"Beach Runner" > wrote in message
...
> to clarify, i will not respond to usual suspects, he ruins this
> group
================
Translation, I can't despute the truth told by U.S, so I'll slink
away and pretend that it doesn't exist.

btw, where's your water usage calculations?





>
> Beach Runner wrote:
>
>> It sounds like e have some Vegans. Are you interested in vegan
>> discussion? That would be interesting.
>>
>> The soy research interests me. The rat studies more than got
>> my curiosity, but no dangers have been shown in human
>> populations,
>> primate populations, or cultures that eat soy their entire
>> lives.
>> Never the less, the research is compelling.
>>
>> What are some vegan sources of B12. I've had mine regularly
>> monitored
>> (as all vegans do). My blood has great chemistry. When I
>> was a fat vegan, I had high lipid and bad profiles. Exercise
>> must be part of the equation. I can only wonder how much
>> worse it would have been if I ate artery clogging meat.
>>
>>
>> I will respond to anyone with reasonable, non mean spirited
>> arguments.
>>
>> As far as environmental issues. there is no question that Bush
>> has done all he can to let coal produce dirty air, rollback
>> improved mpg regulations, and build is he worst environmental
>> president in American history.
>>
>> He also is a failure as a war leader. Where is Bin Laden?
>> After 250 people died in Iraq he said we won. Over a thousand
>> American's have died since. We are deeply in debt, (from a
>> president that took over a surplus).
>>
>> I'm against the terrorists as much as anyone, but Bush has
>> been totally ineffective.
>>
>> He let the navy use sonar that hurts and beaches whales and
>> marine mammals He is building roads into pristine forests.
>>
>> They spent more investigating Monica Lewisnksy than Enron Lay
>> and the
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Challenger put together.
>>
>> We need change.
>>
>> and we have two calamities facing the world, global warming
>> and anti-biotic resistant bacteria. Our president ignores
>> these critical issues.
>>
>> Did Bush win the election?
>> UIC Prof's Statistical Analysis Casts Doubt on '04 Election
>> Result
>>
>> Chicago, IL 60607 July 4, 2005
>>
>> By Gigi Wasz
>> Gazette news magazine, Chicago
>>
>> A University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC) professor recently
>> issued a report calling into question the results of the 2004
>> presidential election.
>>
>> In the 30-plus page report, Ron Baiman, PhD, of UIC's
>> Institute
>> of Government and Public Affairs, along with eleven other
>> colleagues from other prestigious universities, applied
>> quantitative data to explain the discrepancy between exit poll
>> projections and votes actually recorded in the November
>> election and to understand the analysis given by Edison Media
>> Research & Mitofsky International (E/M), the pollster of
>> record
>> for the national election.
>>
>> E/M's poll projections predicted a win for Democrat John Kerry
>> by 3%, however, when votes were tallied, Republican President
>> George W. Bush was given the win by 2.5%-the largest
>> discrepancy in the poll's history. In its post-election
>> analysis and report, E/M discredited its own poll projections,
>> claiming the official vote was not corrupted and that "Kerry
>> voters were more amenable to completing the poll questionnaire
>> than Bush voters."
>>
>> "Using their (E/M's) data tables, we demonstrated that their
>> hypothesis of outspoken Kerry supporters is implausible,"
>> explained Baiman. "If the polls were faulty because Bush
>> voters
>> were shy in the presence of Kerry voters and less likely to
>> cooperate with pollsters, the polls should be the most
>> accurate
>> in the precincts where Bush voters were in the overwhelming
>> majority and where exit poll participation was also at its
>> maximum. What we find is just the opposite. In fact, the mean
>> exit poll discrepancy was dramatically higher in Bush
>> strongholds than in Kerry strongholds."
>>
>> Baiman and his research team then set out to explain the
>> discrepancy between the national exit poll and the official
>> vote. They initially targeted random chance or exit poll
>> errors. Said Baiman, "There have been several methods to
>> estimate the probability that the national exit polls would be
>> as different as they were from the national popular vote by
>> random chance. These estimates range from one in 1,240 to one
>> in 16.5 million. No matter how one calculates it, the
>> discrepancy cannot be attributed to chance."
>>
>> National research shows "exit polling is a well developed
>> science, informed by half a century of experience and
>> continually improving methodology," Baiman explained. For
>> example, E/M samples voters not only for the nationwide exit
>> poll but for each state's exit poll. Furthermore, the research
>> team found that the same exit polls accurately projected U.S.
>> Senate races; both the Presidential and Senate poll results
>> are
>> derived from the exact same responders.
>>
>> "If Bush supporters were refusing to fill out the survey as
>> hypothesized, the accuracy of the exit polls should have been
>> just as poor in the Senate races as it was in the Presidential
>> race," the research team charged in its report. According to
>> Baiman, by ruling out random chance and exit poll errors, the
>> only other logical explanation would be that the official vote
>> was corrupted. In its executive summary, the group's report
>> states, "the many anecdotal reports of voting irregularities
>> create a context in which the possibility that the overall
>> vote
>> count was substantially corrupted must be taken seriously."
>> The
>> report concludes by calling for a thorough investigation and a
>> "careful, exhaustive recount in key states."
>>
>> "Our goal is to raise awareness of the exit poll problems and
>> to highlight the need for broad election reform," commented
>> Baiman. "The fact that Edison/Mitofsky has not released its
>> raw
>> data, which would facilitate independent corroboration of its
>> analysis, is problematic. The biggest problem is not what
>> Edison/Mitofsky has concluded, but the fact that it is sitting
>> on its substantive analysis and data and not allowing any
>> other
>> independent party to look at it. That this is allowed to
>> continue is a national and media disgrace."
>>
>> According to a website dedicated to investigating the 2004
>> Presidential election, www.bushoccupation.com, "To believe
>> that
>> Bush won the election, you must also believe: that the exit
>> polls were wrong; that Zogby's [a traditionally accurate
>> pollster] 5 p.m. election day calls for Kerry winning Ohio and
>> Florida were wrong...; that incumbent rule #1-undecideds break
>> for the challenger-was wrong; that the 50% rule-an incumbent
>> doesn't do better than his final polling-was wrong; that the
>> approval rating rule-an incumbent with less than 50% approval
>> will most likely lose the election-was wrong; that it was just
>> a coincidence that the exit polls were correct where there was
>> a paper trail and incorrect (+5% for Bush) where there was no
>> paper trail; that the surge in new young voters had no
>> positive
>> effect for Kerry; that Kerry did worse than (Al) Gore against
>> an opponent who lost the support of scores of Republican
>> newspapers who were for Bush in 2000...."
>>
>> To learn more about the election analysis by Baiman and his
>> team of professionals, contact Baiman at .
>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> rick wrote:
>>>
>>>> > wrote in message
>>>> ups.com...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> nemo wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> <dh@.> wrote in message
>>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 10:35:40 GMT, Beach Runner
>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Usual suspects has done nothing but be nasty.
>>>>>>> He has accused a member of my family of being a
>>>>>>> homosexual.
>>>>>>> He is CLEARLY not interested in VEGAN lifestyle or
>>>>>>> beliefs.
>>>>>>> He has
>>>>>>> stated he doesn't care about the suffering of animals.
>>>>>>> He calls Osteopaths quacks that teach at major
>>>>>>> universities.
>>>>>>> His constant insults accomplish nothing but make this a
>>>>>>> useless news
>>>>>>> group. It has a purpose, promoting and discussion of a
>>>>>>> vegan life, but
>>>>>>> his agenda is sick.
>>>>>>> He complains about removing unnecessary text, then when I
>>>>>>> post
>>>>>>> Dr. Greger's newsletter complains about the length.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> He is clearly a very sick, mean person and is now
>>>>>>> killfiled.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I welcome discussions on vegan subjects.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> · Vegans contribute to the deaths of animals by their use
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> wood and paper products, electricity, roads and all types
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> buildings, their own diet, etc... just as everyone else
>>>>>> does.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> What part of "To a much lesser extent" don't you
>>>>> understand?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> What they try to avoid are products which provide life
>>>>>> (and death) for farm animals, but even then they would
>>>>>> have
>>>>>> to avoid the following in order to be successful:
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Same old tosh!
>>>>>
>>>>> In other words you're saying if you can't stop contributing
>>>>> to
>>>>> the death of
>>>>> animals 100%, you shouldn't try for, say, 50%, 80% or
>>>>> whatever
>>>>> by not eating
>>>>> the poor buggers. This is illogical, it's rubbisha dn it's
>>>>> just
>>>>> a wind-up.
>>>>>
>>>>> So their's gelatin in paper, white sugar is refined using
>>>>> bone
>>>>> charcoal, and
>>>>> by law just about everything has to be tested using the
>>>>> infamous and largely
>>>>> ineffective LD50 test, the end is listless.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's not us Vegan's fault. We do our best and rubbish like
>>>>> yours isn't going
>>>>> to deflect us from this and iota.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> exactly!!
>>>>
>>>> Useless and etter can go to hell.
>>>> ===============
>>>> Ahhh, feel the typical vegan compassion. You guys crack me
>>>> up!!!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> All right then, go to heaven but just shut yer piehole if you
>>> have
>>> nothing positive to say.....and the same goes for your
>>> girlfriend
>>> ~jonnie~.
>>>