How could this happen? What possible incentive could a UN agency have to exaggerate the scope of the problem it is charged to study?
:rolleyes:
And it’s led by a scientist to boot. What’s the world coming to?
So, obviously, global warming is a fraud…
Ok, maybe not. But it is an interesting conundrum for the UN supporters.
The same incentive any government agency has to solve the problem it was established to solve. None. If I want to hang on to my big fat salary in my big fat office with my big fat staff and our big fat perks, then if some knuckle-headed underling does solve the problem, I’d better create another one to take its place.
Well, we can all learn a lesson from this: Never, ever heed warnings. Just think of all the wasted aid sent to Africa. :rolleyes:
Now now, nothing was wasted. Sudanese generals have eaten very well.
So what new disease do you think the UN will create now?
You must have posted in the wrong thread. In THIS thread, the OP is suggesting that the UN made up exaggerated numbers, not that it made up a disease.
Well, I agree. Clearly, scientists are all liars and cannot be trusted in any way. Except, of course, those who support the conclusions I already want to believe.
:rolleyes:
Of course. But if you read what YOU have written in this thread, YOU suggested that government agencies cause problems, not solve them.
So I ask you again: what disease will the UN create now? Do you think they will use the same strategies of disease creation as the March of Dimes did to save their big fat jobs when that knuckle-headed underling Salk actually cured polio?
I tell you, it takes some sort of dickhead to hear that millions fewer people are dying of a horrible illness than previously thought, and have his first thought be, “hey! This is brilliant news! I can bash the UN with this!”
One wonders what brazil84 actually believes the scientific process to be, if not a refinement of models based on the best available data. Perhaps he believes that something is only science if the precise answer is hit upon first time, with no revisions accepted or necessary. One also wonders why he thinks he can convincingly scream “gotcha!” at a body which has published its own correction, and which has itself indicated that a drop in its funding is in order.
Then one remembers that brazil84 is an idiot.
Having discovered this fact for myself, I am eagerly looking forward to the day that the Large Hadron Collider comes online, and the earth is devoured by mini-black holes.
With illusions destroyed, life is no longer worth living. 
So when the WHO claims to have virtually eradicated smallpox from nature more than 35 years ago, you’d chalk that up to what? Bureaucratic incompetence?
UN Scientist: “Wow, I really look forward to living high on the hog with all those grants I’m getting to eradicate smallpox. Little does anyone know that I’m not really working hard on this project… Heh-heh-heh.”
UN Flunkie: “Uh, sir, I think we’ve pretty much cured it.”
UN Scientist: “Fuck.”
I don’t need illlusions, I’ve got drugs.
You’ve got drugs, some people have right-wing philosophies in which communal action is never actually effective…it all comes out the same, I guess.
This stupid fucking OP is only relevant to…well, anything, if the UN people knew that AIDS wasn’t so bad for the last decade, and sat on that fact. Since that doesn’t seem to be the case (from my perusing the link, anyway), I say “Fuck Off, you (possibly unpaid) Oil Company Shill!”
Right, because the only two options are uncritical acceptance and uncritical rejection.
:rolleyes:
Look, when you post this as your final statement:
. . . you’re clearly implying that scientists are capable of being corrupted by money and/or power, which is the horse you constantly seem to ride around here. The problem is, no one asserts that scientists are above human temptation and biases; that’s a straw-man you hold up as some sort of “proof” or “reasonable doubt” that scientists who you personally disagree with are wrong or have sinister motives.
The information in the article you cite boils down to the following:
The UN used certain models to calculate rates of HIV/AIDS infection.
They have been shown to be wrong, and the UN is adjusting their predictions accordingly.
A number of people have (rightly) questioned the previous HIV/AIDS tallying done by the UN.
So, who exactly are you pitting, and why?
(PS, off to eat turkey for a few hours)
Yeah…because everyone knows that AIDS was created by the U.S.
In any case, it seems to me that the UN didn’t do anything intentionally dishonest here, but I don’t think it’s out of the realm of possiblity to assume that they didn’t vigorously check their work or question things when they got the results they kinda-sorta wanted to see.
(which, as an aside, extremely tu qoquish, and as an observation only, when Certain Elements of a Certain Government do, it’s called “lying to the American people” by some members of this board).
So of course, it is never correct to hold the UN to account for its dodgy accounting, no matter how egregious. After all, to do so would make one a “dickhead”.
Dodgy accounting or honest mistake in their estimate? Why immediately give it the worst possible spin? Other than having a pre-existing bias against the UN, that is.