OT: Election/Politics thread, Part 6

bdoughty · Post by **bdoughty** » Wed Jan 07, 2009 3:42 pm

Feanor wrote:I would guess that there have been slightly more bad Republicans just because there have been more Republicans than Democrats in Congress over the past 8 years. Is that close enough to say we've reached consensus on how bad Congress has been?

Between the two of us, yes.

matthewk · Post by **matthewk** » Wed Jan 07, 2009 3:51 pm

Haven't read this all in detail yet, but there's some good info here on the all holy IPCC:

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/other ... eipcc.html

"From its inception, is has almost exclusively focused on the AGW hypothesis, while systematically ignoring alternative hypotheses."

"AGW proponents often claim that there is a consensus among scientists about man-made global warming. However, this is contradicted by the facts. A recent opinion poll among 133 German climatologists, by Hans Kepplinger und Senja Post, revealed that 37% of climate researchers adhere tot the AGW hypothesis, whereas 36% remain sceptical. The rest occupies an intermediate position. It is likely that in other countries the outcome would not have been substantially different. By no stretch of imagination this can be construed as a pro AGW con¬sensus."

"Over the years, many prominent scientists have distanced themselves from the IPCC, because of the selective and biased way in which this body practices science. ‘Manipulation’ and ‘politicization’ are the qualifications which invariably pop up in the interviews which they have given."

Feanor · Post by **Feanor** » Wed Jan 07, 2009 3:59 pm

Funny that you find have time to locate and read most of that, but can't take 10 minutes to read the seven pages of the IPCC Synthesis report where they discuss what they believe to be the causes of climate change.

The Science and Public Policy Institute (SPPI) is a United States based organization that is skeptical of human induced climate change. It was formerly known as the Center for Science and Public Policy for the Frontiers of Freedom, a conservative think tank founded by former Republican senator Malcolm Wallop. The New York Times reported that in 2002 Frontiers of Freedom received $230,000 in funding from Exxon. The institute received $90,000 in funding from ExxonMobil in 2006.

matthewk wrote:"AGW proponents often claim that there is a consensus among scientists about man-made global warming. However, this is contradicted by the facts. A recent opinion poll among 133 German climatologists, by Hans Kepplinger und Senja Post, revealed that 37% of climate researchers adhere tot the AGW hypothesis, whereas 36% remain sceptical.

Not these facts:

In 2007 Harris Interactive surveyed 489 randomly selected members of either the American Meteorological Society or the American Geophysical Union for the Statistical Assessment Service (STATS) at George Mason University. The survey found 97% agreed that global temperatures have increased during the past 100 years while 74% agreed that "currently available scientific evidence substantiates the occurrence of human-induced greenhouse warming."

http://www.usnews.com/articles/news/nat ... ncern.html

Rather than clutter up the thread again just when people had moved on to other topics, I'll leave the GW discussion for now with this link.

http://scienceblogs.com/illconsidered/2 ... ceptic.php

Unlike the poster below, when I say I'm done, I'm not lying.

matthewk · Post by **matthewk** » Wed Jan 07, 2009 4:25 pm

Feanor wrote:The Science and Public Policy Institute (SPPI) is a United States based organization that is skeptical of human induced climate change. It was formerly known as the Center for Science and Public Policy for the Frontiers of Freedom, a conservative think tank founded by former Republican senator Malcolm Wallop. The New York Times reported that in 2002 Frontiers of Freedom received $230,000 in funding from Exxon. The institute received $90,000 in funding from ExxonMobil in 2006.

Gee, I didn't see that coming. Imagine you finding a way to try and discredit the source of anything that does not agree with your opinion. And yet you never even acknowledge the issues with the IPCC.

As for their affliations, this is from their About US page:
"The Science and Public Policy Institute (SPPI) is a nonprofit institute of research and education dedicated to sound public policy based on sound science. Free from affiliation to any corporation or political party, we support the advancement of sensible public policies for energy and the environment rooted in rational science and economics."

bdoughty · Post by **bdoughty** » Wed Jan 07, 2009 5:03 pm

Feanor wrote: I'll leave the GW discussion for now with this link.

http://scienceblogs.com/illconsidered/2 ... ceptic.php

http://wmbriggs.com/blog/2008/02/20/an- ... hought-of/

I could post a few hundred links to retort much of what Coby Beck says but since you are done with this, it is not worth the time. You should read some of Becks previous blogs.

http://what-wall.blogspot.com/

Why can't all the world be as ignorant and gullible as the US public?

P.S. He is not a scientist, he is a software AI engineer and an angry Canadian with too much free time on his hands, with an obvious hatred for his brothers down south.

bdoughty · Post by **bdoughty** » Wed Jan 07, 2009 5:16 pm

Okay, now I am done with all this global warming/climate change nonsense. Back to important issues with actual relevance.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/20 ... l-bailout/

Another major American industry is asking for assistance as the global financial crisis continues: Hustler publisher Larry Flynt and Girls Gone Wild CEO Joe Francis said Wednesday they will request that Congress allocate $5 billion for a bailout of the adult entertainment industry.

“The take here is that everyone and their mother want to be bailed out from the banks to the big three,” said Owen Moogan, spokesman for Larry Flynt. “The porn industry has been hurt by the downturn like everyone else and they are going to ask for the $5 billion. Is it the most serious thing in the world? Is it going to make the lives of Americans better if it happens? It is not for them to determine.”

Francis said in a statement that “the US government should actively support the adult industry's survival and growth, just as it feels the need to support any other industry cherished by the American people."

“We should be delivering [the request] by the end of today to our congressmen and [Secretary of the Treasury Henry] Paulson asking for this $5 billion dollar bailout,” he told CNN Wednesday.

Flynt and Francis concede the industry itself is in no financial danger — DVD sales have slipped over the past year, but Web traffic has continued to grow.

But the industry leaders said the issue is a nation in need. "People are too depressed to be sexually active," Flynt said in the statement. "This is very unhealthy as a nation. Americans can do without cars and such but they cannot do without sex."

"With all this economic misery and people losing all that money, sex is the farthest thing from their mind. It's time for congress to rejuvenate the sexual appetite of America. The only way they can do this is by supporting the adult industry and doing it quickly."

So far, there has been no congressional reaction to the request.

Feanor · Post by **Feanor** » Wed Jan 07, 2009 5:22 pm

Sounds more like a story from The Onion.

GameSeven · Post by **GameSeven** » Wed Jan 07, 2009 5:25 pm

bdoughty wrote:Flynt and Francis concede the industry itself is in no financial danger — DVD sales have slipped over the past year, but Web traffic has continued to grow.

But the industry leaders said the issue is a nation in need.

GameSeven · Post by **GameSeven** » Wed Jan 07, 2009 5:28 pm

Feanor wrote:http://scienceblogs.com/illconsidered/2 ... ceptic.php

So you guys have a handbook... neat!

Feanor wrote:Unlike the poster below, when I say I'm done, I'm not lying.

Another ad hominen shot?

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Wed Jan 07, 2009 5:34 pm

Flynt RULES.

It says a lot about America when it takes The Crown Prince of Porn Peddling to point out the lunacy of the emerging United Welfare State of America.

Take care,
PK

Post by **Jared** » Wed Jan 07, 2009 5:44 pm

bdoughty wrote:Why do you always feel the need to give special little insults/digs to other peoples opinions? Attack the message, not the messenger. I think that is Jared mantra here? You constantly berate the intelligence of people who disagree with you and why Jared continues to allow you to do so baffles me.

I've been on vacation all week, and the internet has been down most of the time where I've been (wifi is now finally back up). Only internet access has been via IPhone, and I'd much rather be enjoying family and Florida than trying to type moderation messages on the phone.

Anyways, BD is right: please, attack the message not the messenger. I don't care if poster A thinks poster B is the most stupid/brainwashed/biased person they've ever encountered; posts don't need to include those opinions.

Feanor · Post by **Feanor** » Wed Jan 07, 2009 5:49 pm

bdoughty wrote:To be fair, I had you mixed up with macsomjrr's post history. Sometimes I get my DSP environmentalists crossed. He was the one who really went out of his way to attack those with different views. For that I apologize.

I only hope macsomjrr is listening.

I hear you, though, Jared.

bdoughty · Post by **bdoughty** » Wed Jan 07, 2009 6:00 pm

Jared wrote: I've been on vacation all week, and the internet has been down most of the time where I've been (wifi is now finally back up). Only internet access has been via IPhone, and I'd much rather be enjoying family and Florida than trying to type moderation messages on the phone.

Anyways, BD is right: please, attack the message not the messenger. I don't care if poster A thinks poster B is the most stupid/brainwashed/biased person they've ever encountered; posts don't need to include those opinions.

Heh, sorry about that. I was thinking of the wrong person. Back to enjoying the family.

P.S. I apologize in advance for tomorrow night, there is always next year.

Feanor · Post by **Feanor** » Wed Jan 07, 2009 6:05 pm

I feel kinda bad about how I worded that post though, bdoughty, because the main point I was trying to get across is that even arch-liberal Paul Krugman doesn't think our current economic conditions are all Bush's fault. Far from it, really.

http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/07/0 ... sh-s-maki/

Which is pretty interesting given how partisan the economic blame game can be, especially when things get this bad.

matthewk · Post by **matthewk** » Wed Jan 07, 2009 8:56 pm

GameSeven wrote:
Feanor wrote:http://scienceblogs.com/illconsidered/2 ... ceptic.php
So you guys have a handbook... neat!

Feanor wrote:Unlike the poster below, when I say I'm done, I'm not lying.
Another ad hominen shot?

Don't worry, he's taken his attacks directly to me in PMs now, complete with weak namecalling and links.

Feanor · Post by **Feanor** » Wed Jan 07, 2009 9:33 pm

Don't dish out PMs that use swear words to make personal attacks, like the one you sent me on Election Day 2008, if you can't handle getting one back without resorting to crying about in the thread.

That was the first PM we ever exchanged, and you didn't see me complaining to everyone in this thread about your personal attack and weak namecalling.

The whole forum really doesn't need to hear your hypocritical whining.

matthewk · Post by **matthewk** » Wed Jan 07, 2009 10:19 pm

How many times are you going to change your post? I've read at least 5 versions now.

For the record, this was the PM:
"I'm not falling for the bait. Nice try though. You've proven to me that you're not interested in addressing the facts, but rather trying to start a feud.

You really think the "wah wah crying to Jared" s*** was going to work on me?"

This was sent after a number of shots like the ones you've taken here. Instead of "whining about it" in the thread, I sent you a PM. It wasn't a personal attack, but a PM in response to your attempts to bait me into getting banned. The same type of thing you're doing now.

Meanwhile, you call me a lazy chicken s**t and a slow-witted right winger and try and pass it off as equal to my PM.

Sorry to everyone else for messing up this thread, but I'm not going to let Feanor try and paint a picture that isn't there.

Edit: 6 versions now.

Feanor · Post by **Feanor** » Wed Jan 07, 2009 10:26 pm

I can edit my post as many times as I f***in like.

You are a complete hypocrite for sending me a PM titled "Nice try b*tch" just two months ago (which I responded to via PM like you're supposed to and never mentioned in the thread), and then complaining here about receiving a PM from me that contained "weak namecalling".

For Christs sake finally grow a pair and stop ruining this general political discussion thread with your bullsh*t. As Jared will likely say when he sees this, take it to PMs.

bdoughty · Post by **bdoughty** » Wed Jan 07, 2009 10:29 pm

Feanor, Feanor, Feanor

I thought that I was the only one you PM'ed after the fact, trying to egg me into further discussion. Now you do the same to Matt? I feel sullied by this whole experience, I thought I was special, someone hold me.

Post by **Jared** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 1:39 am

First, people are allowed to edit their posts. If, for some reason, someone posts something really bad and you have a problem with it, get a screen shot and PM me.

As for the current flame war, I don't care if you guys re-enact the Lincoln/Douglas debates in PM, who sent who what PM first, etc. PMs are private messages, which means that no one on the forums cares about them. If someone does something really bad (i.e. personal threats) in a PM, then PM me. Otherwise, I (and no one else) don't want to hear about it.

bdoughty · Post by **bdoughty** » Thu Jan 08, 2009 8:21 pm

Now to lighten things up a bit.

Obama prefers to send his money overseas. Sorry Mr. Gates, Obama gets his girls a Wii.

http://kotaku.com/5126435/barack-obama-backs-the-wii

What was that Mr President?

http://kotaku.com/386128/obama--name-ch ... r-children

http://kotaku.com/358584/obama-sees-gam ... rachievers

Ahh...

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Sun Jan 11, 2009 5:26 pm

Looks like Google will be a future target on the greenies' radar:

http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol ... 489134.ece

Take care,
PK

Teal · Post by **Teal** » Sun Jan 11, 2009 6:16 pm

pk500 wrote:Looks like Google will be a future target on the greenies' radar:

http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol ... 489134.ece

Take care,
PK

Yep, I read that-ranks as one of the dumbest, most hilarious reaches in their lunatic history...

wco81 · Post by **wco81** » Sun Jan 11, 2009 6:27 pm

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/10/18/ ... spot18.php

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Sun Jan 11, 2009 8:08 pm

wco81 wrote:http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/10/18/ ... spot18.php

Ah, so Google is financing many green initiatives as a shield against its high energy usage. Sounds a lot like alcohol companies promoting responsible drinking.

In other words, good PR. And I mean that as a compliment.

But Google's empire only is going to grow since it's a company that runs on entrepreneurial ingenuity. So even if it does develop more efficient ways to use energy, it's overall energy footprint will continue to grow.

Google's ambition of remote storage-based, collaborative computing will require tons of servers, and those servers inhale energy.

Take care,
PK