they reject the process entirely.
The consistent "would-be" before "conservative intellectuals" shows you've been making some empirical observations of your own.
@Dave: Maybe he can try to explain it again for us.
I think that the do not care about the science of 'let's build a rail gun and slap it on a destroyer'. They care about whether such a project will get them money and help them gain power. The role of science is that it just another tool in their kit of rhetoric to support what they want to support.
I doubt that they are willing to respect scientific consensus with respect to weaponry. Look at arms control and missile defense.
Maybe I'm in a bad cynical depressed mood (since I emulate Cole in all things, he is my Great Orange Satan, and he is grumpy this morning). But I think the GOP and the current reactionaries' use of science is cynical through and through.
Good for you on sticking with your own personal "peak wingnut".
I live in Texas and up and down the state you can count on Republicans being against science in any form.
The only time they are not against science is when the research grants are getting handed out by the federal government. Then they are not so much pro-science but pro-federal money.
OT: I read this headline:
States Get Their Way and Lose Rail Money
I haven't stop laughing since I read the article:
Gov.-elect Scott Walker in Wisconsin and Gov.-elect John Kasich in Ohio campaigned on pledges to stop passenger-rail projects in their states. On Thursday, they got their wish.
Move over Rick Perry, you've got some competition!
ETA: If that doesn't cheer Cole up then Tunch may have to take more drastic measure.
@themann1086: Yep. And they hate science as a methodology because it tends to undermine their core beliefs, such as creationism, free-market fundamentalism, climate-change denialism, and the like.
@jl: I guess what I am saying is that the science behind something like stem-cell research is objectionable to Republicans because it can prove or disprove things that make their ideology look foolish. So that makes it "bad".
The science behind hurling a piece of metal at bad guys is "good" because it doesn't disprove their ideology and has the added bonus of blowing shit up.
They aren't anti-science in its totality. They are all for science that is ideology-neutral and can blow shit up. Nuclear power, rail-guns, lasers. But that's it.
And scientific consensus is fer loosers because egghedz don't know nuthin'…
@The Grand Panjandrum: And Rick Scott in Florida may be killing the Tampa-Orlando route. Which would be another $2B.
well modern conservatives are not just anti-science.
@The Grand Panjandrum: The negotiating techinque the governors used here seems to be the same one pioneered by Clevon Little in Blazing Saddles.
They have to actively discredit the people who come up with evidence that shows that evolution happens or that global warming is a real threat or that trickle-down doesn't work.
Good point. It's not that conservatism per se is automatically antithetical to science. It's that the current form of American conservatism has to be antithetical to science because otherwise every policy that they want to implement would be shot down by facts and logic.
And Rick Scott in Florida may be killing the Tampa-Orlando route. Which would be another $2B.
Someone else was saying that if Scott does that, he will incur the wrath of The Walt Disney Company, which really wants that train, and that may be something Scott is unwilling to do.
High-speed rail in Florida could be saved not because it's a good idea or because it will benefit the people of Florida, but by corporatism. Sad but true.
For many conservatives, the answer is what matters. The ends always justify the means. It's why torture is fine, and tax cuts are always good.
The essence of science doesn't care about the answer. It cares about making accurate observations. The answer is a derivative of the questions.
Conservatives are fine with observations, provided they confirm their answers.
Republicans don't believe evidence has any place in making public policy decisions. That is the epitome of being anti-science.
Continental drift and Jesus riding a dinosaur. Same thing because evidence doesn't matter. The rejection of evidence means that they can believe in anything at anytime. This helps when your main job is to be a corporate whore.
@Dave: But you know, one can make moral/ethical/political arguments against stem-cell (or rail-gun) research that respect the science.* But that was not the issue when, for example, Bush cut off stem-cell research: it was that he had to bullshit about the viability of existing stem-cell lines and the usefulness of adult stem-cells. It didn't matter to the Right; the intent was to uphold the predetermined policy, underlying facts be damned.
*I was going to try to give an example, but I got off into the weeds on questions of beginning of life, consciousness, etc, etc. Feh. Not my job.
Another problem conservatives have with science: science is messy, it's a work in progress, and thus prone to the unexpected. If you want to run you life in accordance with the stories in an old book, this is just plain scary.
@The Grand Panjandrum:
And our dear Christie who lost money on education and a huge tunnel project.
When they come out with a new picture dictionary, Christie's picture will be the example of stupid.
But, he is the darling of the Republicans.
At base, they want the world to
confirmbe what they think it is.
It comes down to the fact that modern GOP is pre-enlightenment, philosophically
You are being too kind Doug. What really is the difference between republican/troglodites who believe in biblical infallibility and Scientologists who believe that we are inhabited by evil aliens who were released upon mankind out of an exploding volcano? Both are articles of faith. Both may have comforting value and both are absurd if viewed as infallible.
Honestly, conservatives don't like science because they like to feel humans are god's only children. That mankind is god's pinnicle of achievement in the Universe. Sorry but if that is the case that is one slacker god they got there.
For my purposes, I can only hope that extraterrestrials visit us soon so the fundies shut the damn fuck up.
@matoko_chan: Being too stupid to know that you're stupid.
It has a name and has been studied by science. And yes, most conservatives fall into this category of person.
In the recent past (say pre-Moral Majority etc.) I believe the political split among the 'hard sciences' (and to reflect my personal bias I do not include economics) was much closer to even; probably 40/30.
@Mnemosyne: That is a good point.
And I will back track from my accusation that they are 100% cynical. Maybe I will backtrack to 1/3 cynical, 1/3 ignorant, and 1/3 the reaction normal humans have who hold absurd abnormal ideas and are dealing with severe cognitive dissonance.
You do see the reactionaries (they are not really conservatives in the traditional sense of the word) trying to justify their worldview. I believe that sometimes they are genuinely, in a shallow and ignorant way, trying to justify thie absurd beliefs to themselves.
An example is at a recent Senate hearing when Inhofe tried to put Chu on the spot on how the oil 'got' to Alaska. After all, Alaska is cold, how could tropical rainf forests have ever been there to make oil, and under the sea!?
Chu tried to explain, but I don't think Inhofe understood a word. Does Inhofe know or believe in continental drift, that climate change has occured ever, or that coal tends to come from the old rain forests that grew on land, and oil tends to come from plankton in the sea?
No matter. Chu could not give an answer as glib as Inhofe's question, so the GOP and the Tea Peoples' deemed that encounter a victory for them.
So, it is not all cynicism, but the cognitive dissonance and the cynicism and the ignorance are not independent. And I think cynicism is the root cause of the complex.
But their defense mechanisms are complex. Inhofes glib question and glib satisfaction at the conclusion is, to them, the scientific method.
What really is the difference between republican/troglodites who believe in biblical infallibility and Scientologists who believe that we are inhabited by evil aliens who were released upon mankind out of an exploding volcano?
2,000 years.
My guess, though, is that if the engineers are involved with research and experimentation, they are unlikely to be Republicans.
Nope. Engineering is man's control over nature. Scientists discover, engineers manipulate. The only reason why engineering isn't completely overrun by wingnuts is that Americans are too fucking lazy to actually earn engineering PhDs before being lured off by the sweet temptation of a decent living, so Americans are in the minority among R&D elite. No nation really dominates – it's as diverse a population as you'll find anywhere.
Based on my own anecdotal observations, I think the brand of conservatism you'll most likely among scientists and engineers (and what the hell, science fiction writers too) would be of the libertarian/Objectivist variety rather than the sort of populist Palin-era stuff that currently defines the Republican party. In other words, most likely to be registered and self-identified as Independents or Libertarians, but equally as likely to vote for a largely Republican ticket. I'd go as far as to bet a number of my hypothetical conservative science people actually voted for Obama, but are now HORRIFIED at things such as HCR.
Doug, when the psychopath in skirts, the fucking Pope, is running around creating new church dogmas that call for all scientists and physicians to treat zygotes as fully functional and independent human beings and half the country is screaming back "Hell yeah!", all hope for science is lost.
We are entering a new Dark Ages. They'll be burning us in giant autos de fe by 2012.
They live modestly by comparison to most intellectual conservatives who tend to go into the financial industry; through that experience of living modestly for goals beyond money, they cannot understand any group of people who make it their life's goal to hoard resources and dollars, not to mention all the destructive fallout that accrues as a consequence of such greed.
This works the other way too. People naturally tend to think other people are just like themselves. Economic conservatives don't understand any motivation besides greed, so when they see scientists supporting a point of view that is a consequence of existing research, they assume there must be some kind of economic agenda driving them rather than just evidence about how the world works. I think they genuinely believe in a conspiracy of scientists who are promoting global warming for personal benefit, presumably to get more grant funding or something. So to them the issue is a conflict of interest groups, with both sides having equally valid arguments, and it's all just a fight over "who gets the money?"
as someone who lives in OH, it doesn't make me smile. also, my SO could really use some of the work opporutnities that might have come out of the proposed rail line here.
Just look at corn based fuel – a series of engineer's were paid by companies to design the process (and all these engineers knew that the process would barely break even for cost of energy in versus energy obtained but hell, they were paid to apply know chemical principles, not look at the total picture.)
A scientist would first calculate the yields and overall efficiency of the process and realize it is a worthless way to create fuel and end it right there.
Either person applies science but one looks at the total picture and the other looks at an application – just as one of them tends to vote re-thug and one votes fact (liberal.)
@Mnemosyne: That's actally funny. In Fast Food Nation, the author writes that the meat companies made a concerted effort to eliminate e-coli from the meat, not because it would make people sick, but because McDonald's threatened to take their business elsewhere if they ever sent bad meat again.
When corporate America needs science to produce an outcome, money will talk.
@The Grand Panjandrum: So, are you trying to put me into the same tailspin as Cole? Cripes, I'm trying to avoid the damn news here (WI) but I'm just demoralized and dejected. Walker is a complete effing idiot and a republican. Separate items.
A few things from the institute…
First, one of the smartest, most accomplished scientists I know, is a die hard republican. The man is probably one of the foremost authorities on Hox genes, turned down chairs at a prestigious universities, (he just wants to do science, not politics) and has forgotten more science than the board collective ever learned. And yet he thought GWB was it. So the original supposition that we learn our politics at a young age and reluctantly abandon those beliefs is more true than not. To my knowledge he remains in the 28%.
There are two types of scientists, those who are funded, and those who are not. In the former category, they are not always funded because their ideas are strong, or their science golden. There's far more corruption, cronyism, and outright fraud in the field than most will admit. I know a woman (a dept chair) who sank a program project grant because she brought her dimwit husband into the project without informing other the participants. Out of a 1000 grant proposals, the grant was scored as the 4th best, (NIH only funded 3) and all the critiques were focused on the hubby's work. The other members of this project were livid as they lost a great deal of resources. She couldn't care less because was able to use that proposal to get a supplement to her personal grant. The unfunded ones probably lean democratic because they want an increase in funding, while the funded ones are fuck you, I got mine.
Today a grad student was failed on a oral exam not because she answered the questions wrong – she got every one of them right – but because two members of the committee (one a member of the NAS, the other her lackey) are intimidated by the students intellect. To quote that bitch, "she needs to learn a lesson, what it's like to fail." Spitefulness, vindictiveness, and downright despicable behavior is the norm in science, not the exception. More science is inhibited (and sometimes furthered) because someone is jealous of another's accomplishments.
If anything, I'm surprised that more scientists aren't Republican. The honorable are few and far between.
Bitter? Disaffected? No, the truth is I just know them, work with them, and deal with them on a daily and hourly basis. Familiarity breeds contempt.
Nah, the answer is simple. Science means facts. Facts support liberal policies, liberal policies must be fought whether they are good or not. Therefore, we must fight science.
You can shove all kinds of medical and hard science facts in conservatives faces which directly refute everything they want out of society. So they have to wrap their beliefs in religion as a tool they can point to that makes them and their BS argument "superior".
So they don't believe in religion itself, they believe in it as a superior argument to facts. I mean if God says so, then how can we argue with that.
An example is at a recent Senate hearing when Inhofe tried to put Chu on the spot on how the oil 'got' to Alaska. After all, Alaska is cold, how could tropical rainf forests have ever been there to make oil, and under the sea!?
Barton, not Inhofe.
My guess, though, is that if the engineers are involved with research and experimentation, they are unlikely to be Republicans.
Seems in my little area of, as @Poopyman: put in quotation marks "National defense", the D/R ratio is a bit different.
Our engineers frequently have to come up with creative solutions to problems in our programs. Don't know them all, but I'd put the ratio of our engineers at likely 75/25 R to D, including Is leaning in those two directions. And I'm being generous as simply suspect some of being closet Democrats.
Have to say, while some are certainly sharper than others, can't think of one dumbfuck in our engineering dept. who is a Republican. Not in their professional work, anyway. All are well-educated; many more have doctorates than those with a single BS degree. And yet even though they can do the math, they vote R given Bush earlier and the now current exaltation of loon in their party . Sometimes that's puzzling. Provides for some fun conversations too.
But then my little slice of working heaven might not be representative. The principals in my company definitely let you know they're Republican, and the product we produce and its development no way questions/challenges when life begins in a womb, when it began in space, or whether the birth of the baby Jesus was the greatest thing ever.
There's plenty of science that doesn't conflict with these principles, whatever they are, and all that science is fine.
There's a meaningful distinction to be made between Science (e.g., the process of the Scientific Method, and a generalized respect for facts and evidence) and "science" as it is used here, which means approximately "findings from scientific studies".
The latter is irrelevant: everyone loves SOME findings from SOME studies; and there is effectively no one who rejects outright ALL findings from ALL studies. So talking about findings is beside the point. What matters is Science: an acceptance of a basic worldview that respects evidence and is open to being changed by evidence.
Republicans have proven again and again over the last 10 years especially that they are not interested in facts, or in changing their minds, or in acknowledging reality. That's a position completely at odds with the scientific method. Period. The exceptions (like the one described @69) are those who are bad at applying their scientific skepticism and respect for evidence to the rest of their lives.
@69, "The unfunded ones probably lean democratic because they want an increase in funding, while the funded ones are fuck you, I got mine."
I am a funded scientist, and work with dozens of funded and unfunded scientists, and know hundreds of funded scientists: and I don't know a single funded scientist who doesn't want the NIH and NSF budgets increased, much less enough to constitute some kind of general trend. Moreover, you're writing as if once you're funded, you're always funded – which is not the case, anywhere. I conclude you have no idea what you are talking about on this point.
I think you're headed in the right direction, but off the mark. A handful of people in this thread have gotten closer:
It's inherently difficult to have a Conservative mindset and be on the forefront of scientific development. Almost antithetical, really. It lies in the very definition of 'Conservative' […] That's almost the exact opposite of the mindset you need to be a successful scientist. Science is all about challenging boundaries and finding new ways to do things.
There's a strong strain of anti-intellectualism running through today's movement conservatism. There has to be, because so many of their beliefs are flatly contradicted by empirical evidence. They have to actively discredit the people who come up with evidence that shows that evolution happens or that global warming is a real threat or that trickle-down doesn't work.
I think it is simply a matter that Republicans have devolved into a group where the mindset is that what I think is RIGHT. And any test, or evidence, or what have you that says different is wrong. Because I know I am right.
It's the triumph of ideology over everything else. Everything they believe hinges on them always being right. The Scientific Method puts that in jeopardy.
Modern Republican Conservatism is defined by a list of ideologies and issue positions that either stand at odds with demonstrable, falsifiable facts, or amount to unfalsifiable articles of faith. Pick almost any given issue or power group within the Republican Party and this is true: stem cell research, global warming, pollution, food safety, the Iraq War, tax cuts and economic policy–you name it, and the Republican position is either at odds with scientific facts or is so religious in nature that it is incapable of being proven or falsified.
Put simply: science is a threat to Republican policies because Republican policies are almost always wrong on the facts. Of course they have to reject science–accepting it as valid would involve admitting that they were wrong about nearly everything.
The upshot of this is that in order to remain viable, Republican politics have become rooted in anti-intellectualism, nihilism, and institutional dishonesty. They have to deny reality. They have to deny science. They have to deny facts and invent their own alternate reality in order to avoid cognitive dissonance. And in order to do this, they have to lie–to both themselves and everyone they represent–day in and day out, on almost every issue. It's to the point of mental disorder.
I don't know how you fix this, short of the total destruction of the Republican Party. It is self-perpetuating: the more at odds with science and reality they become, the more they have to lie and invent their own alternate reality in order to avoid cognitive dissonance and sell their agenda. And the more they lie and burrow into their alternate reality, the harder it becomes to recant or acknowledge being wrong about anything.
The right likes to joke about re-education camps, but the vast majority of them are in need of nothing so much as a long time spent in an inpatient cult deprogramming program.
But I don't think that conservative opposition to stem cell research is rooted in hostility to science, it's rooted in the (admittedly non-scientific belief) that Jeebus loves 5-celled blastocysts as much or more than he loves post-birth human beings.
It's rooted in the idea that liberals will fight it, and conservatives can hold to a conservative trope (abortion is *evil*) and therefore defend it.
And then it's spread. And some people, sincerely, truly, honestly, believe that an undifferentiated mass of cells (or barely differentiated – apologies if I'm misremembering) is a REAL HUMAN BEING JUST LIKE YOU OR ME. Not because they'd necessarily have believed that if it hadn't been pushed on them, but because people they respect say that it's true. And once enough people say something, it doesn't matter if it makes sense or not.
Heck, it might even have started with sincerity – it's cynicism that provides the push to make it big. I bet that the hate-on for Muslims building a community center started with sincerity – but it became a big deal only when it was a useful distraction.
Today a grad student was failed on a oral exam not because she answered the questions wrong – she got every one of them right – but because two members of the committee (one a member of the NAS, the other her lackey) are intimidated by the students intellect. To quote that bitch, "she needs to learn a lesson, what it's like to fail." Spitefulness, vindictiveness, and downright despicable behavior is the norm in science, not the exception.
Spitefulness and vindictiveness are the norm in pretty much every workplace.
That student did probably learn a valuable lesson: some people are assholes who hate you for no good reason. It's not the one that professor thought she was teaching, but it's still valuable to know in life.
Read the Economist. Sane conservatives, i.e., not American are good with science.
I guess I can understand on a basic level about engineers being more likely to be Republicans – by definition, we are cautious and conservative, and we like things that don't change. But at it's core, engineering is about doing things better than they used to be done. We take the new stuff that the scientists find/develop, and we figure out how to make things better/cheaper/easier/faster/etc. So, while intellectually I can imagine that the generic conservative label may be attractive to engineers, I can't imagine anyone dedicated to making things better subscribing to the poisonous, anti-new, anti-better philosophy that is the modern Republican Party. They're nuts. They want to go BACKWARDS.
Engineers don't go backwards. Backwards is for when you absolutely have nothing else to use. Backwards is log cabins, oil lamps, and abacuses. Give me heat pumps and insulation, LEDs and CFLs, and supercomputers that can fit in my pocket.
And as for the "white supremacy" thing they got going, that's hubris. White supremacy means no more minority innovations or inventions – "Ah don' trust them furriners". White people need all the help we can get. So look here, check your pace maker, and tell me we can get by with just white people. Morons. (Or maybe I should say 'Morans")
conservatism puts principles ahead of empirical findings.
That is just anti-science itself.
quite true on those numbers. though independents can be a squirrely bunch.
can't say i agree with murray's thesis that the left is dead; it's only sleeping. i fear the wake up call may be another depression, tho; thanks to the greedy bastards.
we all know who they are.
Some personal observations:
The few conservative or Republican scientists I've known held their political views because they were able to keep those views completely separate from their work. Not too hard in some of the computational sciences.
The more numerous conservative or Republican engineers I've known were the same way, but there was one additional thing: They liked things that worked correctly in an understandable way. A lot of Republican political ideas (not to mention libertarian political ideas) have a strong surface plausibility. If you assume that everyone's a rational actor, if you assume a perfect market economy, etc. then this should work… These engineers tended not to factor in human limitations.
Sometimes I'll hear non-scientists and a few engineers talk about science as if it's the pursuit of truth-with-a-capital-T. I think this idea is attractive to conservatives and Republicans. That old chestnut, "99% of everything we've ever learned in science has turned out to be wrong," is a reason for them to reject a more sophisticated view, rather than to realize it's a good thing we're constantly testing and re-evaluating our ideas.
Whatever brain architecture makes a person a 'conservative' also contributes to their un-science mindset. Where a scientist will go where the evidence, testing, facts, conclusions lead, liberals also tend to base their decisions on evidence, facts, conclusions. Conservatives, OTH, are able believe nonsense simply because it reinforces their worldview.
I do not know for a fact that the majority of conservatives are climate deniers or creationists based on science or something else. I do know that some highly educated people believe that tax cuts pay for themselves, that Saddam Hussein attacked the US on 911, and that President Obama was born in Kenya.
Conservativse believe outright lies when the lies reinforce what they already believe.
Ok so you're all going to love this story then. (Warning may cause temporary brain lock-up)
A bunch of people said that engineers are more likely to be Republicans than research scientists. My guess, though, is that if the engineers are involved with research and experimentation, they are unlikely to be Republicans.
Engineers are also over-represented in the Intelligent Design Creationist movement. It's the Dunning-Krueger effect: they're too ignorant about other subjects, to know how ignorant they are.*
*There are many great engineers, of course, but there's a subset of them who are very arrogant and ignorant.
And a special Fuck You to Obama's EPA for now deciding that they won't strengthen any of Bush's weakened environmental regulations.
What a fucking joke.
But I don't think that conservative opposition to stem cell research is rooted in hostility to science
Right. They just happen to disbelieve in pollution, evolutionary biology, stem cell research, cosmology, global warming, science funding…
Whatever brain architecture makes a person a 'conservative' also contributes to their un-science mindset.
(Since I'm not a drooling idiot, I couldn't just say "This.")
@BR: thanks. You are right. It was Barton, not Inhofe.
It's the same with their dislike of the phrase "big bang".
Fundie Xian apologist William Lane Craig embraces the big bang – almost co-opts it – as proof that the universe was created ex nihilo, and therefore, somehow it had to have been created by Xian God, squaring perfectly with the Genesis account.
As you say, they love science when they can twist it to support their pre-existing worldview.
One thing I have found is that those who work in data analysis for a living are probably the least likely to be neo-conservatives of any of the white collar jobs where I have worked over the last 30 years. My theory is that to be any good at data analysis, you cannot have pre-conceived notions about what the data is telling you. If the data is telling you something contrary to your core belief, you have to change that core belief. Nate Silver is Exhibit A.
Conservatives by definition are resistant to changing core beliefs and often ignore or dismiss data that may indicate otherwise. FOX News is Exhibit B. And my experience is that sales people are the most likely to be the most conservative in a company.
I find that the anti-science outlook is more about the Ur-Fascist streak in the Republican party than about cars or brains or jobs.
Umberto Eco essay sums it up well:
One could also say
But even at its most intellectually honest (and it rarely is anything approaching intellectually honest), neoclassical economics puts principles ahead of empirical findings.
I just wish there was some attempt to be honest about what the differences are.
I thought there are empirical findings that liberals are more intelligent than conservatives, on average.
(Oh oh…I might have just summoned the evil spirit of Matako Chan or whatever her handle is…)
There was an amusing thing in the MSM recently that there's a difference in the shows they watch. Libs apparently like Dexter and Madmen, whereas one of the top conservative shows was "The Amazing Race". LOL.
@J.W. Hamner:
The Skirball museum must be pretty annoyed right about now. Here they built a multi-cultural, multi-religion permanent exhibit around the myth of Noah's Ark, and now people are going to assume that their version is a stupid fundie trick, too.
Anti-intellectualism in American politic has, to a large extent and over the broad sweep of the country's existence, been subservient to brands of political ideology that are anti-elitist. When scientific inquiry was seen as undermining the left's drive for more equality and dismantling socioeconomic elitism, the left hated it. When it undermined the right's mission of preserving existing institutions that provided society with "structure," the right hated it. Those pointy-headed liberals from "Europe" (read: Jews) think they're so smart, but they're only going to fuck everything up.
In other words, there's a conspiratorial aspect to American anti-intellectualism that seldom gets mentioned.
William Jennings Bryan, for instance, may have been a fire-breathing man of the gospel, but he was also a central figure in the progressive movement. The foundations of his opposition to Darwinism (despite what you may have read in Inherent the Wind) were in the Social Gospel and anti-eugenicism, crystallizing after his run-ins with mostly German eugenicists while he served as Wilson's Secretary of State. All these believers in "science" were shitting on his religious and ideological belief that God created humans in His own image and we were all, as a result, equal.
Likewise, there is a fairly strong anti-intellectual bent among the modern left when it comes to health issues. Specifically when it comes to the promotion of "alternative medicine" and a rejection of pharmacological research. Not because they disagree with the methodologies of modern medicine (I doubt most even know what they are), but because its wrapped up in anti-corporate ideology. We have to reject things like peer review and double-blind testing because modern medicine is, to a very large extent, big business. But in the end that's just throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
This isn't supposed to be a "everyone is equally bad" comment. Modern anti-intellectualism is overwhelmingly found more on the right than the left. They just have common roots in paranoid, reactionary politics.
If the research found a cure for diabetes or Alzheimer's, you just know the conservatives would be lining up for days for the treatment, all the while screaming about those poor baby embryos.
Like Homer Simpson simultaneously mourning the death of and relishing the taste of his pet lobster: "boohoowaahh, Pinchy! Mmmmmm, Pinchy . . . "
@TooManyJens: This.
The people that are prone to being conservative authoritarians are people who aren't inquisitive, you refused to be puzzled for more than a moment and want quick answers to questions and prefer them quick to correct.
This is all antithetical to science. So they are, too.
I was in North Dakota on a research trip and stopped at a roadside fossil museum on the border with SD. The family had owned the property since the homestead act and had apparently stumbled onto some significant fossils over the last century – including a gorgeous Triceratops skull. They had a ton of fossil evidence at the place, including a scale model of Noah's Ark with mini animals on it and dinosaurs left on the land as floodwaters approached. They stacks of creationist literature, mini copies of the Bill of Rights, and flags for sale in the bookstore. A loop of a creationist paleontologist explaining how dinosaur fossils were created in only 3-6,000 years played on a TV.
It was quite a treat.
The people that are prone to being conservative authoritarians are people who aren't inquisitive, you refused to be puzzled for more than a moment and want quick answers to questions and prefer them quick to correct.
Napoleon, probably one of the most reactionary authoritarians in recent centuries, was extremely inquisitive when it came to science and showed great mathematical skill at an early age. And he was, after all, someone who wanted to know with a great deal of precision where his cannonballs would land.
@Tractarian: A Brooks column is more, "WANK, WANK, WANK!!!!!11!"
@lllphd: well….the only elites left on the right are business class, and basically….they farm the base.
oligarchsrepublicans aren't an outside factor; they are like a closed subroutine that has gotten out of hand. A cancer if you want to switch analogies. They are programmed to feed off the rest of the body no matter what the cost to the system in general, and to kill off anything that competes.
@lllphd: But relly, it is far more simple.
One must be smart to become a scientist.
Smart people are becoming more and more rare on the right.
One reason is Salam-Douthat stratification on cognitive ability.
but there are lots of reasons.
My hypothesis is that there is an emergent body of work suggesting a significant measureable between group difference in IQ between liberals and conservatives…for the following reasons.
1. evolutionary pschology– cognitive psychology and the savannah principle and the biological basis of political affiliation
2. game theory–
In gaming, people choose the game they do well at, and clever designers offer skillups, or skill levelling. Conservativism offers a kind of skill levelling for IQ and g.
Intellectuals, "elites" and fancy educations are scorned by conservatives in favor of religiosity and "commonsense".
Being branded an "elite" or an "intellectual" in conservatism results in negative social capital.
So religiosity and commonsense are skillups for conservatives. This is called rubberband theory.
Conservatives self-select based on social levelling/skill levelling for IQ and g.
3. memetic selection–
Consider the last 50 years of memetic selection in the conservative base.
Selection for voters who can be manipulated into voting against their economic self-interest, who are sufficiently undereducated to not understand ToE and basic meiosis, who are highly xenophobic, who despise science, intellectuals and acadame and whose religiosity index is extremely high.
Its like side-effect biomemetic engineering that has produced a malleable population extremely permeable to fearmongering and demagoguery…indeed that only responds to slogans and race-baiting and IQ-baiting.
4. Biological basis-
there is a U Mich paper revealing that backfire effect is ONLY observed in conservatives. im not the only one noticing.
Jay Rosen–The article is mainly about the so-called "backfire" effect, wherein contrary information not only doesn't inform but actually strengthens the existing (and incorrect) belief, thus backfiring. Seems irrational, right? Here's what the article says about this irrationality applying across the board:
Nyhan inserted a clear, direct correction after each piece of misinformation, and then measured the study participants to see if the correction took.
For the most part, it didn't. The participants who self-identified as conservative believed the misinformation on WMD and taxes even more strongly after being given the correction. With those two issues, the more strongly the participant cared about the topic — a factor known as salience — the stronger the backfire. The effect was slightly different on self-identified liberals: When they read corrected stories about stem cells, the corrections didn't backfire, but the readers did still ignore the inconvenient fact that the Bush administration's restrictions weren't total.
In other words, the backfire effect did not occur "across the board." It was observed among conservatives and not among liberals, at least in this portion of the study. However, blocking out facts that were inconvenient did occur among liberals, as well. This shows that liberals are not immune to these irrational tendencies, but it does not show that the irrationality discussed in the Globe article is evenly distributed across the political spectrum. I think that's an important qualifier.
I also think that there's a danger of PC thinking taking over here. In being careful not to encourage fantasies among liberals of being immune from these tendencies, which is an entirely valid thing to do, some writers, I have noticed, are too quick to suggest that a kind of symmetry reigns over political behavior. I don't think we should be doing that.
we arent the same anymore. Conservatism has become memetic selection for stupid.
In order to be a scientist, you have to be ready, willing, and able to say that you are wrong, and start over with the next hypothesis that might be just as wrong. You have to toss pre-conceived notions out, every day, when the evidence argues against them. You have to be able to say "I don't know", and be comfortable with that answer even if others aren't.
No conservative can do even one of those things, in my experience.
And yes, I'm a research scientist.
Late to the party, but I highly recommend the book Merchants of Doubt by Naomi Oreskes and Erik Conway. This shit has been going on for fifty fucking years and the same cast of characters is at the heart of all the anti-science bullshit. The free market fundamentalists have decreed that ideology trumps science.
Read it and weep.
And now even The New Yorker is getting into the act, with a preposterous article titled "The Truth Wears Off — is there something wrong with the scientific method?"
Right, because 2 + 2 stops being 4 after a certain point. It's so hard to prove anything, after all.
Just shoot me now.
Today a grad student was failed on a oral exam not because she answered the questions wrong – she got every one of them right – but because two members of the committee (one a member of the NAS, the other her lackey) are intimidated by the students intellect. To quote that bitch, "she needs to learn a lesson, what it's like to fail."
Do you have any hard evidence to back up this unverified claim?
ED is probably sulking somewhere. He hasn't posted in a while.
Engineers have to have a good data set to come to good conclusions, and many of the ones I know are not curious about the world beyond their niche. Which I think supports your observation.
Ha! I'm laughing too, now that you pointed that out.
Hmm — good analysis, I think.
I started reading that, hoping it wasn't as bad as it sounded. But it was.
Actually, I suspect it is just muddily presented. Hmm. Jonah Lehrer. Fuck, he's fucking everywhere. He's the Steven King of pop science writing these days.
Maybe the article is great — can't read past the pay wall — I'd love to hear a decent take on his take on whatever it is he is taking and selling back to the New Yorker.
The engineers I know care if things work and work properly. Seems to me that's part of old-fashioned conservatism but not current Republican ideology. While many engineers may have been Republicans in the Eisenhower years (and Eisenhower would be rolling in his grave if he knew how anti-science his party had become), I can't see how they would support a party that's as loaded with nonsense and destructiveness as the modern Republicans.


text:
Between Naps on the Porch
Decorating, Tablescaping, Before and Afters, Thrifty Finds, and Gardening
Sorry, no content matched your criteria.
Subscribe for Daily Blog Post Updates! Enter your email:
A Dry Run
6 Pairs of Shoes That Kept Me Warm, Cozy and Comfortable in Italy
A Stylish Anti-Theft, RFID Secure, Crossbody Bag For Travel

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Facts about Monroe in New York
|New York
|Latitude Longitude
|41.319785, -74.184789
US Cities List
Select State
Select County
Select City
Last Updated Date: 20-11-2016
Disclaimer : All efforts have been made to make this image accurate. However Compare Infobase Limited,its directors and employees do not own any responsibility for the correctness or authenticity of the same.
Facts about Monroe in New York
|New York
|Latitude Longitude
|41.319785, -74.184789
Map of Cities in New York
|Dresden village Map
|Shortsville Map
|Freedom Plains Map
|Morrisonville Map
|Lynbrook Map
|Hammond Map
|Perry Map
|Island Park Map
|New Hempstead Map
|Thomaston Map
|Scio Map
|Bayport Map
|Brocton Village Map
|Ellisburg village Map
|Briarcliff Manor village Map
|Boonville village Map
|Poland Map
|James West Map
|Mayfield Map
|Syracuse Map
|Mattituck Map
|Hopewell Junction Map
|Rouses Point Map
|Centereach Map
|Munnsville Map
|Green Map
|West Glens Falls Map
|Savona Map
|Phoenicia Map
|Stillwater Map
|Calcium Map
|Zena Map
|Olcott Map
|South Lima Map
|Freeville Map
|Altmar Hamlet Map
|Rifton Map
|Port Henry Map
|Union Springs Map
|Leeds Map
|Calverton Map
|West Hurley Map
|South Valley Stream Map
|Old Bethpage Map
|Baxter Estates Village Map
|Water Mill Map
|East Randolph village Map
|Mannsville Map
|Babylon village Map
|Plattsburgh Map
|Searing Map
|Hastings-on-Hudson Map
|North Creek Map
|North Gates Map
|Henderson Map
|Old Westbury Map
|Limestone Map
|Scotts Corners Map
|Homer Map
|Williamsville Map
|Saddle Rock Estates Map
|Churchville village Map
|Clarkson Map
|Morris Map
|Paul Smiths Map
|Redwood Map
|Brockport Village Map
|Ghent Map
|Webster Map
|Asharoken village Map
|Retsof Map
|Depauville Map
|Herricks Map
|Bay Shore Map
|North Collins Map
|Unionville Map
|South Lockport Map
|Prattsville Map
|Corfu village Map
|East Hampton village Map
|Mount Sinai Map
|New Rochelle Map
|Cattaraugus village Map
|Peekskill Map
|Fairport village Map
|Roslyn Heights Map
|Cairo Map
|Hampton Bays Map
|Cohoes city Map
|Bardonia Map
|Northport Map
|New Suffolk Map
|Newport Map
|Johnson Map
|Rock Hill Map
|Honeoye Falls Map
|Bridgewater Village Map
|Port Dickinson Map
|Carmel Hamlet Map
|Napanoch Map
Distance Between Cities in New York State
|Distance from Albany NY to Albuquerque NM
|Distance from Albany NY to Atlanta GA
|Distance from Albany NY to Baltimore MD
|Distance from Albany NY to Billings MT
|Distance from Albany NY to Birmingham AL
|Distance from Albany NY to Boise ID
|Distance from Albany NY to Boston MA
|Distance from Albany NY to Buffalo NY
|Distance from Albany NY to Charleston SC
|Distance from Albany NY to Charleston WV


text:
Urine Testing
Because drug use is almost immediately detectable in an individual's urine, hundreds of thousands of urine drug tests are administered every year. Tests may be administered to detect a single substance or up to a dozen classes of drugs.
OR Select a test below
D.O.T drug test
National Drug Testing Network provides DOT drug testing and DOT breath alcohol testing in all states and most cities which complies with all requirements of DOT 49 CFR Part 40.Most testing centers are within minutes of your home or office and the process to schedule a DOT drug test or DOT breath alcohol test is FAST AND EASY.
OR Select a test below
Hair test
For hair testing information please call us at


text:
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
Reading mode: Light Dark
Forum indexSony Cyber-shot TalkChange forum
RX100 In Camera HDR
Started Aug 9, 2012 | Discussions thread
Zen4Life • Forum Member • Posts: 95
RX100 In Camera HDR
Aug 9, 2012
Was testing out the in camera 6EV HDR setting and found it blows out highlights and loses detail in the shadows in cases where it should not. I would expect that the camera is taking 3 shots at EV -3,0,+3 and then tone mapping them. I know when I took pics of the same scene at -3 it protected against blown highlights and +3 retained shadow detail.
I will do more controlled tests and post the results. I will compare in camera 6EV to post processing using bracketted shots (manually at the same EVs). I understand the results will be much better doing it in post but was a bit more hopeful that the in-camera HDR would deliver.
Sony RX100
Reply to thread Reply with quote Complain
|Post (hide subjects)
|Posted by
|Aug 9, 2012
|Aug 9, 2012
|Aug 9, 2012
|Aug 11, 2012
|Aug 11, 2012
|Aug 9, 2012
|Aug 9, 2012
|Aug 9, 2012
|Aug 9, 2012
|Aug 9, 2012
|Aug 9, 2012
|Aug 10, 2012
|Aug 10, 2012
|Aug 10, 2012
|Aug 12, 2012
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow
Latest reviews
Finished challenges
|Carla... by lickity split
from Beautiful caucasian female faces
|Lunar New Year Fireworks by Michael L NYC 99
from FIREWORKS
|Vatican Basilica by wam7
from Street lights
Most popular cameras
Beginner's GuidesGetting StartedIn-depth testingLatest Camera ReviewsBeyond the studio testsFeature Articles and Videosreal world performanceField Test Videossee how we seeSample GalleriesIn-depth ReviewFujifilm X100FShow CoverageHits and Misses from CP+ 2017Throwback ThursdayClassic Cameras from Days Past
Top threads in this forum
Most bookmarked in this forum
Top posters in this forum


text:
OB Beauty Of The Day! Check Out These New Stunning Photos Of Ono Bello
Media Entrepreneur, and Fashion Enthusiasts, Ono Bello is stunning and a sight to behold in these new pictures. For her first look, she is wearing a mild makeup with nude lips. This second look, is perfect for a date night or an outdoor outing. Her bold red lips made this…Read more


text:
Question : Over the coming months, which airline is getting their passengers to Tijuana Airport (TIJ) round-trip the cheapest?
Answer : Volaris is the leader in keeping prices down for their passengers over the next three months. Bookings are being made at just $300, which is quite a deal when compared to the more expensive bookings of $1,192.
Question : Can you cut down on flight costs by changing the day of the week you travel to Tijuana?
Answer : The best day to fly on a budget this month is Friday. Being flexible with your travel days garners even more savings during booking.
Question : Have you considered flying into San Diego International Airport instead of Tijuana Airport?
Answer : Flying into TIJ is not the only way to get to Tijuana. Try searching for flights to San Diego International Airport (SAN) as well. Over the next two months, flights from LAS to SAN are 72% cheaper than flights from LAS to TIJ. Only 18 miles away, it's easily accessible for most.
Question : Are you paying the cheapest or highest price for your ticket to Tijuana?
Answer : Prices for this trip tend to change a lot more than other flights from the United States. They can range anywhere from $300 to $1,192. Remember, the sooner you book, the more you'll be able to save.
Question : Interested in traveling in the next 30 days and want to get the lowest fare?
Answer : As of Jul 17th, the best day for booking to Tijuana (TIJ) is Aug 17th. It costs $330, which is 42% below the average price to book the same route.
Question : How long do most people visit Tijuana?
Answer : Of course you're not most people, but if you were, you'd stay roughly two days.


text: Andre Andre is 55 years old male from Clarks Summit, United States. He is interested in meet new people, . 55, male, Dickson City Likes: 275x Facebook profile Who s/he liked? Send message Favorite May she/he ask you for a date? Never Maybe Sure Im on FB Interests: Star Trek Makeup Snowboarding Dawn of the Dead Fitness and Health Jim Carrey Blade Nightlife South of France Andrea Bocelli Relationship: ShowSexuality: ShowHeight: ShowWeight: ShowBody type: ShowEye color: ShowHair color: ShowLiving: ShowKids: ShowSmoking: ShowDrinking: Show Report photo Sign up to see all photos Facebook Twitter Google+ Pinterest Similar users Steve 58, Sparks 133 Sid 55, Macomb 145 Todd 52, Oswego 421 Dale 58, Rancho Cordova 384 Phillip 54, Albuquerque 163 Jimmy 52, Kingman 311 Russell 57, Chicago 218 Russell 55, Sterling 481 Christoper 57, 82


text:
from 83,9 USD – Apartment
from 73,4 USD – Guest accommodation
from 73,4 USD – Guest accommodation
from 81,1 USD – Guest accommodation
from 61,8 USD – Hotel
from 54,5 USD – Hotel
from 58,3 USD – Hotel
from 58,3 USD – Guest accommodation
0.01 km
Skopelos 37003, Skopelos Town
0.05 km
Skopelos 37003, Skopelos Town
0.07 km
Beach Road - behind Asklipeio Skopelos 37003, Skopelos Town
0.15 km
Ambeliki, Skopelos 37003, Skopelos Town
* Wszystkie odległości są mierzone w linie prostej, od Twojego punktu do celu.
All bookings are confirmed instantly. No waiting, no email exchanges, no confusion.
This beachfront hotel is situated amongst bougainvilleas 700 metres from Skopelos centre. Sunrise Village Hotel features a swimming pool and self-catered accommodation with free Wi-Fi and a balcony overlooking the Aegean Sea.
A kitchenette with a fridge, electric kettle and cooking hobs is included in all air-conditioned studios and apartments. Some units also include a dining area. All accommodation at the Sunrise Village Hotel Apartments has a seating area with a sofa and TV.
Guests can relax in the free sun loungers by the swimming pool with a drink from the bar.
Restaurants, bars and shops are a 10-minute walk from the property. Skopelos Port is at 700 metres and Stafylos Beach is within 4 km. Staff at the tour desk can arrange car and bicycle rental and free private parking is provided on site.
Rooms: 39
Electric kettle, Dining area, Coffee machine, Outdoor furniture, Kitchenware, Kitchenette, Dining table, Stovetop, Refrigerator
Toilet, Bathroom, Shower, Free toiletries, Hairdryer, Toilet paper
Seating Area, Private entrance, Soundproofing, Desk, Wardrobe/Closet, Tile/Marble floor, Clothes rack, Air conditioning, Heating, Safety Deposit Box, Sofa bed
Cable Channels, Satellite Channels, Telephone, TV
Wake Up Service/Alarm Clock
Pool view, Balcony, City view, Garden view
Features a balcony with Aegean Sea views. Includes air conditioning, seating area with sofa and TV. A kitchenette with electric kettle, cooking hobs and fridge is standard.
Refrigerator, Dining table, Stovetop, Electric kettle, Oven, Dining area, Coffee machine, Kitchenware, Kitchenette, Outdoor furniture
Toilet, Toilet paper, Hairdryer, Shower, Free toiletries, Bathroom
Air conditioning, Sofa, Desk, Iron, Wardrobe/Closet, Tile/Marble floor, Sofa bed, Seating Area, Safety Deposit Box, Heating, Clothes rack, Soundproofing, Private entrance
Cable Channels, Satellite Channels, Telephone, TV
Wake Up Service/Alarm Clock
Sea view, Balcony, City view, View
Upper floors accessible by stairs only
More spacious, air-conditioned accommodation featuring a balcony with Aegean Sea views. Includes a seating area with sofa and TV. A kitchenette with cooking hobs, fridge and dining area is provided.
After booking, all of the hotel's details, including telephone and email address, are provided in the online booking confirmation, confirmation email.
Garden, Sun terrace,
Family rooms, Air conditioning,
Safety deposit box, Tour desk, Luggage storage,
Car hire, Bicycle rental (additional charge),
Outdoor pool, Beachfront, Swimming pool,
Free WiFi! WiFi is available in all areas and is free of charge.
Free parking! Free private parking is possible on site (reservation is not needed).
From 14:00 Until 23:00 hours
From 07:00 Until 12:00 hours
All children are welcome.
One child under 2 years stays free of charge in a child's cot/crib.
One older child or adult is charged EUR 10 per person per night in an extra bed.
The maximum number of extra beds/children's cots permitted in a room is 1.
Pets are allowed on request. No extra charges.
Our hotel reviews will help you find the best deal in the right location.
ihr24.com offers the choice of over 600,000 hotels in more than 200 countries.
Sign up for your free My ihr24.com account
Website in English and 17 other languages


text:
Latest Jedi News Network Podcast
Latest News
Fantasy Flight Games: StarViper Mk. II
Fantasy Flight Games preview the Guns for Hire Expansion pack for X-Wing,
Jawa | 'Star Wars' 40th Anniversary | The Black Series 6" Action Figure
Here's my review of the Black Series 40th Anniversary 6" Jawa figure.
Info On Inferno Squad's Gideon Hask & Del Meeko From 'Battlefront II'
The Big 3 of the Inferno Squad ranks.
BBC Radio 2: The Radio 2 Arts Show With Jonathan Ross: San Diego Comic...
Jonathan Ross takes us all the way to San Diego for comic con on BBC Radio 2.
The Metro: 6 Ways The First Order Could Defeat The Resistance In 'The Last...
How can the First Order defeat the Resistance?
Roundup Of All The Big 'Star Wars' News From SDCC 2017
Get caught up on all the exciting reveals from this past weekend.
Product Details For 'The Last Jedi' Visual Dictionary
Learn more about Episode VIII in Pablo Hidalgo's new reference book.
Gentle Giant Zuckuss Collector's Gallery Statue
The bounty hunter is coming in a new 1:8th scale statue from Gentle Giant.
Gentle Giant Darth Vader "Emperor's Wrath" Mini Bust
A father's love for his son should never be underestimated.
The Metro: 'Star War's Books Could Provide Clues About 'The Last Jedi'
Over at The Metro I look at the Journey to the Force Awakens publishing program.
Prom 8: Celebrating John Williams
With a lack of available holes, the music of the maestro filled the Albert Hall.
The Metro: 'The Last Jedi' – 6 Ways The Resistance Can Defeat The First...
Over at The Metro I look at 6 ways the Resistance can defeat the First Order.
More Photos Of Sideshow Mythos Obi-Wan Kenobi Sixth Scale Figure
Take a closer look at this new sixth scale figure from Sideshow.
Death Squad Commander | 'Star Wars' 40th Anniversary | The Black Series 6" Action...
Here's my review of the 40th anniversary Death Squad Commander 6" figure.
Full Video Of SDCC 2017 Lucasfilm Publishing Panel
Bestselling, fan-favorite authors discuss their latest stories set in a galaxy far, far away at SDCC.
Fantasy Flight Games: Man Your Battlestations
Fantasy Flight Games preview the red characters in Empire at War, the latest pack for Star Wars Destiny.
Dorchester's Second Charity TV & Film Convention: September 10th 2017
Sunday September 10th is the date for Greedy Goblin Con, which brings guests from Star Wars and much more to Dorchester. Greedy Goblin Con, Dorchester's...
Fantasy Flight Games: The Swamps of Nal Hutta
Fantasy Flight Games take a look at the latest gamesmat for Imperial Assault.
Hasbro SDCC 2017 Exclusives Pushed Back To September
Fans will have to wait a little longer before getting the chance to order Hasbro's SDCC 2017 exclusives online.
Dave Filoni Shares Untold Story Of Ahsoka & Kanan Meeting Each Other
We learn about another key piece of Rebels information from Dave.
Jason Fry To Author 'The Last Jedi' Novelization
We have our author for Episode VIII's official novelization.
Covers & Details On 'Journey To The Last Jedi' Titles
Time to make rathtar-sized room on your bookshelf.
An Even Bleaker Outlook For 'Making Of The Force Awakens' Book
Will this title ever see the light of day?
Coffee With Kenobi: 'Star Wars': It's About Family
Becca Benjamin writing over at Coffee With Kenobi looks at the importance of family to the Star Wars mythos.
SDCC 2017: Hasbro 'Star Wars' Panel Recap
Come inside for a rundown of what Hasbro revealed during today's Star Wars panel.
Fantasy Flight Games: A Galaxy At War
Fantasy Flight Games take a look at the new units and cinematic combats from the Rise of the Empire expansion for Rebellion.
Go For A 'Star Wars' Celebration At Farthest From, The 'Star Wars' Vintage Toy...
Farthest From is just 2 weekends away.
'The Last Jedi' Behind The Scenes On UK TV
kamino_Ghost brings great news regarding The Last Jedi Behind the scenes video on UK TV.
SDCC 2017: Lucasfilm Publishing Panel, 'Thrawn' Novel Comic Adaptation Coming
Lots of great publishing content has been revealed.
Latest Jedi News YouTube Videos
Gillette Promotional Box Review
Jedi News Review: Top Trumps Star Wars Quiz
Sambro Darth Vader Life-size Helmet Bluetooth Speaker Review


text: ← → 1 hearts View image source Reporting an entry If this image belongs to you or is your intellectual property, please submit a copyright notification instead of reporting it. We encourage users to report abusive images and help us moderate the content on WHI. But please keep in mind that reporting images that are not abusive is against our terms of service and can get your account blocked. If you want to un-heart an image to remove it from your gallery, don't report it. Just click the heart icon over the image and it will disappear from your gallery. Why are you reporting this entry? nudity / pornography discriminative, xenophobic or racist spam / scam child abuse tag spam sensitive, disgusting or upsetting bullying A @andreasunsets Follow Keep Smiling... Hearted from isadiazarape.tumblr.com more about this image This image is in 0 collections View all My eternity by mickeyharley2908 Follow Michael Jackson by emilysantosg Follow My Michael 😻💕 by tracy_jackson34 Follow ⭐Michael Jackson⭐ by jendawson Follow You might like these too


text:
LBDs! Little Black Dresses Black Cocktail Black Casual Dresses.
These LBDs are SO AFFORDABLE you can stock your closet for every season! Sexy cutouts lace backless plus LULUS Exclusive styles!
Little Black Dress Occasion and Party Dresses for Every Woman.
RSVP in style and be the ultimate fun-filled wedding guest. Step out for a day of glamour with our must-have race day dresses! Evening dresses for all occasions whatever your shape size or style. Find your perfect prom party look with our collection of unique dresses. Share your MyLBDStory with us when you wear our dresses and you could feature on our website. Be the first to the party with the LBD newsletter featuring new arrivals fabulous offers and giveaways! By buying our dresses youve helped raise 10000 for womens domestic violence charity Refuge.
Black Dresses Little Black Dress Very.co.uk.
Discover our fantastic range of Black Dresses at Very.co.uk. Order online now for next day delivery and easy free returns.
Maxi Dresses Black Evening Maxi Dresses boohoo.
HURRY ENDS IN daysdaysd /dayshoursh minutesm secondss. By continuing to use our site you agree to us using cookies in accordance with our Cookie Policy. Page 1 of 13. Page 1 of 13. View 80 items per page. Sort by Sort by. Price High to Low. Price Low to High. Page 1 of 13. Page 1 of 13.
Black Dresses Black Dress New Look.
Sale Up to 60% Off. A black dress is a staple in every girl's wardrobe it's easy to throw on and quickly dress up or down. Its simplicity and elegance suits all girls no matter the occasion. Follow the monochrome trend by adding a white sleeveless jacket to your ebony gown. Evening Party Dresses Maxi Dresses Lace Dresses Bodycon Dresses Midi Dresses Little Black Dresses White Dresses Grey Dresses Red Dresses. Best Match Price Low to High Price High to Low Newest Best sellers. 5 or less 1. 10 or less 28. 20 or less 143.
black Dresses Women Debenhams.
FREE Standard Delivery on orders over 40. FREE Next Day Click Collect on orders over 20. International Delivery find out more. Party going-out dresses 253. Little black dresses 32.
Black Dresses Black Lace Dresses Little Black Dress Next.
Sort By Most Popular. Budding fashion begins with that classic black dress! Embroidered plain or floral the LBD never goes out of style! Play with the lengths and weave intricate glamour no matter the occasion. Perhaps finish off your little black dress with chic sandals and accessories boasting understated appeal! When unsure bank on the black dress that blends itself making an impact at work or at a party.
Dresses Shop Women's Dresses Online at Boohoo.
By continuing to use our site you agree to us using cookies in accordance with our Cookie Policy. Page 1 of 78. Page 1 of 78. View 80 items per page. Sort by Most Relevant. Price High to Low. Price Low to High. Page 1 of 78. Page 1 of 78. View 80 items per page.
Black Dresses WOMEN Forever 21.


text:
where can i get owners manual
3 Answers
junk yard or print it off the internet
1 of 1 people found this helpful.
Amazon.com currently has 1 Seller offering the 2003 Owner's Manual (used): http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/B0099PDA5Y/ref=dp_olp_used_mbc?ie=UTF8&condition=used
Your Answer
Looking for a Used Freelander in your area?
CarGurus has 67 nationwide Freelander listings starting at $2,500.
Search Land Rover Freelander Questions
Land Rover Freelander Experts
Reputation 210
Larry Quigley
Reputation 90
Reputation 80
Related Models For Sale
Used Land Rover Discovery
1,398 listings starting at $53,685
Used Land Rover Range Rover
109 Great Deals out of 4,808 listings starting at $2,500
Used Land Rover Defender
118 listings starting at $46,988
Used Land Rover Discovery Series II
72 listings
Used Jeep Grand Cherokee
1,037 Great Deals out of 72,568 listings starting at $1,200
Used Jeep Wrangler
298 Great Deals out of 15,877 listings starting at $3,495
Used Ford Escape
1,275 Great Deals out of 85,055 listings starting at $995
Used Cars For Sale
Content submitted by Users is not endorsed by CarGurus, does not express the opinions of CarGurus, and should not be considered reviewed, screened, or approved by CarGurus. Please refer to CarGurus Terms of Use.


text:
Mobile: 505-259-8131
Office: 505-259-8131
Fax : 505-857-2383
: Email Me
Courtesy of: Century 21 Unica Real Estate
WELCOME HOME! Look no farther. This extremely well maintained & upgraded house is equally MOVE-IN READY as it is PRIVATE. Beautifully landscaped backyard (over $20K in landscaping) has tall privacy wall & abuts open-space. Great open floor plan has multiple living areas & is decorator's dream, freshly painted in designer colors, with six-panel doors & plant/decorative ledges throughout. Beautiful open chief's kitchen flows into living room and through sliding glass door into backyard for ideal indoor/outdoor living. Large dining room/formal living room gives versatility. Huge MBR has office/sitting area, separate shower/soaking tub & his/hers closets. Convenient 2nd floor laundry. Private guest wing includes 3 additional bedrooms & 2 bathrooms. HOME WARRANTY INCLUDED in full purchase price


text:
Shipping and return policies for Korpse
- Return Policy
- Korpse is not responsible for any loss, theft, damage or anything that goes wrong after we posted the package at the post office. After you made a payment to Korpse the order can't be cancelled or changed, and we won't reimburse any money for any reason whatsoever. Ordering Korpse's merchandise is at your own risk, and by ordering merch at our webstore you agree to our terms and conditions.
contact / help
Streaming and Download help


text:
Some models stick around the market longer than others. The Kia Sorento, for example, lasted for a good eight years in its first iteration, and the second-generation model has been around for five years now. Sure, it had a facelift a couple of years ago, but if it's going to make it in the highly competitive midsize crossover market, Kia is going to have to do better than that.
- Photos
- Jul 7, 2014
2016 Kia Sorento spy shots
- 2018 Mustang GT does 0-60 in under 4 seconds
- How dealers are price-gouging Dodge Demon
- New Car Buying Guides
- 2018 Honda Accord is sleeker, more efficient
- Mercedes X-Class pickup truck revealed
- Find and compare 2017 Models


text:
Apparently Chicago-based firm LimitNone is suing Google for misappropriating the trade secrets of its "gMove" application that Google allegedly used to develop its Email Uploader.
The two-count lawsuit also claims Google violated Illinois' consumer fraud laws.
The lawsuit was filed Tuesday by Kelley Drye & Warren LLP – "the same commercial litigation group which challenged Google over the company's online advertising system," SlashDot noted.
Details of the suit can be found in the press release sent out by the law firm.
"Its shocking that Google would engage in this type of conduct; particularly when the other party is a small software company that built its business specifically to help Google sell its existing and future products," said Susan Greenspon of the Chicago office of Kelley Drye & Warren LLP. "People need to realize that Google is just another large publicly traded corporation that will do whatever it takes to increase its revenue, even if that means risking its reputation among developers."
The lawsuit alleges that in February, 2007 Google launched a suite of business software applications called Google Apps. The software was designed to challenge Microsoft's Office suite of products (Word, Excel, Outlook, etc.) which has 500 million users. According to the lawsuit, unlike Microsoft's products, Google Apps does not require a customer to download software onto his or her computer. Instead, Google Apps is a collection of web-based applications that reside on Google's servers. The lawsuit alleges at the time of its launch, however, Google did not have a workable way to enable Microsoft Outlook users to easily migrate their email (called gMail), calendar and contacts to Google's platform.
In early 2007, LimitNone developed just such a product to solve this problem and in March confidentially demonstrated the migration tool to senior members of the Google Apps team. According to the complaint, the Google Apps executives invited LimitNone to be part of the Google Enterprise Professional Program, to further develop and market the tool, and assured the company that it had no intention of developing a similar product.
The lawsuit alleges the tool, which was originally named "MY GRATE" was later renamed, at Google's insistence, "gMove". Though the product retailed for $29, Google asked that LimitNone sell it to Google's customers for $19.
The lawsuit claims that throughout the remainder of 2007, Google promoted LimitNone and gMove and repeatedly told company executives that it would not develop a competing product. Google highlighted gMove on its website and introduced the company to its largest customers (including Proctor & Gamble, Intel, Orbitz, Morgan Stanley and Toys "R" Us). In addition, Google asked LimitNone to present the product to its technical sales personnel, to meet with the Google Open Source team and to continuously share updated versions of gMove.
In December, 2007, as detailed in the complaint Google told LimitNone that it would, in fact, be releasing a competing product and giving it away for free to its "Premier" customers. The lawsuit alleges that Google's product, called "Google Email Uploader" steals gMove's look, feel and functionality.
According to the complaint, Scott McMullan, a senior executive in the Google Apps partner program, told LimitNone that the potential for 50 million users – was "just too big to come from someone else" and that "this is how Google operates."
Related reading
Everything you need to know about visual search (so far)
Visual search is one of the most complex and fiercely competed sectors of our industry. Here's a review of the key players, and what their technology allows us to do.
Google fined $2.7 billion by E.U. in anti-trust ruling
Google has been fined a record $2.7 billion for a breach of E.U. anti-trust rules. The search giant was charged with giving "illegal advantages" to another Google product within search results, in a case that started more than seven years ago.
Meeker's Report on the state of advertising and ad trends to watch out for
Mary Meeker's Internet Trends Report 2017, one of the most-anticipated annual events in the world of digital, was released a few weeks ... read more
Top 4 mistakes ecommerce marketers are still making
The digital ink spilled over ecommerce and product remarketing best practices is pretty prolific, but ecommerce marketers frequently still miss out on opportunities by making the same mistakes. Here are four major ones to avoid.


text: QUIZ: Where Should You Live in Los Angeles? Posted by: MTLA STAFF 0 Flares Twitter 0 Facebook 0 Google+ 0 Pin It Share 0 Email -- 0 Flares × Related posts:People in Los Angeles Hate The PoliceMoving To LA: Haley From Arizona$1000 Grant Awarded For Moving to Los Angeles Share! Tweet Notice: Please check settings of Facebook API in Theme Options -> Advanced Related Posts QUIZ: Are You Ready To Move To Los Angeles? Related posts:The First Thing You Should Do In Los AngelesDon't Take Adult Beginners Swimming L ... QUIZ: What Will Happen When You Move To Los Angeles? Related posts:Los Angeles Power Player - Shane Murphy GoldsmithShould I Plan To Stay In A Shelt ... Should You Take a Plane, Bus or Drive? CAR If you have a car, you should definitely drive but with gas prices this may be costly. Bu ... Leave a Reply Cancel reply Comment Name (required) E-mail (required) Website 1+1= (required)


text:
Watch Featured Movies
Tasumania monogatari: No description
|IMDB: N/A Metascore: N/A RT: N/A
|July 21, 1990
|No Genres
|Yasuo Furuhata
|Haruko Kato Hijiri Kojima Hiroko Yakushimaru Jinpachi Nezu Keiju Kobayashi Kunie Tanaka Naoto Ogata Sumiko Fuji Yoshiko Miyazaki
Tasumania monogatari Links
Streaming films is becoming more risky every day. We strongly urge our users to use a VPN to make themselves anonymous while streaming films and TV shows online. Using a VPN ensures that your ISP, the government and the NSA can't spy on you or block any streams. They will not be able to see ANY of your online activity. Protect Your Privacy with a Free VPN
|Version 1
|14493 views
|Report Broken
|Version 2
|5401 views
|Report Broken
|Version 3
|2722 views
|Report Broken
This movie may be available for download - Click here to try
|= Low Quality
|= Medium Quality
|= High Quality
|How do I watch these?
Sponsored Content
Tasumania monogatari Comments
Post a Comment
Tasumania monogatari Reviews
Support the Site
Site Updates and News
|Follow @real_1channel
Did you know you can use Primewire.org and Primewire.is to access this site? Well, now you do.
Check out the personalized TV Schedule.
Latest Comments
Wish Upon
rusty_shacklefard : Preparing to laugh at everyone complaining about a bootlegged version of a movie ...
Brooklyn's Finest
annelapham : A DARK AND GRITTY CRIME DRAMA WITH EXCELLENT MUSICAL SCORE AND SPOT ON ACTING. R ...
Inside the Actors Studio
Larsmanson : No links to 98% of the episodes lol. Why bother having it here?
rashpraetor : incredible movie that will give you the "feels" so heavy. good luck wa ...
Somewhere Between
kittiecattt : Why they got Paula looking a hot ass mess... still not sure what i think about t ...
The Thirteenth Floor
ckhafre : This is a bit like The Matrix meets Dark City, with more of a film noir feeling. ...


text:
Summer events at Hackney Museum
New Maths in History course for adult learners at Hackney Museum in partnership with Hackney Learning Trust
From Wednesday 7 June, 9.30am-11.30am
What do objects in the museum tell us about the past? How did people in Hackney live their lives? What changes did they make over their lives? Did they have decisions to make about how they spent their money? How are our lives the same and how are our lives different?
Come along and have fun learning maths through exploring Hackney Stories and sharing your own. If you would like to know more information please get in touch with Sai Wong on 07768526855 or firstname.lastname@example.com.
Xenia: Women Learning English Together
Saturdays, 10am-1pm
Women from all walks of life are invited to come along and meet, connect and learn in our next Xenia meetup for women. English language learners and women who are confident in English will participate in activities together, discovering the area, talking and forming relationships. At each meetup we use a different theme to enable conversations to flow and friendships to form.
Are you learning English? Come and make a friend, practice English, learn new things, and share your culture. Do you speak fluent English? Come and make a friend, practice whatever you want to, learn new things, and make London a more welcoming place. You are welcome to bring your children.
Race, Place, and Photography in Hackney
Thursday 22 June and Thursday 29 June, 6pm-7.30pm
Come and share your photographs, memories or personal items that you associate with home, arrival and belonging. Find out how your family photographs and memories of celebrations, festivals, events and everyday life in Hackney can help shape our understanding of our borough's rich histories. Together with local artist Ekua McMorris we will look at how different communities have shaped Hackney starting with African and African Caribbean experiences. In partnership with Hackney Learning Trust.
Talk: From Warhol to Wick
Thursday 27 July, 6.30pm
Join British Museum curator Jenny Ramkalawon to explore the progress of American printmaking from the 1960s to the present, reflecting on issues of gender, power and race through movements such as pop art, minimalism and photorealism.
This event supports Hackney Museum's Warhol to Walker: American prints from pop art to today special exhibition.
Music with Maddy
Fridays, 10am-11pm
Singing, dancing, instruments, puppets and creative fun for babies and children under 5 and their parents, guardians or carers. £5 per child/£2 for siblings.
Email Maddy to book your place.
Page updated: 19/06/2017 09:56:59


text:
Spain on Thursday enjoyed negative interest rates on its medium-term debt for the first time since a crippling economic crisis, the central bank said, a key sign of recovery just three years after it came close to a bailout.
The Treasury sold 885 million euros ($1.0 billion) in five-year bonds at an average rate of return of minus 0.286 percent. That indicated investors were so confident in Spain's financial strength that they were willing effectively to pay to hold the bonds.
GMT 17:42 2017 Wednesday ,26 JulyUS slaps sanctions on 13 current, former top Venezuela officials
GMT 17:36 2017 Wednesday ,26 JulyTwo crew members aboard UN helicopter that crashed in Mali
GMT 17:32 2017 Wednesday ,26 JulyUN helicopter crashes in Mali accident
GMT 17:27 2017 Wednesday ,26 JulyTrump says transgender people barred from US military
GMT 17:23 2017 Wednesday ,26 JulyKremlin says still evaluating US House sanctions bill
GMT 17:18 2017 Wednesday ,26 JulyPoland slams EU 'blackmail' over court reforms
GMT 03:46 2017 Wednesday ,26 JulySenate Republican plan to repeal, replace Obamacare fails to get enough votes
GMT 03:05 2017 Wednesday ,26 JulyCardinal Pell denies abuse charges in Australian court