Consumer spending up, but recession still a threat

getalife

August 29th, 2011
11:11 am

Lets focus on recovering the 15 million jobs w lost before any cuts.

/Back to lurking .

carlosgvv

August 29th, 2011
11:15 am

“A double-dip recession is still a real danger”

Jay, the real danger is all our politicians and you telling us the recession ended some time ago. This is disingenuous, to say the least, since the truth is that while the recession may be over for Wall street, it is far from over for Main street. As long as unemployment stays at 9% the recession, as far as the people are concerned, is far from over.

Good little liberal

August 29th, 2011
11:18 am

Keep Up

Oh what a wicked web we weave, when we practice to deceive:

Keep Up the Good Fight!
August 23rd, 2011
8:51 pm

Now, now josef…we know that 100% of govt scientists don’t agree so obviously there is nothing to be concerned about.

Ironically, back in March following the devastating earthquake in Japan, Rep. Cantor stood by the Republican budget, which would cut funding from disaster warning systems like the U.S. Geological Service (USGS). According to the AP, Republican budget number crunchers had toyed with cutting the USGS altogether, but settled for $27 million in cuts this year as part of the draconian Ryan budget.

Seems Mother Earth is telling Republicans something…. after Jindal the Page spoke agains monitoring volcanoes.. volcano erupted in Alaska.

Good little liberal

August 29th, 2011
11:18 am

Keep Up

Again: Seems Mother Earth is telling Republicans something…. after Jindal the Page spoke agains monitoring volcanoes.. volcano erupted in Alaska.

And again: Seems Mother Earth is telling Republicans something…. after Jindal the Page spoke agains monitoring volcanoes.. volcano erupted in Alaska.

getalife

August 29th, 2011
11:19 am

Looks like lil lib needs to get a life.

Good little liberal

August 29th, 2011
11:21 am

Adam

From downstairs:

Well as long as your life is better than it was four years ago. To hell with the rest of the country.

Good little liberal

August 29th, 2011
11:21 am

getalife

How’s that Dog?

Good little liberal

August 29th, 2011
11:24 am

Jay

Do you think it would be OK if the republicans use the phrase “It’s The Economy, Stupid?”

That worked so well in putting Clinton into office. Bush, the elder was President when all the laws were being made by Democrats, but that phrase sure did turn it toward Bush. Think it would work on Obama?

Keep Up the Good Fight!

August 29th, 2011
11:30 am

Ohh goody….I get to claim that the quote was taken out of context (notice the intentional lack of a link – ). So my sarcasm is now a basis to claim that I was the “wise person who blaimed the earth quake on the Republican’s attempt at cutting funding for the USGS” and then wants to attack my ability to think. Someone needs to work on their poutrate and reasoning. As I pointed out, the logic of GLL’s posts seems to be off as usual and very deceptive as usual. Thanks for proving your false claim and deception GLL!

But glad to know GLL follows me so very closely….. despite his protests otherwise. I

stands for decibels

August 29th, 2011
11:31 am

while corporate profits and corporate cash holdings remain at record highs, that’s dead money taken out of circulation.

why, Jay. How shrill.

Bruno

August 29th, 2011
11:32 am

The recent brinksmanship in Washington has raised doubts both here and abroad about the sophistication and sense of responsibility among much of our elected leadership.

Jay–I’ll give you the “lack of sophistication” charge as applied to the Republicans for threatening to not raise the debt limit, if you will own up to the “lack of responsibility” charge as applied to the Democrats for (1) not considering spending cuts and (2) not coming up with a budget of their own in more than 2 years.

Good little liberal

August 29th, 2011
11:32 am

Adam

Who else for president? I haven’t liked anyone since the Nixon administration. But Obama is a disaster. Perry would be great for the ratings on Letterman and Comedy Central. I have no problem with Bachman and religion, but she is just so much fodder for the networks that I think they would launch an attack like we have never seen. Same for Palin.

Personally, I think Trump is about to give Obama four more years. He will wait until the last minute, re-enter and drain off just enough votes.

ByteMe

August 29th, 2011
11:35 am

And while corporate profits and corporate cash holdings remain at record highs, that’s dead money taken out of circulation

Those same JPM charts (you can see many of them at ritholz.com) show that some of those record corporate profits are going toward capital expenditures, which is a good thing. But corporations are still sitting on a hoard of cash. Which is possibly what’s keeping Treasury yields so low… lots of corporate cash buying them up. Just a theory, but $1T of corporate cash isn’t just sitting in bank accounts earning nothing and they aren’t being invested in anything that’s not a “cash equivalent”.

Paulo977

August 29th, 2011
11:35 am

So Cogress keeps on cutting …Interesting info…

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/28/noaa-weather-satellites-budget-cuts-hurricane-irene_n_939729.htm

Good little liberal

August 29th, 2011
11:36 am

Keep Up

Lack of a link? I posted the date. What do you want? That brain might be giant, but maybe its just swollen from Mo slapping you on the noggin.

carlosgvv

August 29th, 2011
11:39 am

Jay – 11:30

I know your explanation is technically correct. However I would not recommend you go up to a large crowd at any job fair and say “we’re not in a recession now”, I’m pretty sure that would not go over too well!!

stands for decibels

August 29th, 2011
11:40 am

Interesting linked article, Jay, although it focuses more on worldwide efforts pretty much beyond even the imagined sphere of influence of your readership.

However, as to this paragraph…

In the U.S., President Barack Obama is promising another set of initiatives aimed at creating jobs, reducing unemployment (last reported at 9.1%) and targeting particularly the 4.4 million Americans who have been looking for work without success for a year or more. Congressional Republicans, however, are somewhere between unalterably opposed or skeptical about the sort of action that some economists—including several of Mr. Obama’s former advisers—are urging.

Here’s what our President can, and should, do now, to help right our economy.

http://www.tnr.com/article/economy/94112/bernstein-obama-stimulus-congress

read the whole thing, please. but if you can’t, at least retain this take-away…

“But … but … Congress will block him,” you say. On most of these ideas, probably so, though I’d put the renewal of the payroll tax cut at above 50 percent, and the unemployment insurance extension only slightly below half.

And, as for the rest of his plan, if Obama gets fired up around an agenda anything like the one I’ve outlined, and if he’s very clear about who, precisely, is standing between America and that jobs agenda, I think he’ll not only regain his footing and provide a stark contrast between himself and his opponents, but his fierce advocacy will give the country something to feel good about. And man, we really need that.

Paul

August 29th, 2011
11:40 am

As I’ve said, there are a few classic models and schools of thought on how to deal with the economy. The crisis hit, Reps and Dems supported the actions. Recession hit, Dems supported stimulus, Reps didn’t. Now Dems are left pondering ‘what will work?” while Reps repudiate their bailout votes, rail against the stim, but…. do NOT offer any hindsight assessment of what they would have done (other than ‘nothing’) nor do they have any concrete proposals on what will work.

And their constituents aren’t sharp enough to call them on it.

Heard a terrible interview on Fox while at the gym. Rep Eric Cantor was on, said House had sent a bill for $1 billion in disaster relief to the Senate. Was done with offsets.

Interviewer never asked him “what did you cut? Who will be affected by those cuts?”

I’d love to hear.

But the interviewer got real specific about Cantor’s list of Obama Regulations That Destroy American Business. First one read was the NLRB/Boeing decision.

That’s a decision, not a regulation. And the interviewer let it slide. As I said, a terrible interview.

Gator Joe

August 29th, 2011
11:41 am

Jay,
The Republicans in Congress, their candidates for the Presidency, and the corporate benefactors of both, would be happy to see the result of their efforts and actions, another recession, in the hopes the electorate will award them the White House, and the Congress, and by extension even more power for Big Business. One would have to be ignorant, mindless, brainwashed, or all three to not see this. The most laughable pawns in all this are the bigots who will be voting against their own self interest when they vote Republican, simply because there is a man of color in the White House.

Bruno

August 29th, 2011
11:42 am

From below:

But you are right about one thing: if government didn’t artifically raise the price of labor you and others could grow your businesses and hire more people.

If you think about it, it isn’t just businesses who hire in at minimum wage who are impacted when the minimum is raised. For businesses like mine, the “above minimum wage” pay scale is also shifted upward, so that future raises are hard to give. Especially in an economy in which increased revenues is very difficult to achieve. Hiring on additional workers is a huge consideration for small businesses, and now more than ever.

Bill Orvis White

August 29th, 2011
11:43 am

Washington needs to stop the $pending so that WE THE PEOPLE may have our money back so that we can choose what to do with our dollar$. You see, the key word here is giving every legal U.S. citizen choices such as where I can shop; what type of styrofoam cups I may purchase; where I can or will not send my kids to school (screwels); what road I choose to drive down; what doctor I can or will not see! If you want the gov’t to make those decisions for you, Liberal Jay and his friends, then look into packing up your 1980 Corollas and boarding it on a ship to your buddies’ countries like Cuba or Venezuela. It’s funny how you Communist liberals scream and shout for pregnant 10-year-olds to make a choice to end a life, but you won’t give basic choices to people when it comes to schools, attending churches or buying things.
Amen,
Bill

mike "hussein" smith

August 29th, 2011
11:45 am

I hope Bachmann doesn’t win because half the people in America are too stupid to spell her last name correctly.

@@

August 29th, 2011
11:46 am

The Commerce Department said on Monday consumer spending increased 0.8 percent on strong demand for motor vehicles, after slipping 0.1 percent in June.

So people financed new cars? No doubt, monthly payments will put a damper on other spending. I hope they don’t lose their jobs.

Good little liberal

August 29th, 2011
11:47 am

stands for decibels

Really interesting article. LOL!!

So here we are, the car is speeding toward the cliff, GIVE IT MORE GAS!!!!!!!!

The Titanic is already wounded, but not sinking yet. Damn those icebergs. FULL SPEED AHEAD!!!!

Seriously? Do what we have been doing to destroy the economy except do it bigger?

I ned to go to lunch while I still have an appetite.

Adam

August 29th, 2011
11:49 am

GLL: Well as long as your life is better than it was four years ago. To hell with the rest of the country.

Now what in my post made you think that I think THAT?

stands for decibels

August 29th, 2011
11:50 am

GLL @ 11.47 your childish, fact-free assertions, complete with multiple exclamation points aside–you don’t seem to understand that government spending is not evil. It is especially not-evil when we still have an intolerable percentage of Americans who are unemployed.

When you grow up a little bit and come to recognize this fact, maybe we can have the discussion you so crave (it’s obvious that few if any people deign to speak to you in real life). Until then, bon appetit.

Keep Up the Good Fight!

August 29th, 2011
11:53 am

Adam, GLL is doing his WOW this morning. If you can’t attack posts on the reality of posts then distort them to something he can try to attack. Its not what he thinks you think or even what you stated, the attack is to intentionally distort what you said.

Tommy Maddox

August 29th, 2011
11:54 am

Consumer spending up?

Government spending way way up.

Not good…

Adam

August 29th, 2011
11:54 am

GLL: I haven’t liked anyone since the Nixon administration. But Obama is a disaster

You guys really are hilarious. “I don’t know who to run, even in my own party, will you please find someone for me?”

Bruno

August 29th, 2011
11:54 am

read the whole thing, please. but if you can’t, at least retain this take-away…

I read the article looking for something substantial, stands, but found no specifics. Same old, same old government stimulus rhetoric. Since it didn’t work the first time, what makes you think it will work the second, third, fourth or fifth?? Maybe you should heed the words of the American people after the New Deal failed to curb persistent unempolyment:

“When the Gallup poll in 1939 asked, ‘Do you think the attitude of the Roosevelt administration toward business is delaying business recovery?’ the American people responded ‘yes’ by a margin of more than two-to-one. The business community felt even more strongly so.”[65] Treasury Secretary Henry Morgenthau, angry at the Keynesian spenders, confided to his diary May 1939: “We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. And I have just one interest, and now if I am wrong somebody else can have my job. I want to see this country prosper. I want to see people get a job. I want to see people get enough to eat. We have never made good on our promises. I say after eight years of this administration, we have just as much unemployment as when we started.[66] And enormous debt to boot.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Deal

Fred

August 29th, 2011
11:56 am

Bruno: “Jay–I’ll give you the “lack of sophistication” charge as applied to the Republicans for threatening to not raise the debt limit, if you will own up to the “lack of responsibility” charge as applied to the Democrats for (1) not considering spending cuts and (2) not coming up with a budget of their own in more than 2 years.”

That’s a little disingenuous Bruno. ANything the Dems proposed was shot down. The president proposed a bill that included even MORE cuts than that crappy one they finally passed. Political posturing at it’s “finest.”

While not a fan of the Democratic Party, i have become even more disgusted with the party of no. The republican aim is to drive the Country to ruin as a strategy for “grabbing back power.” Why is so hard to understand that they in fact played a leading role in getting us to this point? Jusrt because the leftists keep screaming, “Two unfunded wars” as a mantra does not lessen the truth in the message. Things are so bad that the leftists don’t even have to lie as has been their wont, nor use scare tactics, another favorite tactic. And for ONCE they are sticking pretty much to the truth, while the right is using the tactics of distortion and misrepresentation of truth. It would be almost funny this reversal of roles except for the sad state of our Country.

Bruno

August 29th, 2011
11:59 am

From the same article, FDR’s attitude toward businessmen:

“Roosevelt rejected the advice of Morgenthau to cut spending and decided big business were trying to ruin the New Deal by causing another depression that voters would react against by voting Republican.[61] It was a “capital strike” said Roosevelt, and he ordered the Federal Bureau of Investigation to look for a criminal conspiracy (they found none).[61] Roosevelt moved left and unleashed a rhetorical campaign against monopoly power, which was cast as the cause of the new crisis.[61] Ickes attacked automaker Henry Ford, steelmaker Tom Girdler, and the superrich “Sixty Families” who supposedly comprised “the living center of the modern industrial oligarchy which dominates the United States”.[61] Left unchecked, Ickes warned, they would create “big-business Fascist America—an enslaved America”. The President appointed Robert Jackson as the aggressive new director of the antitrust division of the Justice Department, but this effort lost its effectiveness once World War II began and big business was urgently needed to produce war supplies.”

Everything old is new again……

Kamchak

August 29th, 2011
12:01 pm

Since it didn’t work the first time…

I think it worked as in it staved off a world wide melt-down.

But to think it was a panacea for all the economic woes, was a fool’s dream.

stands for decibels

August 29th, 2011
12:03 pm

I read the article looking for something substantial, stands, but found no specifics

There was a very specific reference to a school construction/rebuilding effort, actually. Here’s where that link actually winds up.

http://jaredbernsteinblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Fix-Americas-Schools-Today-FAST.pdf

Same old, same old government stimulus rhetoric.

what can I say? as far as I can tell, stimulus works. Stimulus keeps people out of the unemployment line. Without those Recovery Act dollars, I am certain our unemployment rate would be much worse than it is. That said, we needed more stimulus than we got in 2009.

Massive tax cuts, on the other hand, just put us in a hole. Continuing to extend these tax cuts to people who can easily afford to pay higher taxes is wrong, but I recognize that it will take a changeover in the House to reverse this mistake.

Kamchak

August 29th, 2011
12:04 pm

You guys really are hilarious. “I don’t know who to run, even in my own party, will you please find someone for me?”

Elmer Fudd seems to be the “it boy”, go-to-guy, by at least one individual here.

md

August 29th, 2011
12:04 pm

“But the interviewer got real specific about Cantor’s list of Obama Regulations That Destroy American Business. First one read was the NLRB/Boeing decision.

That’s a decision, not a regulation. And the interviewer let it slide. As I said, a terrible interview.”

And I disagree………With Obama’s appointments to the NLRB, decisions and regulations are being made…………….much like changing the way voting is calculated………..and businesses can see this too……

Adam

August 29th, 2011
12:05 pm

I’m with stands on this one: When you grow up a little bit and come to recognize this fact (government spending not evil) , maybe we can have the discussion you so crave

stands for decibels

August 29th, 2011
12:06 pm

much like changing the way voting is calculated…

and by that you mean “actually counting the votes that are cast, as opposed to imagining what they might have been if they were actually cast”?

stands for decibels

August 29th, 2011
12:07 pm

maybe we can have the discussion you so crave

emphasis on the “maybe.”

I’m not sure I really want to try to have an adult conversation with someone who posts under a troll-handle, any more than a serious believer in limited government would want to converse with someone calling himself “Compliant Penile-Challenged Conservative”.

1811/0311

August 29th, 2011
12:08 pm

Plutocrat (from below):

Thanks for your response. A couple of points.

1) Penetta was pretty upset that Biden handed up the Seals. Just sayin’.

2) You may not be aware of this but Ozwald got his job at the Texas Book Depository weeks before the President’s staff even announced that he was coming to Dallas. Then when the parade route was announced (against the wishes of the Secret Service) it became a crime of opportunity.

3) May I recommend “A Simple Act of Murder” by Mark Fuhrman

http://www.amazon.com/Simple-Act-Murder-November-1963/dp/0060721545

md

August 29th, 2011
12:08 pm

“you don’t seem to understand that government spending is not evil.”

Depends……….the private sector must generate the funds to support the public sector……if the balance is not appropriate, the private sector spins it’s wheels just trying to meet the demands of the bills it already owes (gov’t spending).

Joe the Plutocrat

August 29th, 2011
12:08 pm

JB, pay not attention to the economists behind the curtain. sure, a “recession” is defined as any period of negative economic growth, but let’s be honest; if unemployment is up, and wages are flat or sinking, AND any measureable “growth” in the GDP can be linked to government stimulous; including 2.5 wars, which are funded by debt; does a term like “repression” really matter? it’s like the comedy bit about the punk who gets rousted by the cops for being a gang member; “…it’s not a gang, it’s club…” as I have ranted in the past; recessions and the occassional depression are mainfestations of the central bank philosophy and the natural order of free market (unregulated) capitalism.

1811/0311

August 29th, 2011
12:10 pm

Jay:

The great, great bulk of American business people will hold back spending, hiring or expanding until Obama is gone. They just don’t trust him.

If you want the economy to improve ………… help us vote him out of office.

md

August 29th, 2011
12:11 pm

“and by that you mean “actually counting the votes that are cast, as opposed to imagining what they might have been if they were actually cast”?”

If folks want a union, don’t you think they would take the time to vote for it??

Otherwise, not changing the status quo shouldn’t require a vote to leave it alone………….

Adam

August 29th, 2011
12:12 pm

Scout: I recommend American Grace by Robert D Putnam.

http://americangrace.org/
New version coming out in Feb that includes new data on the Tea Party:
http://www.amazon.com/American-Grace-Religion-Divides-Unites/dp/1416566732/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1314634313&sr=1-1

Bruno

August 29th, 2011
12:13 pm

That’s a little disingenuous Bruno. ANything the Dems proposed was shot down. The president proposed a bill that included even MORE cuts than that crappy one they finally passed. Political posturing at it’s “finest.”

Not disingenuous at all, Fred. In case you forgot, Obama’s only specific, written budget plan was defeated 97-0 in the Senate. He made references to another plan which cut spending, but nothing specific was submitted to anyone. You can make excuses all day as to why he submitted no actual plans, but the fact remains, he submitted no actual plans.

The republican aim is to drive the Country to ruin as a strategy for “grabbing back power.”

See my 11:59, Fred.

Why is so hard to understand that they in fact played a leading role in getting us to this point? Jusrt because the leftists keep screaming, “Two unfunded wars” as a mantra does not lessen the truth in the message.

In case you forgot, Fred, Bush left office with extremely low approval rates from both sides of the political aisle. Bush, along with the Democratically controlled Congress from 2007-2008 were both responsible for not acting more quickly when it was obvious that our economic fundamentals were out of whack. That is a well-established fact which no one denies. However, all the fault-finding in the world doesn’t solve the problems. And this is where Obama’s responsibility begins. So far, from my viewpoint, he has been less than effective in creating an environment in which business can flourish again.

1811/0311

August 29th, 2011
12:13 pm

Jay:

This would have been a better thread:

Headline: “GALLUP: OBAMA DISAPPROVE HITS ALL-TIME HIGH…”

http://www.gallup.com/poll/113980/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Job-Approval.aspx

Keep Up the Good Fight!

August 29th, 2011
12:13 pm

The great, great bulk of American business people will hold back spending, hiring or expanding until Obama is gone.

And prior to the 2010 elections, it was that “business people will hold back spending, hiring or expanding until” the Congress is back in Republican hands and then when they got the House and the economy was still rising, it was “see, we told you so”.

This argument holds about as much “fact” as Bachmann’s claim that God sent the earthquake and hurricane to send a message….

Zap Rowsdower

August 29th, 2011
12:13 pm

Bye Bye, Obama.

Butch Cassidy

August 29th, 2011
12:14 pm

1811/0311 – “The great, great bulk of American business people will hold back spending, hiring or expanding until Obama is gone. They just don’t trust him.”

Great, but what happens if they don’t trust the guy after that? Do we just stay in a terminal holding pattern until everyone can agree on a guy that they “trust”?

Thulsa Doom

August 29th, 2011
12:14 pm

what can I say? as far as I can tell, stimulus works- stands for decibels

Soooo 2 years after the stimulus, with the economy on the brink of double dip recession, you have people saying that stimulus works. Unfreakingbelievable. Tell ya what. If stimulus works lets just spend a gazillion dollars and see how things turn out.I won’t bore you guys with the various economical reasons as to why that is such pure folly.

Massive tax cuts, on the other hand, just put us in a hole.- stands for decibels.

Ok. Lemme see if I understand this correctly. Massive tax cuts put us in a hole but running up massive govt debt via deficit stimulus spending doesn’t?

You can’t make this stuff up. These people actually believe their own nonsense. And the shocking thing is that they believe, despite all the empirical evidence in the world, that a dollar spent by the govt via stimulus is more efficiently spent in the economy than a dollar spent via the private economy in the form of tax cuts. If that were true then North Korea and the former Soviet Union would have been rousing successes while the most laissez faire economies in the world such as Singapore and Hong Kong wouldn’t have been the economic engines that they are. Such is the bizzarro economics world of the far left.

Fred

August 29th, 2011
12:15 pm

Scout:

“Jay:

The great, great bulk of American business people will hold back spending, hiring or expanding until Obama is gone. They just don’t trust him.”

And you say this from your long history of being a business owner and hiring people?

Adam

August 29th, 2011
12:15 pm

Bruno: The “Where’s your plan, on paper?” thing again? That’s as stupid as saying “Perry didn’t say he supports creationism, he just said that both are taught in school because a kid is smart enough to know which is true”

poison pen

August 29th, 2011
12:15 pm

Bruno

” Jay–I’ll give you the “lack of sophistication” charge as applied to the Republicans for threatening to not raise the debt limit, if you will own up to the “lack of responsibility” charge as applied to the Democrats for (1) not considering spending cuts and (2) not coming up with a budget of their own in more than 2 years.”

Bruno, Don’t hold your breath…

Doggone/GA

August 29th, 2011
12:15 pm

“If folks want a union, don’t you think they would take the time to vote for it??”

and just like the rules that say not voting is a “No” vote – you are guessing what someone who doesn’t vote wants. Count the votes cast. Anyone who didn’t vote, and who doesn’t agree with the outcome…well, they should have voted, shouldn’t they?

Joe the Plutocrat

August 29th, 2011
12:16 pm

Scout, and let me guess how you (personally) know “Panetta was upset”? because you read it in the media, right? and FYI, as director of the CIA, Panetta does not have any ‘authority’ over the SEALs or any other DoD special ops assets; unless; of course, they are TDY’d to this agency or that; in which case they were “operating” as CIA contractors or assets; and not SEAL team Six, which would support my argument that the “story” as presented in CNN, Fox News or MSNBC is very likely just that; a story. I am not saying people in power do not sometimes reveal clasified information (accidentally or on purpose), but there is great tactical value in letting our enemies think the info they are hearing is “classified”. re: Oswald and Dallas ‘63; as I said, we may never know who shot JFK, but as it turns out, the Warren Commission didn’t either, but it sure assumed the; “…that’s my story and I am sticking with it…” approach.

poison pen

August 29th, 2011
12:17 pm

Adam

” Bruno: The “Where’s your plan, on paper?” thing again? That’s as stupid as saying “Perry didn’t say he supports creationism, he just said that both are taught in school because a kid is smart enough to know which is true”

Adam, Then where is the plan, any plan?

Kamchak

August 29th, 2011
12:17 pm

The business community is so bothered by “uncertainty” that the S & P(yeah, the ones that should FOAD!) 500 is up 2.06% right now.

poison pen

August 29th, 2011
12:19 pm

Joe, It was the grassy knoll.

md

August 29th, 2011
12:19 pm

“what can I say? as far as I can tell, stimulus works- stands for decibels”

“Massive tax cuts, on the other hand, just put us in a hole.- stands for decibels.”

Have to agree with TD…….what’s the difference other than one has a middle man and one doesn’t?

Adam

August 29th, 2011
12:19 pm

Bruno: I’ll give you the “lack of sophistication” charge as applied to the Republicans for threatening to not raise the debt limit

what exactly is “lack of sophistication” about that?

1811/0311

August 29th, 2011
12:20 pm

Adam:

Very good. The Bible itself predicts such a falling away by the last generation.

Thanks much !!

2 Timothy 3:1-4

“1This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. 2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, 3without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good. 4Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God.”

Kamchak

August 29th, 2011
12:20 pm

Anyone who didn’t vote, and who doesn’t agree with the outcome…well, they should have voted, shouldn’t they?

Ooooh, one of those “choice” thingies.

Adam

August 29th, 2011
12:20 pm

poison pen: If you weren’t aware of plans being made during the debt ceiling debate BY OBAMA, then you weren’t paying attention.

Now, you may think his plan sucked, but you cannot say he didn’t have a plan. All you can say is he didn’t write it down. Which is, as I said, a stupid argument.

TM

August 29th, 2011
12:21 pm

any body think that consumers spending rose because the costs of food and gas kept going up during that month?

Adam

August 29th, 2011
12:21 pm

Scout: The Bible says a lot of things. And just like you I pick and choose which parts I like and which I don’t.

Doggone/GA

August 29th, 2011
12:21 pm

“Which is, as I said, a stupid argument.”

Give ‘em a break, when stupid is all you have, stupid is what you run with.

poison pen

August 29th, 2011
12:22 pm

Butch Cassidy

1811/0311 – “The great, great bulk of American business people will hold back spending, hiring or expanding until Obama is gone. They just don’t trust him.”

” Great, but what happens if they don’t trust the guy after that? Do we just stay in a terminal holding pattern until everyone can agree on a guy that they “trust”?”

Butch, Yep, that’s about it, they have not been spending for many years.

Peadawg

August 29th, 2011
12:23 pm

“backing views the economy was not falling back into recession”

LOL falling back into? I missed where the recession ended.

Adam

August 29th, 2011
12:23 pm

Doggone: I am just waiting for the resounding silence when he DOES have a paper plan.

md

August 29th, 2011
12:23 pm

“and just like the rules that say not voting is a “No” vote – you are guessing what someone who doesn’t vote wants. Count the votes cast. Anyone who didn’t vote, and who doesn’t agree with the outcome…well, they should have voted, shouldn’t they?

No………it is currently understood that the status quo remains unchanged unless a union is voted IN…..so why vote to NOT change the stautus quo?

A bit like a bunch of Baptists going into a Catholic church and demanding a vote to change it to Baptist…………so if not enough catholics show up, the baptists win………..

Joe Mama

August 29th, 2011
12:23 pm

Mr. White — “but you won’t give basic choices to people when it comes to schools, attending churches or buying things.”

How, exactly, do you not have choices in those things?

You can’t send your kid to a different school? You can’t attend the church you want? You’re not allowed to buy the products you want to buy? I don’t understand — could you elaborate, please?

Adam

August 29th, 2011
12:24 pm

Peadawg: I missed where the recession ended.

Apparently you did.

Bruno

August 29th, 2011
12:24 pm

what can I say? as far as I can tell, stimulus works. Stimulus keeps people out of the unemployment line. Without those Recovery Act dollars, I am certain our unemployment rate would be much worse than it is. That said, we needed more stimulus than we got in 2009.

The only problem with trying to “scientifically” measure the effect of stimulus spending is that you don’t have a “control group” by which to compare results. So in the end, we can only form an opinion as to its efficacy based on what we think the outcome would have been without government intervention. However, by applying “inductive reasoning”, we can look at previous attempts to spend our way out of a recession/depression to judge its effectiveness, specifically FDR’s New Deal. From my viewpoint, shared by 2/3 of Americans at the time, the New Deal unnecessarily extended the Depression. Three years into Obama’s administration, I don’t see any turnarounds in sight, only a huge pile of new debt.

Massive tax cuts, on the other hand, just put us in a hole. Continuing to extend these tax cuts to people who can easily afford to pay higher taxes is wrong, but I recognize that it will take a changeover in the House to reverse this mistake.

1811/0311

August 29th, 2011
12:25 pm

Plutocrat:

Everyone is entitled to their opinions (as opposed to evidence) but you still didn’t address my main point.

Were you aware that Oswald got the job at the Texas School Book Depository weeks before it was announced the President was coming to Dallas?

I’ll add a second question:

Or was he clairvoyant?

stands for decibels

August 29th, 2011
12:25 pm

More useful advice for our CEO.

If I were the one in charge of this pop stand, I’d direct my economics team to come up with the “If I were a prime minister instead of a president, this is what we would do” plan. And if all they came up with was minor tax breaks for hiring, “patent reform,” and “trade deals,” I’d, you know, fire them.

Doggone/GA

August 29th, 2011
12:25 pm

“No………it is currently understood that the status quo remains unchanged unless a union is voted IN…..so why vote to NOT change the stautus quo”

You’re still guessing. A unionization vote is an up OR down vote. Anyone who doesn’t vote is NOT voting either way. As I said, if they have a problem with the results, they should have voted.

“A bit like a bunch of Baptists going into a Catholic church and demanding a vote to change it to Baptist…………so if not enough catholics show up, the baptists win………..”

that’s right. If not enough Catholics show up and vote to keep their church Catholic, well…too bad, so sad, they should have voted.

Joe the Plutocrat

August 29th, 2011
12:27 pm

poison pen, and if you read either Jim Garrison’s On the Trail of the Assassins (plural, by the way) or Jim Maars’ Crossfire: The Plot that Killed Kennedy; or some of the old jailhouse interviews with Woody Harrelson’s (yep, that Woody Harrelson) late father Wayne; who spent the last 25 years or so of his life serving in federal prison for killing a federal judge (he was a contract killer), you might consider the role of the “grassy knoll”. but again, armchair cops and conspiracy nuts can opine about the actual shooter(s), but what is not subject to debate is the fact that the Warren Commission told one story; and 8 or 10 years later, the Senate Committe on Assassinations amended the “story”. what people (like Scout) fail to accept is; everyone here on this blog at one time or another likes to embrace the “they’re all liars” or “your guy lied” mantra; and then, all of a sudden, when a highly classified “op” is executed (or fails, for that matter), they afford the very same politicians some medal of honesty and candor.

1811/0311

August 29th, 2011
12:27 pm

Adam:

…………… and picking what we may or may not like doesn’t change the truth.

stands for decibels

August 29th, 2011
12:28 pm

Ok. Lemme see if I understand this correctly.

there’s a first time for everything.

with the economy on the brink of double dip recession, you have people saying that stimulus works.

Correlation is not equal to causation.

Kamchak

August 29th, 2011
12:28 pm

The Bible itself predicts such a falling away by the last generation.

Reminds me of a very old comic I cut out of the paper some 40 years ago.

A very old guy with a long white beard was walking around with a sign that said, “The End is Near“, when another much younger fellow asks him, “How does one get into a job like this?”

The old guy replies, “My great-great-great grandfather founded the business.”

1811/0311

August 29th, 2011
12:28 pm

Joe:

You really should read “A Simple Act of Murder”. You owen it to yourself.

1811/0311

August 29th, 2011
12:29 pm

Kammie:

Just don’t whine.

Doggone/GA

August 29th, 2011
12:29 pm

“Correlation is not equal to causation”

Actually, it’s more accurate to say “correlation is not always equal to causation” because sometimes it IS.

Brosephus

August 29th, 2011
12:29 pm

Depends……….the private sector must generate the funds to support the public sector……

Doesn’t depend. Money that the public sector spends ends up being returned to the private sector and aids profits in the private sector. The reason government spending is more important right now is because the private sector is hoarding boatloads of money. Our economy is choked to death when money doesn’t circulate. If you think government spending is evil and want it cut, then all that has to be done is have more money circulating in the private sector. Sitting on profits doesn’t circulate money enough to aid consumption for a consumption based economy.

Butch Cassidy

August 29th, 2011
12:30 pm

Lets see, 2 World Wars, Korea, Vietnam, Kuwait, Afghanistan and Iraq. Not to mention 2 oil embargos and countless forays by the U.S. into other minor skirmishes over the past 100 years. And yet just in the last 3 years, businesses have become so “uncertain” that they can’t possibly hire anyone until their crystal ball has been located?

1811/0311

August 29th, 2011
12:31 pm

Mick

August 29th, 2011
12:09 pm

“1811″

“We are in agreement on that, I have been to the book depository 6th floor, it was a turkey shoot especially for an ex marine. A better book was Case Closed by gerald posner – he nails it…”

Thank you sir. At least someone on here has some common sense.

Joe the Plutocrat

August 29th, 2011
12:32 pm

Scout, to answer your question, no I was not aware; but to your point about “a crime of opportunity” where has it been proved that he acted alone, as determined by the “facts” presented by the Warren Commission, and later rescinded by the Senate Committee on Assassinations. I have no experience as a contract killer, or sniper; but it seems to me that any good ’shooter’ can adapt and adjust. once Oswald got the gig at the book warehouse; the “opporunity” to exectue the plan got the greenlight, no? and Hollywood aside; don’t most (military trained) snipers rely on spotters or teams?

1811/0311

August 29th, 2011
12:32 pm

Butch Cassidy:

No ………………… until Obama is gone.

Adam

August 29th, 2011
12:32 pm

Scout: and picking what we may or may not like doesn’t change the truth.

Correct. Much like the arguments about Climate Change and Evolution. Thank you for agreeing with me.

ragnar danneskjold

August 29th, 2011
12:33 pm

Good afternoon all. Given the quality of past efforts, I think I could not care less how historians might some day analyze this era (remember, historians say that the stock market crash had some direct causative effect on the Great Depression, a laughably deficient analysis.) I think most economists would agree that the current economy shows profitable companies – even with record profits in many cases – that are unwilling to expand their companies, due to anticipated higher government-imposed per-employee costs for the long-term future (ObamaCare, Medicare and social Security unfunded contingent liabilities) and the constant threat of higher energy costs, due to micromanagement by EPA and the leftist cap-and-tax dream. The current economy has been regulated to death, bu the Federal government. No additional regulations will cure that problem.

1811/0311

August 29th, 2011
12:33 pm

Adam:

Of course. On any issue there is falsehood and truth.

Whether it’s the economy or how to bake the best cherry pie.

The key is the wisdom to discern.

Keep Up the Good Fight!

August 29th, 2011
12:34 pm

Hmmmm….. so businesses are hoarding cash because of uncertainty…but if there were a temporary holiday that would allow corporations to repatriate offshore funds at a 0% ratte (as endorsed by Bachmann and Perrry), then suddenly a trillion dollars would be back in the US and jobs would be created.

One of these “absurdities” does not go well with the other.

Fred

August 29th, 2011
12:34 pm

Bruno: “So far, from my viewpoint, he has been less than effective in creating an environment in which business can flourish again”.

And from my viewpoint, he has been blocked at every turn. I don’t use the term “party of no” as a catch phrase. It’s really how I view them. You reference 2007-2008, what about the previous 6 years of unchecked ‘cut tax and spend” republican control largesse?

One thing that DOES get over looked though is the Democrats failure to pass a budget after they lost control of the House and Senate in the elections but BEFORE they left power. Now THAT would be a very easy example for you to use of a lack of responsibility shown by the leftists.

Yet I hear no mention of that simple fact. Nope, all I see is bumper talk speech and the spouting of failed policies from the past. Mindless drivel like Scout or Dusty spew.

THINKING people agree that massive cuts (including some corporate welfare) AND some tax hikes are needed. The party of no however is “firm” on the notion of no cuts to corporate welfare (medicare YES, Social Security YES, unemployment benefits YES, cuts to the folks who aren’t creating jobs in this Country, NO), and certainly NO tax increases no matter how small.

i have an idea. Instead of decrying the whole Obama care thing as garbage, how about using IT as a bargaining chip? Go through it carefully and tie some tax increases to cuts in THAT bloated piece of legislation? Oh no, can’t do THAT. We have to trash the whole thing because IT was proposed and passed by “democrats.” As such we have to demonized it or else “they” will get some “credit.”

You seem to be a very intelligent man Bruno, why do you tote the party line much in the same way as mindless automatons do? THAT I don’t get. I would think you would be an independent, not a neo con.

Oh, and have no fear, I NEVER forget that those two revolving idiots, Pelosi and Reed, are the “leaders” of the Democrats. That in and of itself is enough to keep me wary of THAT party. But as I’ve been saying for a couple of months now, when the Democrats seem more sane and resonable than the Republicans on almost every issue, it scares the HELL out of me. Never thought I =would ever use the words sane or reasonable in any paragraph that contained the names Pelosi and Reed………

Adam

August 29th, 2011
12:35 pm

ragnar: and the leftist cap-and-tax dream

And as we all know, a dream that never became law just scares the pants off businesses and makes them “uncertain.” No one will hire as long as leftists have dreams….

1811/0311

August 29th, 2011
12:35 pm

Hummmmm …………………..

Trouble in the ranks !

Headline: “Former Secretary of State Colin Powell, who famously crossed party lines to vote for President Obama in 2008, said today that he’s not necessarily supporting the president for reelection in 2012.”

stands for decibels

August 29th, 2011
12:35 pm

it’s more accurate to say “correlation is not always equal to causation” because sometimes it IS.

sometimes it coincides, sure. I don’t think that ever makes it “equal to,” though.

Adam

August 29th, 2011
12:35 pm

Scout: The key is the wisdom to discern.

I’m sorry you lost your key. It might be prudent to make a copy next time.

md

August 29th, 2011
12:36 pm

“Doesn’t depend. Money that the public sector spends ends up being returned to the private sector and aids profits in the private sector.”

Sure it does……….gov’t spending does not guarantee economic recovery……..but it does guarantee debt…………it becomes basic economics at that point……..income better be greater than expenses or we end up in default.

Yes, that spending MAY aid in jumpstarting the economy………and it MAY not. If it does not, the debt still remains…….and the private sector must generate the income to settle the debt.

Butch Cassidy

August 29th, 2011
12:37 pm

1811/0311 – “No ………………… until Obama is gone.”

But wait, what if the business owners that support Obama don’t “trust” the new guy? Do they then lay off all their people until a “trustworthy” candidate comes along to their liking? And if so, wouldn’t that pretty much just keep us where we are for another 4 – 8 years?

Fred

August 29th, 2011
12:37 pm

md: “Have to agree with TD…….what’s the difference other than one has a middle man and one doesn’t?”

The difference is that the “middleman” is the working class Americans.

Thulsa Doom

August 29th, 2011
12:37 pm

Butch Cassidy,

When Home Depot co-founder Bernie Marcus says that they couldn’t start Home Depot in today’s regulatory environment I tend to believe the man. And when billionaire businessman Steve Wynn- a former Obama supporter, and Donald Trump echo the same things and state that they have many CEO friends who believe the same thing but are too afraid to say it then I believe them. And I believe these men have just a tad bit more credibility on the subject of business and creating jobs then say….you.

Granny Godzilla

August 29th, 2011
12:39 pm

Thanks Jay for not making the consumer spending report look like it might be a flickering light of hope.

If you had done that the GOP would then be forced the legislate a way to snuff it out.

Bruno

August 29th, 2011
12:40 pm

That’s as stupid as saying “Perry didn’t say he supports creationism, he just said that both are taught in school because a kid is smart enough to know which is true

For the record, Adam, I definitely support presenting Intelligent Design alongside of (blind) Evolution in Biology class as a possible explanation of how this world became so incredibly organized. ID makes more sense to me than believing that an interminable number of random events led directly to the incredible layers of organization which make up our Universe. And just to remind you, ID /= to Creationism, because it doesn’t presuppose a Creator.

what exactly is “lack of sophistication” about that?

You’ll have to check with Jay about that, since that has been one of his constant drumbeats since the S & P downgraded our credit rating. And though he has written more than one article highlighting his interpretation of the S & P report in regards to Republican culpability, he has yet to address the main thrust of their opinion, that not enough spending was slashed. According to other articles Jay has written, our level of spending today is nothing to worry about.

Joe the Plutocrat

August 29th, 2011
12:40 pm

Scout, thanks for the referral, but again; my point was not whether or not Oswald shot JFK or acted alone, but simply that the Federal Government releases “cover” stories all the time. Ask gary Francis Powers about the “weather research” missions he was flying in his U-2. here’s another book for you; it’s called The Puzzle Palace (about the NSA, it referred Thulsa to it earlier). in the early days of the Cold War, the US (NSA) was trying to determine the radar capabilities of the USSR’s air defence system in Europe,; so American pilots were ordered to “probe” the system, which provided great insight as to the technologies being used by the Rooskies. well, sometimes these planes were shot down, and pilots were killed or captured; but the story told at home was “training accident” or even worse; “pilot error”. then, when the wall came down and certain Soviet and US files were declassified; new stories were proferred.

ragnar danneskjold

August 29th, 2011
12:40 pm

Dear Adam @ 12:35, we agree. Leftist dreams are always businessmen’s nightmares.

Kamchak

August 29th, 2011
12:41 pm

The rest of the story:

“I haven’t decided who I’m going to vote for,” Powell said on CBS’ “Face the Nation.” “Just as was the case in 2008, I am going to watch the campaign unfold. In the course of my life I have voted for Democrats, I have voted for Republicans, I have changed from one four-year cycle to another.

“I’ve always felt it my responsibility as a citizen to take a look at the issues, examine the candidates, and pick the person that I think is best qualified for the office of the president in that year. And not just solely on the basis of party affiliation,” he said.

Always best to look beyond the gooey Drudgey goodness.

md

August 29th, 2011
12:41 pm

“Money that the public sector spends ends up being returned to the private sector and aids profits in the private sector.””

And bear in mind, the public sector has no funds TO spend……they must first be generated by the private sector…………

Jefferson

August 29th, 2011
12:43 pm

Things are picking up.

stands for decibels

August 29th, 2011
12:43 pm

No one will hire as long as leftists have dreams….

Setting aside that the market-based, republican-advanced Cap and Trade ideas are a “leftist’s dream.”

The sky in Raggy’s world must be a lovely shade of magenta.

stands for decibels

August 29th, 2011
12:44 pm

Always best to look beyond the gooey Drudgey goodness.

but, enough about what’s under that smelly hat.

md

August 29th, 2011
12:44 pm

“so businesses are hoarding cash because of uncertainty…but if there were a temporary holiday that would allow corporations to repatriate offshore funds at a 0% ratte (as endorsed by Bachmann and Perrry), then suddenly a trillion dollars would be back in the US and jobs would be created.”

Common sense dictates that bringing it home and putting it in the bank @ .5-1% would be better than to leave it offshore to generate 0%………………..

Thulsa Doom

August 29th, 2011
12:44 pm

Fred,

No. Md is talking about the middleman being a whole governmental bureaucracy that takes money from the private sector, then disburses in the form of various bureaucracies, or which then is funneled back in the form of various governmental spending projects which by their very nature are slow moving, plodding efforts. If you don’t believe that then you should listen to Obama when he joked about those shovel ready jobs projects not being quite as shovel ready as they thought. If you want stimulus spending you are much better off just plain confiscating less of what the private sector generates- and not just wealth creators like entrepreneurs but also the middle class in the form of tax cuts. The only difference being that you cut out the middleman which of course means more efficiency which should be what we want- Everyone except that nanny state of course which hates to see its power and control over people diminished.

Jefferson

August 29th, 2011
12:45 pm

Close Robbins AFB and you will see what the public sector spending does…

Jack

August 29th, 2011
12:47 pm

We have a real economist among us: dead money he says is the cause for recession. Start or run a corporation, Bookman, then you can decide what’s best for the economy.

md

August 29th, 2011
12:47 pm

“The difference is that the “middleman” is the working class Americans.”

No Fred……..the gov’t is the middleman………why buy at retail when one can buy wholesale?

Keep Up the Good Fight!

August 29th, 2011
12:47 pm

When .. Bernie Marcus says that they couldn’t start Home Depot in today’s regulatory environment I tend to believe the man. And when … Steve Wynn…, and Donald Trump echo the same things …then I believe them. And I believe these men have just a tad bit more credibility on the subject of business and creating jobs then say… I chose not to believe Warran Buffet or other patriotic millionaires or many others who disagree with my beliefs and opinions. Of course, I beleive the opinions that match with my predetermined mindset

Thanks for playing!

Granny Godzilla

August 29th, 2011
12:48 pm

Steve Wynn this last July:

We had a great first quarter, the best in our history. And we went through it — we were just around $400 million in the first quarter. We are $447 million this time, and that quarter was about 59% better than a year ago. And in fact, for the 6 months, we’re 62% better than a year ago. We are all, in this organization, heartened by the results.

Joe Mama

August 29th, 2011
12:49 pm

Mr. Danneskold — “the constant threat of higher energy costs, due to micromanagement by EPA and the leftist cap-and-tax dream.”

Are you claiming that current high consumer energy prices are solely or primarily attributable to those two specific causes?

md

August 29th, 2011
12:57 pm

Adam……just an fyi…..but that hc bill has been a “dream” for a very long time………..and took precedence over jobs……………….even after Obama said it wouldn’t at his SOTU……

Adam

August 29th, 2011
12:59 pm

Bruno: And just to remind you, ID /= to Creationism, because it doesn’t presuppose a Creator.

Making MORE stupid arguments doesn’t help your original argument.

Intelligent Design isn’t science, and therefore does not belong in a science classroom. It is faith based, and does, in fact, pre-suppose a creator. And don’t give me any of that “science is faith too” bullsh*t. No it isn’t.

This is the exact same type of argument you are making with the where’s your plan thing.

Adam

August 29th, 2011
1:01 pm

md: Did I say anything about the hc bill? I’m talking about DREAMS md, DREAMS. You know, the kind that don’t get votes, but somehow scare the pants off the entire business community FORCING them, F O R C I N G THEM, to hold on to their massive cash reserves and not hire anyone. Because they are just so scared that ONE DAY, in the DISTANT FUTURE, there might be a law out there that does something that is surely evil.

md

August 29th, 2011
1:02 pm

“It is faith based, and does, in fact, pre-suppose a creator.”

And so does evolution……goes back to that concept of a starting point………

Adam

August 29th, 2011
1:03 pm

Scout: BTW, something else Colin Powell said

Thulsa Doom

August 29th, 2011
1:03 pm

keep up,

I’m always here to help you out. Warren Buffett? I believe Wingfield had a thing or 2 to say about Buffett a week or so ago.

At first glance, Buffett seems to have made the case for “millionaires and billionaires” not paying their “fair share.” But let’s look a bit further:
In 1992, using Buffett’s figures, the top 400 would have paid $4.9 billion in taxes. That’s a little less than half a percentage point of all federal revenues at the time (which includes more than just personal income taxes).
In 2008, the top 400 would have paid $19.5 billion in taxes. That’s about three-quarters of a percentage point of all federal revenues.
So, the top 400 in 2008 paid more in taxes than they earned in 1992. And their share of all tax revenues rose by one-half. But that’s not the way Buffett wants us to look at things. How much more would the “mega-rich” have paid on their 2008 earnings at 1992 effective rates?
Well, if the top 400 in 2008 had paid taxes at the same rate they did in 1992, 29.2 percent, the U.S. Treasury’s take would have increased by…
…drum roll, please…
…a whopping…
…staggering…
…soaring…
…$7 billion.
Which represents about four-tenths of a percentage point of this year’s $1.5 trillion deficit.
As I wrote once before: A tenth here, a tenth there — pretty soon, you’re talking about a whole percentage point! In fact, add it to President Obama’s hated tax break for corporate jet owners and you’re almost at 1 percent of the problem.
Now, Buffett also wrote that he supports creating two new tax brackets, at $1 million and $10 million. He didn’t suggest any rates for these brackets, so we can’t analyze what his proposal would mean in terms of revenue.
But we can apply the effective rates in 2000, the last full year of the Clinton-era rates, to the income reported in Buffett’s $1 million and $10 million brackets in 2009. There were 236,883 filers in those brackets that year, the top 1.7 percent of all filers.
Do that, and 2009 revenue would have increased by…
…wait for it…
…$14.4 billion.
That’s just under 1 percent of this year’s $1.5 trillion deficit.

out of the blue

August 29th, 2011
1:03 pm

Here is a republican congressman trying to explain Bush’s tax cuts!

He can’t!

Hilarious

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NN5cdoSEDkU&feature=player_embedded

Adam

August 29th, 2011
1:04 pm

md: No, Evolution does no such thing. In order to do that, evolution would have to attempt to explain more than just how species change into other species over time. It does not attempt to explain anything EXCEPT that.

Why is this so hard to understand?

md

August 29th, 2011
1:04 pm

“Did I say anything about the hc bill? I’m talking about DREAMS md, DREAMS.”

And what do you not understand about the hc bill also being a DREAM at a given point in time??

Some dreams do become reality………..and that is the point.

Paul

August 29th, 2011
1:04 pm

md

me regarding Rep Cantor’s list of regulations: “That’s a decision, not a regulation. And the interviewer let it slide. As I said, a terrible interview.”

you: “And I disagree’

Disagree all you will, it doesn’t change there is a difference between an agency regulation and an NLRB decision.

Adam

August 29th, 2011
1:05 pm

Thulsa Doom: $7 billion

Wow, what a piddly amount. You’d only have to cut 7000 NPRs to make that up!

Adam

August 29th, 2011
1:05 pm

md: Some dreams do become reality………..and that is the point.

Your point………………………………………………………… is moot

md

August 29th, 2011
1:06 pm

“It does not attempt to explain anything EXCEPT that.

Why is this so hard to understand?”

Because common sense dictates it has to have a starting point…………..so the science basically leads to a dead end……………

Bruno

August 29th, 2011
1:06 pm

And from my viewpoint, he has been blocked at every turn. I don’t use the term “party of no” as a catch phrase.

Fred–A lot of political hay has been made about the increased number of cloture votes the past few years, but I think it’s much ado about nothing. When a political party has no power, as the Repubs did the first two years of Obama’s reign, the threat of a filibuster is the only power they have to influence legislation. However, since there is a mechanism in place, the cloture vote, to end filibusters, then I see it as just one more yin-yang. Ultimately, legislation has to stand on its own merit, no political stunt by itself can stop it. And considering the number of sweeping reforms, including ObamaCare, that were passed the first two years, it’s hard to see how Republican “obstructionism” has had any real effect.

You seem to be a very intelligent man Bruno, why do you tote the party line much in the same way as mindless automatons do?

I choose my politics the same way everyone else does: by choosing what serves my interests bests. As an independent businessperson, I’m solidly in the “tax contributor” category of citizens, but rarely in the “tax beneficiary” column. As such, I generally go with the political party which advocates lower taxes and less spending. Pretty simple. Does that mean that I vote 100% Republican?? Heck no. And does that mean that I support every plank and policy of the Republicans?? Double heck no, especially when it comes to firm separation of religion and politics.

Doggone/GA

August 29th, 2011
1:07 pm

“Why is this so hard to understand?”

I’m still trying to figure out how the presence of an “intelligence” to do the “designing” does NOT presuppose a creator!

md

August 29th, 2011
1:08 pm

“Disagree all you will, it doesn’t change there is a difference between an agency regulation and an NLRB decision.”

Unless the decision actually leads to a regulation………………

Adam

August 29th, 2011
1:09 pm

md: A single scientific theory to explain everything that ever happened or will happen DOES NOT EXIST. Does that mean the theories are all dead ends? Maybe in your OPINION they do, but not in reality. If you want to go back to the dark ages, I am afraid science hasn’t found a way to time travel yet. Maybe you should just pray for it instead. Let me know how that works.

Paul

August 29th, 2011
1:09 pm

md

Did it?

Thulsa Doom

August 29th, 2011
1:09 pm

Adam,

I’m as cool with public dollars going to support a liberal show like NPR as you would be if public dollars funded Rush Limbaugh.

Next please….

md

August 29th, 2011
1:09 pm

I don’t like your point, so I relegate it to the moot pile………..

You are such a funny fellow Adam…………..

Adam

August 29th, 2011
1:10 pm

Doggone: I’m still trying to figure out how the presence of an “intelligence” to do the “designing” does NOT presuppose a creator!

I can help with that.

It DOES pre-suppose a creator.

stands for decibels

August 29th, 2011
1:11 pm

a liberal show like NPR

NPR is a “show?”

Adam

August 29th, 2011
1:11 pm

md: Any “What if” and “maybe in the future, someday” points are basically moot. If you’re a businessman so fickle as to be fearing such things, then you shouldn’t be in business to start with. Business is, to a large degree, about risk taking. If you can’t take the heat, get out of the fire.

Adam

August 29th, 2011
1:13 pm

Thulsa Doom: Right. We have to start somewhere. Why not cut NPR, it’s a whole MILLION dollars towards the treasury! But taxing the top 400, which would have gotten such a piddly $7 billion, we can’t do THAT…..

In other words, $1 million is greater than $7 billion in the Tea Party mindset.

Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)

August 29th, 2011
1:14 pm

Well, who cares about consumer spending? I checked at lunch and my beer stocks are thru the roof. I’m going to be a rich man one day and just pay a 15% tax rate. When the market goes down, people guzzle to drown their miseries. When it goes up, they guzzle to sellabrate. Either way I get rich. I feel real Republican today.

I see a new doublewide and a very big pickup truck in my future. And what the heck, might as well go for a new 52″ flat screen.

Have a good p.m. everybody.

md

August 29th, 2011
1:14 pm

Adam……..and what exactly is being taught with evolution?

Part of an equation??

What good is that?

Thulsa Doom

August 29th, 2011
1:15 pm

Granny Godzilla,

During a recession certain stocks tend to do well such as the sin stocks- specifically alcohol and I would guess gambling. Its well known that people drink more during hard economic times and I would assume they probably gamble more-hoping they can make back 10 times what they don’t have in order to pay the bills. No surprise there with the earnings report.

1811/0311

August 29th, 2011
1:15 pm

“American opinion of the federal government has sunk to an all-time low, with impressions of the public sector ranked dead last among 25 business and industry sectors for the first time, according to a new poll.”

Adam

August 29th, 2011
1:16 pm

md: Science. Science is being taught. If you can’t find the value in that, then you still don’t understand what science is.

md

August 29th, 2011
1:17 pm

“Any “What if” and “maybe in the future, someday” points are basically moot.”

I’m guessing you’ve never done any forecasting…………most all of it done on “what if’s” and “may be’s”…………

md

August 29th, 2011
1:19 pm

“Science. Science is being taught. If you can’t find the value in that, then you still don’t understand what science is.”

yes Adam……..incomplete science…….for it is what we think we know as of today………..

Doesn’t change the fact that it is only teaching part of the equation………with the other part unknown………..not subject to change anytime soon.

Joe Mama

August 29th, 2011
1:20 pm

md — “Because common sense dictates it has to have a starting point…………..so the science basically leads to a dead end……………”

Are you suggesting that evolution seeks to explain the origin of the universe? If so, you’re definitely off base.

The theory of evolution and modern cosmological thought are two completely different and disconnected animals.

Bruno

August 29th, 2011
1:22 pm

I’m still trying to figure out how the presence of an “intelligence” to do the “designing” does NOT presuppose a creator!

Doggone and Fred–In it’s purest form, ID does NOT postulate a Creator. From Wiki:

“Intelligent design arguments are formulated in secular terms and intentionally avoid identifying the intelligent agent (or agents) they posit. Although they do not state that God is the designer, the designer is often implicitly hypothesized to have intervened in a way that only a god could intervene. Dembski, in The Design Inference, speculates that an alien culture could fulfill these requirements. Of Pandas and People proposes that SETI illustrates an appeal to intelligent design in science. In 2000, philosopher of science Robert T. Pennock suggested the Raëlian UFO religion as a real-life example of an extraterrestrial intelligent designer view that “make[s] many of the same bad arguments against evolutionary theory as creationists”.[63] The authoritative description of intelligent design,[n 12] however, explicitly states that the Universe displays features of having been designed. Acknowledging the paradox, Dembski concludes that “no intelligent agent who is strictly physical could have presided over the origin of the universe or the origin of life”.[64] The leading proponents have made statements to their supporters that they believe the designer to be the Christian God, to the exclusion of all other religions.”

The bottom line is that many, maybe even most, proponents of ID like to extend the theory to include their own personal Gods, but it’s not part of the descriptive statement which constitutes ID. And ultimately, that’s all ID is, a qualitative, descriptive statement. However, until some inherent properties of matter are discovered which explain self-organization, that is what we are stuck with.

Doggone/GA

August 29th, 2011
1:22 pm

“NPR is a “show?””

Let’s see, if a program on TV is a show…does that mean a program on radio is a hear?

md

August 29th, 2011
1:22 pm

“Are you suggesting that evolution seeks to explain the origin of the universe? If so, you’re definitely off base.”

I’m suggesting we have no clue………………..

Granny Godzilla

August 29th, 2011
1:22 pm

Thulsa

I always enjoy it when you tell us what we already know.

That said it really is pretty cheesy of Mr. Wynn to complain about his gift horse ain’t it?

Thulsa Doom

August 29th, 2011
1:23 pm

Adam,

Tell ya what Adam. I’ll go along with what you guys want. Let’s do this. Lets take back the Bush tax cuts which according to the CBO cost the treasury 46 billion in FY 2011. Good. Now lets do as Buffet wants and lets tax those billionaires some more and raise that 14 billion. Now we’re up to 60 billion in revenue that we have raised by “taxing the rich”. Just like you guys want!

Considering that the FY2011 budget deficit was a projected 1.6 trillion we have now reduced the deficit all the way to 1.54 billion. We’ve taken back the Bush tax cuts and we just whacked Buffet and his friends and haven’t even made a serious dent in the deficit.

So tell me genius. Is the problem spending?? Or revenue-in other words the rich not paying their fair share???

Adam

August 29th, 2011
1:24 pm

md: The fact that science doesn’t already explain everything doesn’t mean squat. It’s still science, it’s still valid, it still produces facts and breakthroughs in practical terms. Regardless of how incomplete your OPINION of it is, the FACTS that science produces are not in dispute by rational, thinking human beings.

If you don’t like it, keep praying that you be transported back to the dark ages.

stands for decibels

August 29th, 2011
1:25 pm

Let’s see, if a program on TV is a show…does that mean a program on radio is a hear?

I swear, if we could harness the mighty power of ignorance on display regarding just NPR and Planned Parenthood alone, we’d probably have an energy source cheaper than Michelle Bachmann’s 2-buck-per-gallon gas.

Paul

August 29th, 2011
1:25 pm

Bruno

Also from Wiki:

“…leading to the 2005 Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District trial, where U.S. District Judge John E. Jones III ruled that intelligent design is not science, that it “cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents”, and that the school district’s promotion of it therefore violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.[18]
Contents”

Adam

August 29th, 2011
1:26 pm

Thulsa: I tell YOU what. When you come back with numbers that are accurate, then we’ll have a discussion about it.

Butch Cassidy

August 29th, 2011
1:27 pm

Thulsa Doom – “And I believe these men have just a tad bit more credibility on the subject of business and creating jobs then say….you.”

Really, and after all the background I have given you as to my experience, education, political beliefs and shoe size? Oh wait, I’ve told you nothing that could possibly lead you to such a broad generalization such as the above statement.

Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)

August 29th, 2011
1:28 pm

Well, I see the Rev. Warren Jeffs has been put in a hospitle from prison. When I saw the headline I thought maybe he found a 12 year old girl in his cell and hurt hisself with all the contortions but they say he wasn’t eating or drinking enough and had some other medical problems.

Anyway, just thought all you Mormons would like to know, since you won’t be getting any votes for your guy in GA and need something to read about. We don’t cotton much down here to politicans that ain’t Southren Baptist or Holiness.

Perry-Bachmann in 2012. They’ll pray your gay ass straight. You’ll be in divorce court with the rest of us pretty soon. And not because you’re gay married.

Thulsa Doom

August 29th, 2011
1:28 pm

Granny,

I also think that Wynn is raking in profits because his company is not doing any expansion- which costs enormous sums of money. And also because of the recession they are not investing in new hiring, training, etc. which only fattens the bottom line. But they are still making lots of cash on desperate folks- and there are plenty of them in the Obama economy.

Wynn’s point isn’t that he and his company aren’t making money. His point was that there are no plans to expand or invest in new gaming equipment, personnel, or new casinos due to the bleak economic picture and the regulatory environment under Obama. That is the point that completely seems to go over the head of the liberals on this blog.

Dusty

August 29th, 2011
1:29 pm

Well, a long discussion on what most of us already know.

There is a heavy pall over business and it is Obama. He has spent too much government money without results. He wants to spend more. Even the general public knows that does not work when you are broke.

Obama’s budget plans: Rejected first. Never on paper next. I’d love to pay bills with unwritten & unsent checks.

There is no confidence. “Obama” may become the root of a new verb. Everything that doesn’t work may be “obamarized”. The economy has been “obamrized”.

Joe Mama

August 29th, 2011
1:30 pm

md — “I’m suggesting we have no clue………………..”

Evolution doesn’t *attempt* to explain the origin of the universe at all. It’s simply not even in the same ballpark.

Evolution’s more concerned with the changes that living species experience over time, not the cosmological forces involved in the formation and aging of stars, planets, etc.

And not knowing the whole story doesn’t render our knowledge irrelevant. A kid can go to college, get a degree in electrical engineering and learn how to design all sorts of modern techno-wonderment. But he doesn’t need to learn how to *manufacture* semiconductors or any other component in order to do that.

1811/0311

August 29th, 2011
1:30 pm

“If you use tools on it, you have profaned it.” Ex. 20:25

“God’s altar was to be built of unhewn stones, that no trace of human skill or labor might be seen on it.”

“Human wisdom however, trims and arranges the doctrines of the cross into an artificial system that is more congenial to the depraved tastes of the fallen nature. But instead of improving the gospel, carnal wisdom contaminates it and invents another gospel that is not the truth of God. Any alteration or ammendment to the Lord’s own Word defiles it.”

“The proud heart is eager to have a part in the justification of its soul …………. humblings, and repentings are trusted, good works are celebrated, natural ability is flaunted, and by every means that heart attempts to place human tools on the divine altar.”

“Trembling sinner, put your tools away and fall on your knees in humble supplication. Accept the Lord Jesus alone to be the altar of your atonement.”

Charles Spurgeon

Thulsa Doom

August 29th, 2011
1:30 pm

Butch Cassidy,

I stand corrected. I had no idea that you were one of the movers and shakers in the world like Trump or Bernie Marcus, that you’ve made a billion dollars, or that you have given jobs to tens of thousands of people. My mistake.

1811/0311

August 29th, 2011
1:31 pm

Macro-evolution

Micro-evolution

Big difference

1811/0311

August 29th, 2011
1:32 pm

Job 26:7

” ……………. he hangs the earth upon nothing”.

Bruno

August 29th, 2011
1:32 pm

If you want to go back to the dark ages, I am afraid science hasn’t found a way to time travel yet. Maybe you should just pray for it instead.

Doesn’t change the fact that it is only teaching part of the equation………with the other part unknown………..not subject to change anytime soon.

Adam–I think you are wrongly characterizing md’s and my own views regarding Science. He and I are merely pointing out the limitations that are built-in to scientific inquiry, limitations so severe that we will likely never be able to answer some of the deepest questions that stir our souls with any certainty. You are wrongly equating this viewpoint with outright rejection of Science and full-on acceptance of Religion. I’m about as non-religious as they come, and md has squarely placed himself in the agnostic category in the past.

So, what is motivating your mis-characterization??

Joe Mama

August 29th, 2011
1:33 pm

1811 — “Macro-evolution

Micro-evolution

Big difference”

And yet they’re the same, in that neither one addresses cosmology in any way.

md

August 29th, 2011
1:33 pm

“Regardless of how incomplete your OPINION of it is, the FACTS that science produces are not in dispute by rational, thinking human beings.”

I think you are confusing the process with the origins of the process……………science can only explain what we currently know under the terms we currently understand………….

There is no opinion to it Adam…….we don’t have a clue about the ENTIRE process of evolution……..one can’t leave out the starting point and expect people to not have questions……….

A Face in the Crowd

August 29th, 2011
1:34 pm

ADAM

You are, I hope, aware that your didacticism and dogmatic approach to this question are as limited and as dangerous as any Medieval pope, are you not?

out of the blue

August 29th, 2011
1:35 pm

Dusty and Mr 1811……

Reach out and pray with congress woman Bachmann!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385×612708

Fantasia

August 29th, 2011
1:36 pm

“While that’s good news, a double-dip recession is still a very real danger.”

Wrong as usual Jay. A year ago – last summer – when everyone was predicting a double-dip recession it truly would have been a double-dip due to the elapsed time since the June 2009 official end of the “great” recession. Now it would be a whole new recession, not a continuation of the prior one, since we’ve had an intervening 2+ year recovery cycle. But, agreed, not good whatever you call it.

Fred

August 29th, 2011
1:36 pm

Bruno: “Doggone and Fred–In it’s purest form, ID does NOT postulate a Creator. “

Huh? How did I get dragged into this silly “argument?”

I haven’t typed a word about it. Other than stating i am firm in MY faith and dislike churches, the other day, I haven’t had more than three words to say on religion anywhere on this blog. Whether it’s the atheists and THEIR “holy crusade” to ridicule people of faith, or the “staunch Christians” with their holy crusade to beat people over the head with their bibles and force them to Jesus, or the “pseudo-Christians” with their weird hand picked version, I pretty much keep to myself my opinions and try to respect ALL for their particular brand of lunacy. As I would hope they would respect mine. I eams as Jesus himself once said, “Be excellent to each other.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7532GXPnO8

Granny Godzilla

August 29th, 2011
1:37 pm

Thulsa

You may be interpreting Mr. Wynn correctly.

So am I. Pretty cheesy.

Joe the Plutocrat

August 29th, 2011
1:38 pm

md, …well, there you go again. it’s the Treaury Department’s “money”. here’s how it works; the private sector has markets, and in these markets; good and services are exchanged for currency (money). through the rampant deregulation from 1981 – 2001; the stage was set for the major banks and investment houses to essentially “trade” debts (neither goods, nor services). this is how ‘asset bubbles’ are (purposely) created. the traders on Wall Street (via enabling from the Central Bank, which controls the “value” of the currency via interest rates and worthless IOUs) literally INFLATE the value of an asset (sometimes real estate, sometimes tech stocks, sometimes gold, sometimes securitized mortgages). then, these very same traders stop the music and whomever is left without a “chair” (usually the American taxpayer) pays the tab. right now; gold is the being inflated; and if you noticed last week, there was a toothless attempt to stop the speculation, as the SEC or some useless regulatory agency increased the amount of collateral one needs to borrow money to buy gold. perhaps investors have learned something from the past 30 years, but again, it all goes back to the “lending” (or debt fueled consumption, which is an economic time bomb) and debt fueled consumption is “fueled” by the Federal Reserve bank.

Thulsa Doom

August 29th, 2011
1:39 pm

Adam,

Numbers that are accurate? Really? The numbers I posted are from the CBO which stated 46 billion is what the Bush tax cuts cost us from last year. Are you saying the CBO is lying?

Lemme give you some other numbers Adam which you can look up yourself via the IRS website. If we tax the top 1% of the U.S. households, nearly a million households- 971,000 to be exact, at a 100% clip, taking everything they earned, we would reduce the deficit by raising 622 billion dollars. So once again if the projected 2011 deficit was 1 trillion and we raise 622 billion then we still have roughly nearly 1 trillion in annual deficits that we are still running. So once again I ask you Mr. genius is the problem spening or revenue??? And if you disagree with the CBO or the IRS then take it up with them. Its their numbers.

Dusty

August 29th, 2011
1:39 pm

Oh come on. Not another evolution discussion. I like science myself with God behind the science. If you don’t like that, fine. Go find your own “thing” to believe in. Might as well because there are no concrete answers, only faith, study and your own convictions.

Carry on. I’ve got to pick up my car at the dealership. Talk about “faith”. I hope they know what they are doing!

Butch Cassidy

August 29th, 2011
1:40 pm

Thulsa Doom – “I stand corrected. I had no idea that you were one of the movers and shakers in the world like Trump or Bernie Marcus, that you’ve made a billion dollars, or that you have given jobs to tens of thousands of people. My mistake.Z”

I haven’t given you enough information to draw any legitimate conclusions either way.

Bruno

August 29th, 2011
1:40 pm

Are you suggesting that evolution seeks to explain the origin of the universe? If so, you’re definitely off base.

Joe Mama–Perhaps it’s a bit of laziness to not be more explicit, but most critics of the Scientific explanations of cosmology and the origins of life like to roll Big Bang Theory in with Evolution Theory. Strictly speaking, Darwin’s original theory only dealt with changes which occur in established species, and didn’t address any origin of life questions. However, by accepting the proposed driving mechanism behind those changes, i.e. randomness, it’s not a big leap to project that random origin all the way back to the moment of ex nihilo , i.e. something from nothing.

As an avowed atheist, how do you explain “something from nothing” ??

Joe Mama

August 29th, 2011
1:40 pm

md — “…….we don’t have a clue about the ENTIRE process of evolution……..one can’t leave out the starting point and expect people to not have questions………”

Come now. Modern science is about nothing BUT questions. Scientists question each other and their own assumptions all the time. When a theory with better support and better fit comes along, the old theory goes out the window.

You seem to be positing some sort of dogmatism on the part of scientists. I can assure that’s not so for the vast majority of them.

Fred

August 29th, 2011
1:42 pm

PS (refering to my 1:36): I have no idea what that “I eams” at the start of my last sentence means or was supposed to mean. I think the blog goblin inserted it………..

Thulsa Doom

August 29th, 2011
1:42 pm

Granny Godzilla,

Whatever our politics lib or con the billionaires, whether they be lib or con, they will always make their coin. As Joe the Plutocrat likes to point out it often has nothing to do with either of the 2 parties since both are bought and paid for and is more a reflection of the plutocracy that runs the nation.

Good little liberal

August 29th, 2011
1:48 pm

Joe Mama

“Come now. Modern science is about nothing BUT questions. Scientists question each other and their own assumptions all the time. When a theory with better support and better fit comes along, the old theory goes out the window.”

I agree. But the problem, at least for me, is when people on a political blog insist that a certain science is a decided science. CLIMATE CHANGE WAS CREATED BY MAN. THERE CAN’T BE ANY DEBATE, ITS SETTLED. EVOLUTION IS DECIDED. THERE CAN’T BE ANY DISCUSSION.

I have offered this argument for a long time, but for some reason, the left always insist that what the believe has always been proven and there is simply no reason to think otherwise.

1811/0311

August 29th, 2011
1:49 pm

• The Fossil Record

• Living “Fossils”

• The Cambrian Explosion

• New T.Rex Discoveries

• “Missing Links”

• There are many creatures that defy evolution. All of the examples below illustrate complex and sophisticated biological structures. It is difficult to believe that these creatures could have evolved, since all of their systems had to have been in place at the start for them to survive.

Human Eye
Angler Fish
Chicken Egg
Beaver
Giraffe
Black And Yellow Garden Spider
Incubator Bird
Bombardier Beetle
Woodpecker

Granny Godzilla

August 29th, 2011
1:49 pm

Thulsa

Call me an idealist or a dreamer…I do not subscibe to the myth
that they are all bad.

If they are, then as our representatives we are too.

And I am quite sure I am not.

1811/0311

August 29th, 2011
1:50 pm

P.S.

http://www.straight-talk.net/evolution/arguments.shtml

Bruno

August 29th, 2011
1:51 pm

leading to the 2005 Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District trial, where U.S. District Judge John E. Jones III ruled that intelligent design is not science, that it “cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents”

Paul, I’m aware of the reasoning that the Judge in Delaware used to make his ruling. Which doesn’t change the fact that I think it was an incorrect ruling. Why?? Because our “established Science” is inadequate to explain the cosmology and the origin of life. Even the proposed driving force behind Darwin’s limited micro-Evolution has never been proved. As such, I think it’s most honest to simply acknowledge that there is an intelligence which pervades the Universe which we are unable to explain.

1811/0311

August 29th, 2011
1:52 pm

“Evolution is Religion — Not Science”

“In no way does the idea of particles-to-people evolution meet the long-accepted criteria of a scientific theory. There are no such evolutionary transitions that have ever been observed in the fossil record of the past; and the universal law of entropy seems to make it impossible on any significant scale.

Evolutionists claim that evolution is a scientific fact, but they almost always lose scientific debates with creationist scientists. Accordingly, most evolutionists now decline opportunities for scientific debates, preferring instead to make unilateral attacks on creationists.

The question is, just why do they need to counter the creationist message? Why are they so adamantly committed to anti-creationism?

The fact is that evolutionists believe in evolution because they want to. It is their desire at all costs to explain the origin of everything without a Creator. Evolutionism is thus intrinsically an atheistic religion. Some may prefer to call it humanism, and “new age” evolutionists place it in the context of some form of pantheism, but they all amount to the same thing. Whether atheism or humanism (or even pantheism), the purpose is to eliminate a personal God from any active role in the origin of the universe and all its components, including man.”

Thulsa Doom

August 29th, 2011
1:53 pm

md and Bruno,

Saw a good nova special last night on Fractal geometry and its implications regarding the natural world. The thesis of the program from a strictly scientific view was that there is an order and a repeating pattern in nature that can be shown mathematically.

I know others will disagree but part of the reason I believe in an infinite intelligence is because in just about every science or math program I watch on nova, discovery, etc. there is shown to be an order, a design, and a pattern to everything that we see. JMHO but its not something that in my view could possibly be an accident.

md

August 29th, 2011
1:54 pm

Joe mama…….nothing of the sort…….as I already stated……science is what we think we know as of today……….in respect to evolution, many present it as an alternative to religious origin……yet for all we ‘know’, they can be one and the same……………the science in inconclusive as to where the process began……………..

Joe the P………….agree with everything in your post……..so where am i going?

I understand the lemming game quite well…………and play the stock market accordingly…….I very rarely buy stocks because “everyone else is”…….same with gold. It will come down, and too many will wait too late to jump……………..

1811/0311

August 29th, 2011
1:55 pm

Bruno:

1) “leading to the 2005 Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District trial, where U.S. District Judge John E. Jones III ruled that intelligent design is not science, that it “cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents”

2) Preambles to the 50 State Constitutions:

http://www.theroadtoemmaus.org/RdLb/21PbAr/Pl/Cnst/StCnstPreAmb.htm

Kamchak

August 29th, 2011
1:57 pm

There is a heavy pall over business and it is Obama.

If only there was some way to quantify that “heavy pall.” You know maybe some indices that could measure the business climate when Obama took office and compare it to the present.

Good little liberal

August 29th, 2011
2:01 pm

Its very interesting that the ACLU has been filing much less suites to take religion out of public places. The reason? The ACLU lawyers make a killing when they win because part of the settlement is to pay the ridicules hourly wage of the blood sucking lawyers. Most municipalities just immediately fold and the lawyers get nothing.

Isn’t it amazing how noble these guys were about what they believe in until the money stopped rolling in.

Adam

August 29th, 2011
2:01 pm

Bruno: limitations so severe that we will likely never be able to answer some of the deepest questions that stir our souls with any certainty……So, what is motivating your mis-characterization??

Maybe I seem to be mischaracterizing your belief system, but that doesn’t really matter as much as the ridiculous idea that somehow a missing piece or a missing starting point means that there is some question as to the basis of the whole thing. That somehow, this invalidates the entire scientific theory.

Evolution is a very sound scientific theory that has been tested over and over and any new evidence found supports it, and doesn’t disprove it.

md: we don’t have a clue about the ENTIRE process of evolution

Yes we do. We have pretty damn good clues. That’s why it’s a theory.

A Face In the Crowd: You are, I hope, aware that your didacticism and dogmatic approach to this question are as limited and as dangerous as any Medieval pope, are you not?

What question are you referring to?

GLL: I have offered this argument for a long time, but for some reason, the left always insist that what the believe has always been proven and there is simply no reason to think otherwise.

1) It’s not “the left” that get on your case for this, but rational, scientific thinkers. Now you may be technically correct that questioning theories is a good thing – if done in a scientific way. This court of public opinion nonsense where people start claiming that the whole thing is corrupt and being made up, that is what is bullsh*t. If you can make a reasoned scientific argument AGAINST either Evolution or Climate Change then publish a paper and have it peer reviewed. Otherwise, yes, there isn’t a question as to the realities of evolution and climate change.

Scout: There are many creatures that defy evolution.

I’ll put this as simply as I can: On that you are incorrect.

Joe Mama

August 29th, 2011
2:02 pm

Bruno — “Joe Mama–Perhaps it’s a bit of laziness to not be more explicit, but most critics of the Scientific explanations of cosmology and the origins of life like to roll Big Bang Theory in with Evolution Theory.”

I know; I’ve seen that argument many times. I can’t explain it without presuming laziness (as you said), ignorance or willful mendacity. In most cases, I think ignorance is to blame; I would prefer not to label a polite and patient poster like md (though we often don’t agree) as lazy or mendacious.

“Strictly speaking, Darwin’s original theory only dealt with changes which occur in established species, and didn’t address any origin of life questions.”

Agreed.

“However, by accepting the proposed driving mechanism behind those changes, i.e. randomness,”

I don’t recall specifically — did Darwin propose any actual driving mechanism *at all?* It’s been years since I’ve read Darwin, but I don’t recall him identifying any sort of driver in the process.

“it’s not a big leap to project that random origin all the way back to the moment of ex nihilo , i.e. something from nothing.”

At the risk of sounding discourteous, IMO you’re doing the same thing as jm — just with better aim.

I’m sure you recognize that Darwin was just trying to make sense of his observations, and at some point he came to the realization that he was witnessing and documenting a process of nature. He wasn’t trying to explain where life came from — rather, he was trying to illuminate a process that he had observed it in, and which he felt it had been undergoing for some time (based on some observations of the fossil record). I think that the *implications* of what Darwin wrote about bothered many people at the time (and some even today), but as I recall, he was only trying to make sense of what he had seen and observed, and did an exceptionally good job of synthesizing the available data.

“As an avowed atheist, how do you explain “something from nothing” ??

I don’t, though biology isn’t my field. I would point out, however, that Darwin’s book was “On the Origin of Species,” not ‘On the Origin of Life.’

I feel pretty certain that life arose by means of some as-yet unknown and indeterminate process; perhaps we will discover it one day. Perhaps we may even discover species on other worlds whose appearance and biology are notably dissimilar to our own. On a day-to-day basis, though, I don’t give it much consideration. My sense is that, whatever the process is, it can continue to operate without any intervention on my part.

Thulsa Doom

August 29th, 2011
2:03 pm

Granny Godzilla,

Not sure if you were talking about politicians or billionaires not being all bad. Personally I think only a few of them from either group are necessarily bad people and its really not for me to judge. In regards to pols I just think that many of them are either misguided or naive in what they think govt can do to solve problems, or simply ill informed as to the consequences of their legislation. Many I think are well intentioned but due to the human flaw of arrogance they believe that they can solve people’s problems as opposed to people solving their own problems. And I think many of them lose touch with the common man once they go to Washington which is an inherently corrupt place. And I believe this applies to both parties whether we are talking about Republicans who think we can go win and a war and change a whole culture of people in the process- Iraq,Afgh. or the Democrats who think that big govt can fix people’s everyday problems. They are both usually wrong in my book.

Just Another Anonymous One

August 29th, 2011
2:04 pm

I see that Bachmann is not the only Republican with no faith in science. There seems to be an epidemic amongst the Right wing crowd. It must be something in the holy water.

Uncle Jed

August 29th, 2011
2:05 pm

Must take the White House Laundry a lot of starch to get that Empty Suit to stand erect.

A little three minute dissertation to introduce one person and it had to be scripted?

http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/three-minutes-two-teleprompters

A Face in the Crowd

August 29th, 2011
2:05 pm

md

August 29th, 2011
1:54 pm

“.in respect to evolution, many present it as an alternative to religious origin……yet for all we ‘know’, they can be one and the same……………the science in inconclusive as to where the process began”

**********

I would say they are both one and the same and that both are inconclusive. The “argument” seems to be the two “sides” trying to keep from admitting that they “don’t know nuthin’ ’bout nuthin’” Those who admit that what they do “know” is precious little, generally have better sense than to get into such an argument, scientist and theologian alike.

md

August 29th, 2011
2:05 pm

“in an infinite intelligence ”

Which is the real mind blower………as we tend to want to find a constant. The whole idea of infinity is too large for us to get a handle on it. We have this propensity to envision the rest of infinity more or less like our own miniscule sliver…………………

Fred

August 29th, 2011
2:05 pm

Bruno: I WILL delve lightly into this “debate.” I agree with both you and md, as it IS the only “sure thing” in this silly conversation. you both have said repeatedly, “We don’t know.”

And we don’t. Same with global warming, (NOW comes the crap storm lol). All we know for sure about EITHER issue, is that something happened (is happening, ie global warming), but we don’t know what. While “science” struggles mightily to explain them both, it still hasn’t. There just isn’t enough “data.”

What I don’t understand is why folks refuse to accept that as an answer? What causes cancer? We don’t know. What is the genome code? We don’t know. We don’t know is a very valid and honest answer. Not knowing something is not a “failure.” It merely suggested a continuing will and effort TO “know.”

In my opinion, it’s such simple and BASIC concept that those who don’t understand that are either dumber than a box of rocks or are combative and refuse to acknowledge what they themselves know to be true because of some ulterior motive. Either way it’s pointless to try to “explain” it to them or even justify a basic human truth.

Uncle Jed

August 29th, 2011
2:06 pm

Save your finger strokes as I am out for the afternoon. Con convention

Bruno

August 29th, 2011
2:06 pm

Whether atheism or humanism (or even pantheism), the purpose is to eliminate a personal God from any active role in the origin of the universe and all its components, including man.”

Scout–As one who is well-trained in Science, I will agree with you that there is a motivation to exclude supernatural beings from scientific discussion, and for good reason. By definition, a supernatural being is not bound by any type of physical laws; events can be created by whim and can ignore natural mechanisms, e.g Biblical miracles. Such a chaotic, whimsical world could never be subject to investigation, since it all depends on the will of an unseen Being.

Joe Mama

August 29th, 2011
2:07 pm

GLL — “I agree. But the problem, at least for me, is when people on a political blog insist that a certain science is a decided science. CLIMATE CHANGE WAS CREATED BY MAN. THERE CAN’T BE ANY DEBATE, ITS SETTLED. EVOLUTION IS DECIDED. THERE CAN’T BE ANY DISCUSSION.”

Does it bother you as much when posters on a political blog say something like CLIMATE CHANGE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH HUMAN ACTIVITY AT ALL AND WE CAN’T DISCUSS THE POSSIBILITY THAT IT MIGHT. Or something like ALTERNATIVE ENERGY IS A PIPE DREAM AND WILL NEVER WORK, SO LET’S NOT TALK ABOUT IT ANY MORE. Those things bother you at all?

“I have offered this argument for a long time, but for some reason, the left always insist that what the believe has always been proven and there is simply no reason to think otherwise.”

I’m not “the left” and respectfully, I’m not responsible for what you think “the left” believes. I speak for myself.

Thulsa Doom

August 29th, 2011
2:07 pm

Good little liberal,

The blood sucking parasites are just switching gears. One thing I’ve really noticed a lot of lately is that in just watching the news I’m astounded by the sheer number of new commercials I see from the bloodsuckers suing big pharma over a whole slew of well known medications. I can’t be the only person who has noticed this. I don’t watch much tv but when I do I can’t help but notice this.

A Face in the Crowd

August 29th, 2011
2:09 pm

Adam

The question of “intelligent design” and/or “science…”

md

August 29th, 2011
2:11 pm

“Yes we do. We have pretty damn good clues. That’s why it’s a theory.”

Theory being the operative word…………..

How do you know evolution wasn’t “created” during the Big Bang?

And yes, I understand the concept of evolution as a scientific theory, but not knowing the origins should lead to questions about the process…………..

jt

August 29th, 2011
2:13 pm

When this article leaded off …………..”From Washington”……………………….I moved on.
.
Most intelligent people do.

Adam

August 29th, 2011
2:14 pm

A Face in the Crowd: Intelligent Design is a question that is answered completely, but with faith. Science is answered through observation, and everything not observed, catalogued, tested, etc cannot be “answered” until it is.

Fred: Sure I’m with you on the “don’t know” premise, but I think you’re a bit behind on what exactly is left unanswered on both the subjects of evolution and climate change.

Talking Head

August 29th, 2011
2:15 pm

“It would be fascinating to read how future historians and economists analyze this era and the decisions made by government and business leaders.”

It will probably read something like this, “Keynesian Economic Policies: The Downfall of the American Empire”

Adam

August 29th, 2011
2:15 pm

md: Theory being the operative word……

Do I REALLY have to explain why a Scientific Theory is different from “theory” in modern vernacular …. AGAIN?

md

August 29th, 2011
2:16 pm

Glad to know there are others here that admit they do not know…………….

It’s the one’s that think they do that worry me…………

Adam

August 29th, 2011
2:16 pm

md: In addition, I am fascinated that you think somehow that the fact you are asking the question means that no one else has attempted to answer it. But you won’t find the answers in Evolution. You’ll have to look elsewhere.

Adam

August 29th, 2011
2:17 pm

“Keynesian Economic Policies: The Downfall of the American Empire”

Author: Glenn Beck.

Joe Mama

August 29th, 2011
2:17 pm

1811 — “There are many creatures that defy evolution. All of the examples below illustrate complex and sophisticated biological structures. It is difficult to believe that these creatures could have evolved, since all of their systems had to have been in place at the start for them to survive.”

No. I’d be happy to refer you to some folks who can explain that to you far better than I can.

“Evolutionists claim that evolution is a scientific fact, but they almost always lose scientific debates with creationist scientists. Accordingly, most evolutionists now decline opportunities for scientific debates, preferring instead to make unilateral attacks on creationists.”

No. Creationists demonstrate very little understanding of extant scientific evidence and support, and are generally unwilling to make their evidence available for peer review. Given that degree of recalcitrance and ignorance, most scientists who were inclined to engage creationists in debate now dismiss them as unserious cranks who aren’t particularly interested in genuine scientific inquiry.

“Dr.” Kent Hovind would be a good example of such a creationist; is he still in jail?

Kamchak

August 29th, 2011
2:18 pm

When this article leaded off …………..”From Washington”……………………….I moved on.

When I read posts with the name ………….. Ron Paul ……………………….I move on.

Most intelligent people do.

Yup.

Adam

August 29th, 2011
2:20 pm

Scout: Also this: but they almost always lose scientific debates with creationist scientists

According to who/whom? Was there a judge’s panel? Because that would make more sense. Reminds me of a college debate about whether being gay is nature or nurture, where the people who won did so by throwing out catch phrases like “It was Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve” and got the crowd to cheer. What a bunch of crap!

Good little liberal

August 29th, 2011
2:20 pm

Uncle Jed

Actually, it was the same prompter, just two monitors. They used to use a system called the “presidential” that used the two little plates of teleprompter glass on both sides of the podium, but because Obama got so much grief for not being about to talk without the prompter, they started using the gigantic screens set way off as is seen in the pictures. I had wondered how they were doing it. Now I know.

Joe Mama

August 29th, 2011
2:20 pm

Adam — “Do I REALLY have to explain why a Scientific Theory is different from “theory” in modern vernacular …. AGAIN?”

Apparently so.

A Face in the Crowd

August 29th, 2011
2:21 pm

ADAM

How, my I ask of Your Holiness, have you come to the fiat that “intelligent design” is a question that is “answered completely?” This is why I made the statement that yours is as didactic and dogmatic an approach as a Medieveal pope. Your orthodoxy is narrow minded.

Good little liberal

August 29th, 2011
2:21 pm

Adam

Like Hope and Change and they got the crowd to cheer. What a bunch of crap!!!

Atlas Shrugging

August 29th, 2011
2:21 pm

Thulsa, money buys elections, whether it’s labor union money or coporate money, all of our politicans are bought and paid for by some group with sufficient funds to buy votes. These bought and paid for Dem-wits or Rep-ugnants must repay their benefactor in some fashion if they expect to recieve this funding in the future. Question: How much money did the Obomonation state that he wanted to raise in order to run for re-election? By the way we don’t elect the poor to political office because they have already demonstrated that they can’t manage there own lives much less the lives of others.

Bruno

August 29th, 2011
2:22 pm

I don’t recall specifically — did Darwin propose any actual driving mechanism *at all?* It’s been years since I’ve read Darwin, but I don’t recall him identifying any sort of driver in the process.

No, he didn’t, and in fact stated that a discovery like genes would invalidate his whole idea.

http://www.windowview.org/sci/pgs/25genes.html

On a day-to-day basis, though, I don’t give it much consideration. My sense is that, whatever the process is, it can continue to operate without any intervention on my part.

In my experience, one’s “worldview” does show up on a day-to-day basis, even if not explicitly. My main motivation for supporting ID is that it demands a respect for Nature that pure atheism doesn’t demand, while avoiding all of the supernatural beliefs one is required to accept if relying on a Creator.

Zap Rowsdower

August 29th, 2011
2:22 pm

Al Gore aka manbearpig, claimed that people who don’t believe in global scamming are racists.

How dumb can that loser be?

Adam

August 29th, 2011
2:22 pm

I can’t wait until I see the Republican Presidential candidate start using teleprompters. I am gonna flood you guys with it when it happens. See what kind of justifications come up. They’ll probably be fairly reasonable, except for the people who pull out “Oh yeah, well OBAMA DOES IT TOO! (whine)”

md

August 29th, 2011
2:22 pm

“Do I REALLY have to explain why a Scientific Theory is different from “theory” in modern vernacular …. AGAIN?”

Partial evidence??

Zap Rowsdower

August 29th, 2011
2:22 pm

“I see that Bachmann is not the only Republican with no faith in science. ”

What’s stupid about people who write things like stems from the fact that said people are not scientists.

Adam

August 29th, 2011
2:23 pm

GLL: Like Hope and Change and they got the crowd to cheer. What a bunch of crap!!!

Yes we all know that political campaigning is equivalent to scientific debate

Zap Rowsdower

August 29th, 2011
2:23 pm

Can’t wait till AmVet shows up to call me a flat earther. I love it when he claims to be tolerant and then throws out insults.

mm

August 29th, 2011
2:23 pm

“Bush, the elder was President when all the laws were being made by Democrats”

Please provide a list of laws the Dems passed that GWB did not veto.

I’m convinced republicans really are so stupid they believe their own BS.

Adam

August 29th, 2011
2:24 pm

A Face in the Crowd: Oh, are you saying there are holes in Intelligent Design?

Just Another Anonymous One

August 29th, 2011
2:25 pm

Is there really such a thing as a “creationist scientist”.

Adam

August 29th, 2011
2:25 pm

md: Partial evidence? Seriously? You really don’t know what I’m talking about do you?

Just google “scientific theory.” Read more than one link.

Doggone/GA

August 29th, 2011
2:25 pm

“Theory being the operative word”

Gravity is just a theory

Good little liberal

August 29th, 2011
2:26 pm

Thulsa Doom

I hate to admit it, but I was producing commercials for the blood suckers in Atlanta, and yes, they are all going for the big bucks in the medical field. That’s one of the reasons why I moved to the mountains. I’m pretty sure that people who produce commercials for lawyers have a special place in hell. I’m worried enough about the new administration building that was built in hell just to keep up with my life in the 70s.

Adam

August 29th, 2011
2:27 pm

Doggone: Special Relativity is also a theory – one that we use to have GPS.

Thulsa Doom

August 29th, 2011
2:27 pm

stands for decibels

August 29th, 2011
1:25 pm
Let’s see, if a program on TV is a show…does that mean a program on radio is a hear?

stands for decibels,

You know your point is pathetically weak when all you can do is parse words over whether NPR is a show or a program. Good grief. If it makes you feel better it is a program.

A Face in the Crowd

August 29th, 2011
2:27 pm

ADAM

I am saying just that…and they are a gaping as the ones in science…

And with that, I’ll leave this discussion and go and contemplate the fuzz in the cosmic navel…

Adam

August 29th, 2011
2:28 pm

GLL: I’m pretty sure that people who produce commercials for lawyers have a special place in hell.

They’re capitalists, entrepreneurs, etc. Job creators!

Granny Godzilla

August 29th, 2011
2:29 pm

Funny thing about intelligent design, alot of people were not designed to be intelligent.

Zap Rowsdower

August 29th, 2011
2:29 pm

What rat voters rant about. global warming, race, race, race, slavery and race.

Try something new, rat voters.

Adam

August 29th, 2011
2:29 pm

Hmm, so Intelligent Design is a concept that has holes in it. Who knew? Because when I read up on it, it basically answered every otherwise unanswered question with faith in an “Intelligent Designer”

Good little liberal

August 29th, 2011
2:29 pm

Doggone.

Afternoon, Dear.

There are some sciences that are determined to be finite, at least in this area of the universe. But there are others that require way too many unproven theories to be considered proven and the causes of climate change is one of those sciences.

Bruno

August 29th, 2011
2:30 pm

Fred–It merely suggested a continuing will and effort TO “know.”……In my opinion, it’s such simple and BASIC concept that those who don’t understand that are either dumber than a box of rocks or are combative and refuse to acknowledge what they themselves know to be true because of some ulterior motive

md– Glad to know there are others here that admit they do not know…………….It’s the one’s that think they do that worry me…………

Fred and md, count me in your camp today. The extremists on both sides worry me as well. In a practical way, one’s worldview DOES show up in a myriad of ways, as I alluded to Joe Mama. Excluding uncertainty is a dangerous place to start, IMO.

Zap Rowsdower

August 29th, 2011
2:30 pm

“alot of people were not designed to be intelligent.”

Especially people who don’t know that “a lot” is two different words.

Doggone/GA

August 29th, 2011
2:30 pm

“You know your point is pathetically weak when all you can do is parse words over whether NPR is a show or a program”

And YOUR point might be a little less funny if you addressed it to the person who actually posted what you quoted. And I didn’t “parse” over whether NPR is a show or program, I “parsed” whether an NPR program is a “hear” as oppsed to a “show”

Adam

August 29th, 2011
2:30 pm

Granny: I like to liken the very term Intelligent Design with extreme narcissism. So, there is an Intelligent Creator, and we are Intelligent, THEREFORE we came into being with POOF, *sparkle sparkle*

md

August 29th, 2011
2:31 pm

“Gravity is just a theory”

An awful lot we don’t know about gravity as well………but I don’t think i’d want to compare it to the origins of everything…………….

Good little liberal

August 29th, 2011
2:32 pm

Adam

“Yes we all know that political campaigning is equivalent to scientific debate”

In the area of Climate change, there is actually little difference between scientific and political debate.

Doggone/GA

August 29th, 2011
2:32 pm

“Funny thing about intelligent design, alot of people were not designed to be intelligent”

Personally, I think it’s a committee. Ever hear the definition of a camel as “as horse designed by a committee”?

Adam

August 29th, 2011
2:32 pm

Bruno, md, Fred, like I said to just Fred before, yes science doesn’t answer everything and there is much we don’t know. But on the subjects of evolution and climate change, there is much MORE that we know that you guys are not admitting to. There are very few questions that haven’t been answered in both camps, and not one of them doubts the basic premise of either.

md

August 29th, 2011
2:33 pm

And Adam, you may be wise to take your own advise and look it up………and take note of words such as “available”, “known”, “samples”, “may” etc………………………

Tommy Maddox

August 29th, 2011
2:33 pm

GLL – those lawyer commercials do blow.

Zap Rowsdower

August 29th, 2011
2:33 pm

Where’s Owl Gore these days?

Adam

August 29th, 2011
2:33 pm

md: but I don’t think i’d want to compare it to the origins of everything

Nor should you compare the origins of everything to evolution, since that’s not what it is.

Adam

August 29th, 2011
2:35 pm

GLL: In the area of Climate change, there is actually little difference between scientific and political debate.

There is a stark and very important difference:

Scientific: Earth is warming overall due to CO2. CO2 is being added to, in a statistically important way, by humans. Ergo, humans are adding to the effect.

Political: What to do about the fact that the earth is warming, knowing that we are contributing to the cause.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
2:37 pm

know others will disagree but part of the reason I believe in an infinite intelligence is because in just about every science or math program I watch on nova, discovery, etc. there is shown to be an order, a design, and a pattern to everything that we see. JMHO but its not something that in my view could possibly be an accident

The Golden Ratio, Fibbonachi’s (?sp) sequence and other mathematical equations found in nature are hardly anything new or random; they are what makes nature, nature, but it still doesn’t mean it was created by a supernatural creature.

md

August 29th, 2011
2:38 pm

“Nor should you compare the origins of everything to evolution, since that’s not what it is.”

Then tell us what you think it is.

Doggone/GA

August 29th, 2011
2:38 pm

Adam – I think what trips up most anti-evolutionists is that you can’t see evolution happening. What you CAN see is adaptation, but adaptation does not become evolution until the original population and the adapated population become so different that they can no longer interbreed. And that can be an extremely slow process, well beyond the ability of humans to maintain obeservation time on.

md

August 29th, 2011
2:39 pm

“they are what makes nature, nature, but it still doesn’t mean it was created by a supernatural creature.”

And the opposite is also true…………….

Adam

August 29th, 2011
2:39 pm

md: An explanation of how species change over time.

I would ask if you get it now, but I answered that question numerous times already.

Bruno

August 29th, 2011
2:39 pm

Gravity is just a theory

Special Relativity is also a theory – one that we use to have GPS.

Doggone and Adam–You are confusing observable phenomena with our EXPLANATIONS of observable phenomena. The phenomenon of gravity has remained the same from the beginning of time, as far as we know. However, man-made explanations of gravity have changed greatly through the years, from Newton’s “action at a distance”, to Einstein’s “curved space”, to particle physicist’s talk of “gravitons”. Ditto for evolution and global warming. No one is arguing with observation, only mechanism.

Joe Mama

August 29th, 2011
2:39 pm

Bruno — “My main motivation for supporting ID is that it demands a respect for Nature that pure atheism doesn’t demand”

Doesn’t demand, but doesn’t reject. Some atheists have great respect for nature; others don’t. There’s no orthodoxy in atheism; if you ask a dozen atheists about their beliefs, like as not you’ll get a dozen distinctly different answers. And there will likely be a wide variation in those answers.

Thulsa Doom

August 29th, 2011
2:39 pm

Competent people- the ones who know enough to know that the more they know the more they realize just how much they don’t know.

Incompetent people- those who know enough to be dangerous- those who think they know but don’t know enough to know how much there is that they really don’t know- but yet they unequivocally know.

Doggone/GA

August 29th, 2011
2:39 pm

“And the opposite is also true…………….”

How was that supernatural creature created?

Just Another Anonymous One

August 29th, 2011
2:40 pm

I suspect we know enough about gravity to satisfy most people that want to know about gravity. Jump! Higher! Higher! Higher! Higher!

jt

August 29th, 2011
2:40 pm

From the Drudge———————
.Central Park—–NY.NY.—-
“Twenty Seven kites destroyed…..winds up to 24mph………Irene to blame………..Officials decry no “Kite Flying Permits”…………..Developing……………………………………………..

Adam

August 29th, 2011
2:41 pm

Doggone: I’m more convinced what trips up anti-evolutionists is the false idea that it is a replacement for religion.

Joe Mama

August 29th, 2011
2:42 pm

Adam — “THEREFORE we came into being with POOF, *sparkle sparkle*”

Ah seen that on that there Star Trek show oncet.

md

August 29th, 2011
2:42 pm

“I think what trips up most anti-evolutionists is that you can’t see evolution happening. ”

Anti-evolution as the opposite of creationism, or anti-evolution as junk science??

Evolution as we “know” it explains the process as it is………..not necessarily as it was………….

Doggone/GA

August 29th, 2011
2:43 pm

“I’m more convinced what trips up anti-evolutionists is the false idea that it is a replacement for religion”

Yes, that too…and the fact that they keep losing sight of one of the bed-rock foundations of scientific theory: that it should be able to make predictions. And that is why “intelligent design” can never be a scientific subject, because it cannot be used as the basis for predictions.

Doggone/GA

August 29th, 2011
2:43 pm

“Anti-evolution as the opposite of creationism, or anti-evolution as junk science??”

both

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
2:44 pm

md,

No, not really. Math is just math — it was something we humans gave to repeating patterns we found. To me, it’s the same thing as the question, did God create man in his own image? No, of course not, we created him in our own.

The things we don’t understand we have to have some kind of concrete filler to explain it and most people just call that “God.”

(And of course, this is all my opinion)

Adam

August 29th, 2011
2:44 pm

md: Evolution as we “know” it explains the process as it is………..not necessarily as it was

Evolution explains the process as it was, is, and will continue to be for all species on this planet.

Again with the not getting the SCIENCE part.

md

August 29th, 2011
2:46 pm

“How was that supernatural creature created?”

Don’t know……….one way or the other.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
2:46 pm

“My main motivation for supporting ID is that it demands a respect for Nature that pure atheism doesn’t demand”

That’s just crazy talk. Most athiests I know respect nature a whoooolllleeee lot more than religious folks. It’s been my experience that the exact opposite of what Bruno wrote to be true.

Granny Godzilla

August 29th, 2011
2:47 pm

Zap

How gracious of you to correct my spelling. It is regularly atrocious as are my keyboarding skills.

Thanks….I think you have found something worthwhile to do.

Please check my spelling always, OK?

I’ll count on you, you wild and crazy Canuck.

md

August 29th, 2011
2:47 pm

“No, of course not, we created him in our own. ”

And you know this how?

Joe The Plumber too.

August 29th, 2011
2:47 pm

now if only bedwetter liberals could evolve.

Thulsa Doom

August 29th, 2011
2:48 pm

Bruno,

I think there is an intelligent design, not necessarily proof of a supernatural being- a God. My belief in a God as the infinite intelligence is one that I acknowledge as being of faith and not something I can prove.

Bruno

August 29th, 2011
2:48 pm

So, there is an Intelligent Creator, and we are Intelligent, THEREFORE we came into being with POOF, *sparkle sparkle*

I have to disagree regarding your proposed motivation, Adam, and with your mischaracterization of ID once again. The intelligence which organizes the Universe starts at the sub-atomic level, and isn’t limited to humans. Which is what leads me to a Jainist-like respect for all of Nature, not just us. Also, though a strong percentage of IDers are also religious, it’s not true across the board. Is there any good reason that you keep misstating this fact??

The Golden Ratio, Fibbonachi’s (?sp) sequence and other mathematical equations found in nature are hardly anything new or random; they are what makes nature, nature, but it still doesn’t mean it was created by a supernatural creature.

Bosch–Squarely in your camp as well today.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
2:48 pm

Doom @ 2:39

And then there’s people like you who feel they know more than others and are constantly injecting the need to “educate” us.

Kamchak

August 29th, 2011
2:48 pm

Hey Bosch

Drogba got knocked out Saturday.

AmVet

August 29th, 2011
2:49 pm

Bruno, haven’t gone back through most of the posts, but if I understand correctly, your position for teaching ID in public school science classrooms is because Darwin’s theory is not yet proven and that this is an equally valid one?

Seems like a very low bar to me.

I’ve not read much about it but I know of no credible institutions that proffer that ID/creationism is scientifically supportable.

As for absolute proof, numerous other significant and nearly universally accepted scientific theories have not yet met that “criteria” either.

Allowing cloaked religion and repackaged creationism in science classes is a dangerous precedent, in my view.

If it is presented in comparative religion, philosophy or mythology classes, that is fine.

But it is not science.

md

August 29th, 2011
2:49 pm

“Evolution explains the process as it was, is, and will continue to be for all species on this planet.”

I’m not getting the science part??

Explain to me your definition of “was”……….and how do you know it to be true??

Adam

August 29th, 2011
2:49 pm

Bosch: If you want a religion that treats nature well, you’ll have to go Native American or Pagan. Jews, Christians, and Muslims all seem to be earth-rape apologists.

stands for decibels

August 29th, 2011
2:49 pm

all you can do is parse words over whether NPR is a show or a program. Good grief. If it makes you feel better it is a program.

NPR is a *program*?

lordy, TD–I’m not trying to tell you how to live your life, but you might want to cut back on this stuff a bit.

stands for decibels

August 29th, 2011
2:50 pm

Jews, Christians, and Muslims all seem to be earth-rape apologists.

all?

Paul

August 29th, 2011
2:50 pm

Bruno

“I’m aware of the reasoning that the Judge in Delaware used to make his ruling. Which doesn’t change the fact that I think it was an incorrect ruling. Why?? Because our “established Science” is inadequate to explain the cosmology and the origin of life. Even the proposed driving force behind Darwin’s limited micro-Evolution has never been proved. As such, I think it’s most honest to simply acknowledge that there is an intelligence which pervades the Universe which we are unable to explain.”

I too hold to the concept of “The Force.” I don’t think it incompatible with evolution.

In this particular court case, it appears the judge held because of how the Discovery Institute and others designed Intelligent Design (like the play on words?) to get their points across without saying “God.” A bit of fog the judge saw thru.

But the real issue, as I see it, is placing it in the realm of science teaching in schools. Want to put it in a comparative religion, philosophy or other class? That’s an option. But in a science class, where the scientific method cannot be used to examine it? I think that’s where the problem is.

Religion has a place in public discourse. Just not, I think, presented as quasi-religion in a science class.

Adam

August 29th, 2011
2:50 pm

md: Explain to me your definition of “was”……….and how do you know it to be true??

This is what I mean by you not getting the science part. Science tests for this by using PAST evidence and PRESENT evidence and testing for results based on all that.

Really? I mean, REALLY? This cannot POSSIBLY be that hard to understand!

Good little liberal

August 29th, 2011
2:51 pm

Tommy Maddox

Yes they did. The money was very good, but the Karma was horrible.

Zap Rowsdower

August 29th, 2011
2:51 pm

Granny Godzilla

No problem, cupcake.

Just Another Anonymous One

August 29th, 2011
2:51 pm

Atom Ant was an intelligent subatomic designer. He was most noted for his ant clothing designs, especially those teency weency capes.

AmVet

August 29th, 2011
2:51 pm

Excuse me, I meant Big Bang, not Darwin, in that last.

Unevolved, Freudian slip?!

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
2:52 pm

md,

Because I do.

Seriously, it just seems logical to me that if humans needed “the filler” as I mentioned and that “filler” is “God” — the next step would be to make that like themselves so the things they can’t explain make some semblance of sense.

Zap Rowsdower

August 29th, 2011
2:52 pm

“But it is not science.”

AmVet is and never has been a scientists but he did stay at Holiday Inn last night.

Bruno

August 29th, 2011
2:53 pm

Most athiests I know respect nature a whoooolllleeee lot more than religious folks. It’s been my experience that the exact opposite of what Bruno wrote to be true.

Oops, back out of your camp, Bosch. IDers aren’t “religious”. Religious people are religious, and I think their lack of respect for nature IS rooted in their narcissistic world view (God made me specially). I also think the term ‘atheistic” is defined in more than one way, but is most often presented as being in opposition to being a full-blown theist. As such, I think you’re lumping too many people under one banner, as Joe mama alluded to. The Wiccans I used to hang out with would likely be technically “atheists”, but I wouldn’t categorize them that way.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
2:53 pm

“If you want a religion that treats nature well, you’ll have to go Native American or Pagan”

Adam,

As a Neo-Pagan Agnostic Christian, I am all with that.

md

August 29th, 2011
2:53 pm

“both”

And how do you know that creationism and evolution are not intertwined?

Paul

August 29th, 2011
2:54 pm

Adam

“Bosch: If you want a religion that treats nature well, you’ll have to go Pagan”

He’s already there. Looking for converts, too. Watch out or he’ll have you dancing naked in the moonlight in a forest clearing.

Zap Rowsdower

August 29th, 2011
2:54 pm

“and I think their lack of respect for nature”

Yeah, dern them Christian farmers. Always tearin up dat land for no reason.

Where do you rat voters come up with this crap?

Adam

August 29th, 2011
2:57 pm

Zap: Are you a scientist?

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
2:58 pm

“I too hold to the concept of “The Force.” I don’t think it incompatible with evolution.”

Dang! I forgot to add “Jedi” to the end of my self-identity religion.

So, make that Neo-Pagan Agnostic Christian Jedi.

AmVet

August 29th, 2011
2:59 pm

Intelligent design (ID) is the proposition that “certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.” It is a form of creationism and a contemporary adaptation of the traditional teleological argument for the existence of God, presented by its advocates as “an evidence-based scientific theory about life’s origins” rather than “a religious-based idea”. It avoids specifying that the hypothesized intelligent designer is God. Its leading proponents are associated with the Discovery Institute, a politically conservative think tank, and believe the designer to be the Christian God.

Intelligent design was developed by a group of American creationists who revised their argument in the creation–evolution controversy to circumvent court rulings such as the United States Supreme Court Edwards v. Aguillard ruling, which barred the teaching of “creation science” in public schools as breaching the separation of church and state. The first significant published use of intelligent design was in Of Pandas and People, a 1989 textbook intended for high-school biology classes. From the mid-1990s, intelligent design proponents were supported by the Discovery Institute, which, together with its Center for Science and Culture, planned and funded the “intelligent design movement”.

It is clear that the genesis (get it?!) of ID is based on Christian opposition to Darwin, Big Bang and the other non-teleological theories and sciences that attempt to explain the universe, etc.

oldguy

August 29th, 2011
2:59 pm

For all you Darwin/”fat”Albert Gore fans:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3fI8834iCgo

Granny Godzilla

August 29th, 2011
3:00 pm

Zap

Thanks Stud Muffin

Just Another Anonymous One

August 29th, 2011
3:00 pm

Creation and evolution have much in common. They both end in tion. They are both English words. They both have greater than seven letters.

Thulsa Doom

August 29th, 2011
3:01 pm

Bosch,

Nope. Just your opinion. I freely admit that there are plenty of things I don’t know-particularly on the origins of the universe. But there are a few things that I absolutely know. And one of them, unlike you going back to last week’s debate, is that a dollar spent by the private sector is more efficient than a dollar spent by the federal government.

Secondly, if you will notice on here there are liberals who portend their ideas as fact instead of something we think we know but aren’t really sure of. For example Adam thinks that CO2 is the main reason that the earth is in a gradual warming trend. This is something that we think may be true but it is not a proven fact as Adam mistakenly believes it to be.

Likewise Doggone @ 2:38 seems to posit the idea of evolution and her idea that we cannot observe evolution. I disagree because we have this thing called the fossil record and in my opinion- not fact, the evidence of the fossil record does not prove evolution. But yet liberals on here seem to posit both evolution and man made global warming as fact when they are anything but.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
3:01 pm

Bruno,

Well, isn’t THAT rich, Mr. Bruno — YOU lecturing on making broad brush assumptions and grouping people.

Anywho, my point was that in my experience athiests, at least the ones I know, do respect nature, in my opinion, more so than theists, because they tend to look at it through math and science — things that are tangible instead of brushing it aside as being created by some dude in the sky.

Paul

August 29th, 2011
3:02 pm

Bosch

You’ve moved up from Padawan! Congratulations! I knew you’d do it?

prior thread, 8:43. You’ll likely find it interesting.

AmVet

August 29th, 2011
3:02 pm

Darwin fans?

150 years on and nothing has countermanded or replaced it and the deniers still think its a club or something.

Incredible…

Adam

August 29th, 2011
3:03 pm

Just Another Anonymous One @ 3p

jm

August 29th, 2011
3:03 pm

I no longer believe in evolution.

The Republican and Democratic parties are both proof its just a hoax. I mean “theory”. Whatever.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
3:03 pm

“is that a dollar spent by the private sector is more efficient than a dollar spent by the federal government”

Nope Doom, that’s STILL just your opinion.

The only FACTS in the world are that you were born and will one day die. Other than that, it’s really just the way we all interpret things.

Good little liberal

August 29th, 2011
3:03 pm

Science is settled. There is no more to learn. The theory of man causing climate change is a closed topic.

(Brought to you by the same people who so wisely predicted the new ice age would be upon the earth by the year 2001 and Miami would be under water by 2010. )

Joe Mama

August 29th, 2011
3:04 pm

Bruno — “The Wiccans I used to hang out with would likely be technically “atheists”, but I wouldn’t categorize them that way.”

Agreed. I’ve generally found Wiccans, Buddhists and Jews (???) the most accepting/tolerant of atheists. Folks in non-theist religions seem to be a bit more understanding of atheists — possibly because we’re just a different species of non-theist.

I have no idea why Jewish folks would be more accepting of atheists. Perhaps I’ve just been fortunate with the ones I’ve met.

Dusty

August 29th, 2011
3:04 pm

Well, my brakes have been repaired by Goodyear’s intelligent design but my tires are still in evolution. Seems they are soon to become fossils that will crack and crumble. But a devine human being then declared to me that four new tires would save my day.

At this revelation, I tenderly backed away from the price tag and smiled sweetly in great study. Thank you, thank you, I said, I appreciate your safety worries about little blowouts but I must consider all revenues (and other tire dealers.)

As they tenderly stroked my credit card, I pulled it back to safety. So I ride on good brakes. And tomorrow yes… tomorrow, I shall venture into the jungle of tire dealers. Pray for my safe return!! (and my credit card too.) Thank you.

Bruno

August 29th, 2011
3:04 pm

Want to put it in a comparative religion, philosophy or other class? That’s an option. But in a science class, where the scientific method cannot be used to examine it? I think that’s where the problem is.

Possibly just my opinion, Paul, but I don’t think that the scientific method should stand in isolation as you are proposing, which has pretty much been the modus operandi of public education for the past 50 or more years. The scientific method comes with a rich philosophical background, with some great thinkers honing it along the way:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_scientific_method

Even today, however, the interplay between inductive thinking, which is the ultimate source of hypotheses, and deductive reasoning, which drives experimentation, is not close to being understood. In other words, the scientific method itself is outside of the scope of the scientific method. Why limit our scope of understanding so severely??

Adam

August 29th, 2011
3:04 pm

This is something that we think may be true but it is not a proven fact as Adam mistakenly believes it to be.

I’ll put Thulsa on the list of people who is behind on the questions that science has answered….

Zap Rowsdower

August 29th, 2011
3:05 pm

“Zap: Are you a scientist?”

Nope, and I never claim to know what science says or doesn’t say about a subject when said subject is a theory backed by a loser politician who flies around the world on a private 747.

Zap Rowsdower

August 29th, 2011
3:05 pm

“Thanks Stud Muffin”

No problem, hotness.

Adam

August 29th, 2011
3:05 pm

GLL: Science is settled. There is no more to learn. The theory of man causing climate change is a closed topic.

Speaking of mischaracterizations and hyperbole….

Let’s close the patent office!

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
3:06 pm

And Doom,

In regards to Adam and Doggone (and everyone else here) — it is pretty much a given to me that everything we express is an opinion — it’s just that there are many here like Doggone and Adam, who can, and most often do, explain where and how they formulated theirs. And if they don’t in a particular post, if asked, will provide it for you.

jm

August 29th, 2011
3:06 pm

“Why limit our scope of understanding so severely??”

Why broaden our minds? We live in America. Where the liberals and conservatives know the absolute truth and everyone else is an idiot. Evolution is over.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
3:06 pm

Paul,

ON IT!!

Adam

August 29th, 2011
3:06 pm

Zap: when said subject is a theory backed by a loser politician who flies around the world on a private 747.

Yeah because he totally came up with the idea all by himself

Zap Rowsdower

August 29th, 2011
3:07 pm

“150 years on and nothing has countermanded or replaced it and the deniers still think its a club or something.”

Yet again, Vet claims to be a scientists. Darwin accepted Christ on his death bed. At least that’s what stories have claimed so it must be true.

Just Another Anonymous One

August 29th, 2011
3:07 pm

Brought to you by the same people who so wisely predicted the new ice age would be upon the earth by the year 2001 and Miami would be under water by 2010. )

I have not read that paper. Was it in Sports Illustrated, Swimsuit Edition or what.

Zap Rowsdower

August 29th, 2011
3:07 pm

“Yeah because he totally came up with the idea all by himself”

Never said he did, cupcake.

Just Another Anonymous One

August 29th, 2011
3:09 pm

Darwin accepted Christ on his death bed. At least that’s what stories have claimed so it must be true.

That was to ensure a proper burial and subsequent good treatment of his survivors by the church. Much like today, if you are not a member in good standing with the appropriate church, life can be hell.

Zap Rowsdower

August 29th, 2011
3:09 pm

Alright rats, I gotta go do some real work. Have fun calling each other names about subjects in which you have no idea how they work. Can’t wait to read Vet’s rants. What will he call us next?

Good little liberal

August 29th, 2011
3:09 pm

NEVER QUESTION ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS!!

“[By] 1995, the greenhouse effect would be desolating the heartlands of North America and Eurasia with horrific drought, causing crop failures and food riots…[By 1996] The Platte River of Nebraska would be dry, while a continent-wide black blizzard of prairie topsoil will stop traffic on interstates, strip paint from houses and shut down computers.” Michael Oppenheimer, published in “Dead Heat,” St. Martin’s Press, 1990.

“Arctic specialist Bernt Balchen says a general warming trend over the North Pole is melting the polar ice cap and may produce an ice-free Arctic Ocean by the year 2000.” Christian Science Monitor, June 8, 1972.

“Using computer models, researchers concluded that global warming would raise average annual temperatures nationwide two degrees by 2010.” Associated Press, May 15, 1989.

“By 1985, air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half.” Life magazine, January 1970.

“If present trends continue, the world will be … eleven degrees colder by the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us in an ice age.” Kenneth E.F. Watt, in “Earth Day,” 1970.

“By the year 2000 the United Kingdom will be simply a small group of impoverished islands, inhabited by some 70 million hungry people … If I were a gambler, I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000.” Ehrlich, Speech at British Institute For Biology, September 1971.

“In ten years all important animal life in the sea will be extinct. Large areas of coastline will have to be evacuated because of the stench of dead fish.” Ehrlich, speech during Earth Day, 1970

But laughing at them is completely appropriate.

Adam

August 29th, 2011
3:10 pm

Dusty: In other words, the scientific method itself is outside of the scope of the scientific method.

Circular logic… ugh. You’re going in circles and making stuff up. The scientific method is a sound method, designed to observe, test, predict. It does that. To attempt to explain it away as some sort of faith or something is really, really lame.

Joe Mama

August 29th, 2011
3:11 pm

Dusty — “Well, my brakes have been repaired by Goodyear’s intelligent design”

It couldn’t have possibly been intelligent design. At Goodyear Intelligent Design auto shops, they come to your house unannounced in the middle of the night, make the repair without you being aware of it, and then they randomly hit one of your credit cards for the amount due. If you try to take your car to one of their shops, they’re always closed. If you manage to find one open, there’s no window for you to watch the work being done. Then they try to pass someone else’s car off as yours.

Bruno

August 29th, 2011
3:11 pm

It is clear that the genesis (get it?!) of ID is based on Christian opposition to Darwin, Big Bang and the other non-teleological theories and sciences that attempt to explain the universe, etc.

Adam–Though the motivation of the original framers of ID may have been to circumvent anti-Creationist laws, in the process they came up with a theory which should stand on its own merit. To not discuss on its own merits reveals an incredible bias on your part, IMO.

Adam

August 29th, 2011
3:11 pm

Bosch: And if they don’t in a particular post, if asked, will provide it for you.

You mean as opposed to “I’m not going to do your research for you!”?

AmVet

August 29th, 2011
3:12 pm

As I said earlier, repackaged creationism.

Although arguments for intelligent design are formulated in secular terms and intentionally avoid positing the identity of the designer, the majority of principal intelligent design advocates are publicly religious Christians who have stated that in their view the designer proposed in intelligent design is the Christian conception of God. Stuart Burgess, Phillip E. Johnson, William Dembski, and Stephen C. Meyer are evangelical Protestants, and Michael Behe is a Roman Catholic, while Jonathan Wells is a member of the Unification Church. Phillip E. Johnson has stated that cultivating ambiguity by employing secular language in arguments that are carefully crafted to avoid overtones of theistic creationism is a necessary first step for ultimately reintroducing the Christian concept of God as the designer. Johnson explicitly calls for intelligent design proponents to obfuscate their religious motivations so as to avoid having intelligent design identified “as just another way of packaging the Christian evangelical message”. Johnson emphasizes that “the first thing that has to be done is to get the Bible out of the discussion”; “after we have separated materialist prejudice from scientific fact [...] only then can ‘biblical issues’ be discussed”.

Fine. Discuss them outside of the science classroom…

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
3:12 pm

Paul,

I actually did read that, but I’ve been busy and didn’t have time to write the comment it deserved.

I sit on an Interfaith “committee” or whatever you wanna call it in my little town — we do some fun things and piss off alot of people because we sponsor things that make people ponder, and sometimes they don’t like to ponder, but we enjoy that.

It’s always fascinated me when people get all bent out of shape to listen to people of other faiths, beliefs, etc. As Bishop Spong said once (and I paraphrase), “if little old insignificant me can create such animosity in you and if that shakes or even makes you question the foundation of your faith, then YOUR faith isn’t that strong.”

In other words, if you are truly faithful in what you believe, it should really never get you all upset to hear someone else express another belief.

Adam

August 29th, 2011
3:13 pm

Zap: It doesn’t matter who backs what as long as the theory is sound (which it is). Like I said before, it only becomes political as soon as someone suggests doing something about it. Which, apparently, is just too much change for people who fear change.

Granny Godzilla

August 29th, 2011
3:13 pm

Zap

Groovy, macho man

Midori

August 29th, 2011
3:14 pm

anybody know where I can get a good deal on tires this weekend?

Joe Mama

August 29th, 2011
3:14 pm

Zap — “Yet again, Vet claims to be a scientists. Darwin accepted Christ on his death bed. At least that’s what stories have claimed so it must be true.”

And even the creationists themselves say there’s nothing to that tale.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2009/03/31/darwins-deathbed-conversion-legend

Good little liberal

August 29th, 2011
3:14 pm

SCIENCE IS ALWAYS RIGHT!!! DO NOT QUESTION SCIENCE!!! ANYTHING TO THE CONTRARY IS DANGEROUS!!!!!

YOU MUST OBEY!!!!!!

At the first Earth Day celebration, in 1969, environmentalist Nigel Calder warned, “The threat of a new ice age must now stand alongside nuclear war as a likely source of wholesale death and misery for mankind.”

C.C. Wallen of the World Meteorological Organization said, “The cooling since 1940 has been large enough and consistent enough that it will not soon be reversed.”

In 1968, Professor Paul Ehrlich, Vice President Gore’s hero and mentor, predicted there would be a major food shortage in the U.S. and “in the 1970s … hundreds of millions of people are going to starve to death.” Ehrlich forecasted that 65 million Americans would die of starvation between 1980 and 1989, and by 1999 the U.S. population would have declined to 22.6 million. Ehrlich’s predictions about England were gloomier: “If I were a gambler, I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000.”

In 1972, a report was written for the Club of Rome warning the world would run out of gold by 1981, mercury and silver by 1985, tin by 1987 and petroleum, copper, lead and natural gas by 1992. Gordon Taylor, in his 1970 book “The Doomsday Book,” said Americans were using 50 percent of the world’s resources and “by 2000 they [Americans] will, if permitted, be using all of them.” In 1975, the Environmental Fund took out full-page ads warning, “The World as we know it will likely be ruined by the year 2000.”

Harvard University biologist George Wald in 1970 warned, “… civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind.” That was the same year that Sen. Gaylord Nelson warned, in Look Magazine, that by 1995 “… somewhere between 75 and 85 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct.”

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
3:14 pm

“You mean as opposed to “I’m not going to do your research for you!”?”

Exactly! I mean, if I can type here on the blog, THAT means, MY google is NOT BROKE!!

Just Another Anonymous One

August 29th, 2011
3:14 pm

That GLL sure posted all my favorite sources for the latest in climate science.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
3:15 pm

“anybody know where I can get a good deal on tires this weekend?”

Damn Midori! I was just behind a dude with about 500 new ones on the bed of his pick up truck. It was defying logic and gravity as to how those things were staying on his truck — if I’d know, I’d have run him off the road and grabbed you some!!

Adam

August 29th, 2011
3:16 pm

Bruno: in the process they came up with a theory which should stand on its own merit. To not discuss on its own merits reveals an incredible bias on your part, IMO.

Intelligent Design has already been discredited as anything scientific. Supposing a creator – excuse me a “designer,” – means that you are introducing an unprovable and untestable element into the process, and that MAKES it non-scientific. It isn’t a scientific theory. It does nto belong in a science classroom.

And as I have said before, you’re more than welcome to include that in a class of comparative religion alongside all the other creation myths known to man, if you like.

AmVet

August 29th, 2011
3:16 pm

B, you misattributed my quote to Adam.

I doubled-down on it with my 3:12.

The strategy of deliberately disguising the religious intent of intelligent design has been described by William Dembski in The Design Inference. In this work Dembski lists a god or an “alien life force” as two possible options for the identity of the designer; however, in his book Intelligent Design: The Bridge Between Science and Theology, Dembski states that “Christ is indispensable to any scientific theory, even if its practitioners don’t have a clue about him. The pragmatics of a scientific theory can, to be sure, be pursued without recourse to Christ. But the conceptual soundness of the theory can in the end only be located in Christ.” Dembski also stated, “ID is part of God’s general revelation [...] Not only does intelligent design rid us of this ideology (materialism), which suffocates the human spirit, but, in my personal experience, I’ve found that it opens the path for people to come to Christ”. Both Johnson and Dembski cite the Bible’s Gospel of John as the foundation of intelligent design.

Barbara Forrest contends such statements reveal that leading proponents see intelligent design as essentially religious in nature, not merely a scientific concept that has implications with which their personal religious beliefs happen to coincide. She writes that the leading proponents of intelligent design are closely allied with the ultra-conservative Christian Reconstructionism movement. She lists connections of (current and former) Discovery Institute Fellows Phillip Johnson, Charles Thaxton, Michael Behe, Richard Weikart, Jonathan Wells and Francis Beckwith to leading Christian Reconstructionist organizations, and the extent of the funding provided the Institute by Howard Ahmanson Jr., a leading figure in the Reconstructionist movement.

Perhaps you can direct me to the scientific postulates, hypotheses and theorems that this is all based on?

(Hell, I might even adequately understand some of them!)

Granny Godzilla

August 29th, 2011
3:16 pm

Bosch

I love me some Shelby….

Keep Up the Good Fight!

August 29th, 2011
3:16 pm

Great GLL…thanks for citing evidence from the 1970 and more. Of course, thankfully we enacted the Clear Air Act some 40 years ago and modified the dates for those events and predictions. Now if you want to use them as “evidence” you should really state all of the assumptions and caveats in those claims and then demonstrate that there have been no interveniening events.

We’ll be here where you return with your support.

Kamchak

August 29th, 2011
3:17 pm

Midori

I always go to Kauffman Tires.

I trust their service, and if I have to pay more for the tires — so be it.

Zap Rowsdower

August 29th, 2011
3:17 pm

“Which, apparently, is just too much change for people who fear change.”

No one fears Owl Gore.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
3:18 pm

“That was to ensure a proper burial and subsequent good treatment of his survivors by the church. Much like today, if you are not a member in good standing with the appropriate church, life can be hell.”

That is SOOOO true! I’ve known three folks in the past couple years to die and be cremated and there really is no where “legal” to dispose of their ashes.

Paul

August 29th, 2011
3:18 pm

Bruno

“Possibly just my opinion, Paul, but I don’t think that the scientific method should stand in isolation as you are proposing,”

Seems reasonable that for a subject to be taught in science class, it should meet the requirements of science. Want to examine the idea outside science? As I said, that could be considered.

Zap Rowsdower

August 29th, 2011
3:18 pm

“And even the creationists themselves say there’s nothing to that tale.”

Sarcasm went right over your head.

Good little liberal

August 29th, 2011
3:19 pm

LISTEN TO THE BIBLE POUNDER TURNED ENVIRONMENTAL SAGE!!!

TO GORE BE THE GLORY!!!!

Sea Levels: Mr. Gore predicted in An Inconvenient Truth that sea levels would rise by 20 feet by 2100. Well, if that is going to happen, the sea level better get on with it. The sea level rise over the last 18 years is 1.8 inches. In the 20th century the total increase in sea level was 8 inches. Over the past 10,000 years, the average increase in sea level per century has been 4 feet as glaciers from the last ice age have melted.

Ice Free Arctic Ocean: In 2009 Mr. Gore claimed that there was a 75% chance that the Arctic Ocean would be ice free by 2014. He cited climatologist Dr. Wieslav Maslowski as his source. Dr. Maslowski promptly rejected this, stating he had no idea how Gore had arrived at his prediction.

Bye Bye Polar Bears: Mr. Gore claimed in An Inconvenient Truth that polar bears would become endangered due to melting glaciers and ice bergs in the Arctic. Even the Obama administration was recently forced to admit that polar bears aren’t endangered. Reports on the ground in Alaska and Canada indicate an increase in polar bear populations.

Melting glaciers-Gore claimed in An Inconvenient Truth that glaciers were melting as a result of global warming. Unfortunately for Mr. Gore, many studies indicate that many glaciers are growing not shrinking, The UN last year had to admit that the prediction of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in 2007 that the Himalayan glaciers would melt by 2035 due to global warming was not based on scientific research as claimed, but based upon speculation contained in a non-peer reviewed magazine article from 1999.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
3:19 pm

Mrs. G.,

Yes, he is neat. I got to meet him once briefly, and he is all that.

Bruno

August 29th, 2011
3:21 pm

The scientific method is a sound method, designed to observe, test, predict. It does that. To attempt to explain it away as some sort of faith or something is really, really lame.

Last attempt at getting some original thought out of you, Adam. The scientific method is, at its essence, a creative process. The source of our hypotheses about the world can’t come from any type of deductive reasoning, but instead relies on inductive reasoning. Do you understand the difference between the two?? To deny the existence of, or prohibit discussion of the inductive part of the Scientific Method reveals a deep lack of understanding on your part. Can you possibly see past the false dichotomy of Science/Faith for a moment and ponder the fact that the Scientific Method is simply one more human-created tool to understand our world, one of many other tools??

Good little liberal

August 29th, 2011
3:21 pm

Keep Up

I just want to thank you and your giant brain for figuring out that it was the Republicans that caused the earth Quake on the 23rd of August this year.

From all of the people on earth: Thanks.

Just Another Anonymous One

August 29th, 2011
3:22 pm

Melting glaciers-Gore claimed in An Inconvenient Truth that glaciers were melting as a result of global warming.

You mean higher temperatures can actually melt ice! Do you have any proof of that!

Paul

August 29th, 2011
3:22 pm

Bosch

“we do some fun things and piss off alot of people because we sponsor things that make people ponder, and sometimes they don’t like to ponder, but we enjoy that. ”

Sounds like my kind of committee!

Bishop Sprong sounds like a neat kind of guy. As to his comment, I’m regularly amazed at the number of people with control issues who get all bent out of shape by other people doing stuff that doesn’t affect them in the least. Like people who see a car coming fast so they change lanes to block it. Same with people who say “I believe such and such.” That’s nice. Why get bent out of shape over it?

Unless they wanna institute Sharia Law in the Supreme Court, that is…..

Hi Midori!!!

Dusty may have a used set -

Zap Rowsdower

August 29th, 2011
3:23 pm

How many global scammer believers on this blog have a degree in any of the science fields? Reading all of these “facts” makes me curious as to how many people have a scientific background.

Joe Mama

August 29th, 2011
3:23 pm

Zap — “Sarcasm went right over your head.”

Shrug. There’s nothing so perfect about you and your posts that you can’t be misunderstood or misinterpreted.

Am I supposed to call you “tough guy” or something now?

Adam

August 29th, 2011
3:23 pm

GLL: You’re no longer participating in the argument, you’re just spouting the straw man argument that people who understand science and evolution are trying to stop you from speaking.

Speak all you want. Be wrong all you want. But you don’t get to insert religious ideas into a classroom because you have a belief that contradicts it. If you aren’t trying to do that, Great! You can continue to hold on to the idea that evolution is false if you like. As for climate change, yes, continue to believe as you like. I would appreciate it if you didn’t use it as another excuse to rape the earth. Thanks.

Zap Rowsdower

August 29th, 2011
3:24 pm

“Perhaps you can direct me to the scientific postulates, hypotheses and theorems that this is all based on?”

Perhaps Vet will enlighten all of us as to what kind of scientist he is. Nah, he’ll just keep bobbing and weaving, duck and diving, all while throwing out childish insults.

Just Another Anonymous One

August 29th, 2011
3:24 pm

I just want to thank you and your giant brain for figuring out that it was the Republicans that caused the earth Quake on the 23rd of August this year.

I have not seen any fracking evidence from drillers to confirm that humans had no contribution and given that the epicenter was smack dab in the middle of that Republican stronghold of Virginia… need I say more.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
3:25 pm

Hey Paul! I just had an idea! As part of our Community Interfaith programming, and since I’M a Jedi now, and well, you obviously are one, do you think you could visit and we could do a light saber demo? The kids would love it. Hell, the adults would too! I’d probably have to get a fireman to standby — but he’d probably do it for free just to see the awesomeness of the demo.

And afterwards we could do a Power Point on “The Force and It’s Many Wonders”

Whadda ya think?

Adam

August 29th, 2011
3:25 pm

Bruno: I agree with all that. But that doesn’t mean you can explain away the tool. In fact it gives a very good reasoned argument for why it should remain as a very important tool.

Joe the Plutocrat

August 29th, 2011
3:25 pm

you folks still batting the Intelligent Design vs. Evolution shuttlecock (that was cool; I said c*ck) to and fro’? here’s the bottom line; the very concept of intelligence is human or the product of the homosapien brain. this is like gay people and homophobes fighting over who gets to have the word “mariage”. here’s my take; creationism (lower case c) should be studied and investigated, but there is not need to recognize it as “science” or as a manifestation of some Creator (upper case C).

stands for decibels

August 29th, 2011
3:26 pm

Is there anyone posting here who actually believes that the scientific community had coalesced around the concept of a cooling planet, with anything even approaching the unanimity or the length of time that climatologists have come to accept global warming, and man’s contribution to same?

Anyone?

Ok, since I know the answer to this, I gotta ask–GLL, who do you think you’re impressing with that crap you’re regurgitating @ 3.14?

I’m not saying you’ll go blind from all that mental masturbation or anything, but it can’t be especially good for you.

Good little liberal

August 29th, 2011
3:26 pm

Just Another Anonymous One

Stop trying so hard. I think it is important to take a look at the “proven science” of the past to put a little perspective on the nonsense we are being handed today.

It’a all about the money. Be a scientist working on projects that disprove the man-made climate change theory and see how many grants you get.

Keep Up the Good Fight!

August 29th, 2011
3:26 pm

Yes, GLL, I do expect that you suffer the ability to determine sarcasm. Your candidate Bachmann claims to have told a joke too. I expect that you believe her. Of course, you deflect from the gist of my post with your silly false claims. But that just shows the weakness of your position.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
3:26 pm

“with control issues who get all bent out of shape by other people doing stuff that doesn’t affect them in the least”

Good point Paul — never really thought of it that way, but that’s going in my brain for later use……now.

Just Another Anonymous One

August 29th, 2011
3:26 pm

Arrrrgh! The scientific method was a creation!!!!!!

Adam

August 29th, 2011
3:27 pm

Zap: How many global scammer believers on this blog have a degree in any of the science fields?

Uh… I do (raises hand). Not that that necessarily means anything, as you attempt to imply.

Zap Rowsdower

August 29th, 2011
3:27 pm

“Am I supposed to call you “tough guy” or something now?”

No, just call me Zap.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
3:27 pm

Paul,

Like the gays getting married and all? Yeah, and that affects your marriage how exactly??????

Zap Rowsdower

August 29th, 2011
3:27 pm

“Uh… I do (raises hand).”

Cool, what do you do?

Good little liberal

August 29th, 2011
3:28 pm

Just Another Anonymous One

The Giant brained Keep Up said that mother nature was trying to get the Republican’s attention for trying to cut the budget of the USGS, by shaking us a little.

People from his planet know these kinds of things.

AmVet

August 29th, 2011
3:28 pm

Slightly dated (2002) but even then the basic premis was extremely dubious:

ID parallels but is not identical to creation science, the view that there is scientific evidence to support the Genesis account of the creation of the earth and of life.

ID and creation science share the belief that the mainstream scientific discipline of evolution is largely incorrect. Both involve an intervening deity, but ID is more vague about what happened and when.

Indeed, ID proponents are tactically silent on an alternative to common descent. Teachers exhorted to teach ID, then, are left with little to teach other than “evolution didn’t happen.”

A search of scientific databases, such as PubMed or SciSearch, reveals that scholars have not applied the concept of irreducible complexity or the design inference in researching scientific problems.

ID has been called an “argument from ignorance,” as it relies upon a lack of knowledge for its conclusion: Lacking a natural explanation, we assume intelligent cause.

Most scientists would reply that unexplained is not unexplainable, and that “we don’t know yet” is a more appropriate response than invoking a cause outside of science.

http://ncse.com/creationism/general/intelligent-design-not-accepted-by-most-scientists

md

August 29th, 2011
3:29 pm

“This is what I mean by you not getting the science part. Science tests for this by using PAST evidence and PRESENT evidence and testing for results based on all that.

Really? I mean, REALLY? This cannot POSSIBLY be that hard to understand!”

Yes, Adam, you do seem to be having a hard time grasping that science is only what we think we know…………………..once upon a time, science said the earth was flat………..you can try to get it from there…………

Dusty

August 29th, 2011
3:29 pm

ADAM @ 3:10 What? I said that? Where? We must have some ghost writers here unless I am overcome with gas fumes aquired via auto repair.

Scientists, as researchers,make things simple. They observe what they see. Repeat how they got results. Observe again. Do this hundreds of times. Then study the results and see if some one else can get the same results or disprove it.

That’s to find the first miniminute fact of discovery. It goes slowly. We are blessed with the results of what some spent their entire lives discoverering just to make one step forward. If you want to knock what they do, go spend your own life for one step forward.

Just Another Anonymous One

August 29th, 2011
3:29 pm

Be a scientist working on projects that disprove the man-made climate change theory and see how many grants you get.

Let me know if you need some contacts at Exxon, the Heritage Foundation, Massey Energy… there are plenty of people willing to pay but no matter how much they pay, they cannot magically change that which is observed. It is what it is.

JohnnyReb

August 29th, 2011
3:30 pm

You guys are boring. Here’s the red neck, hick, chauvinist, conservative, bigotted, terrorist saying for the day.

Julie Banderas is not an illegal immigrant. And, if those that are looked like her, there wouldn’t be a problem!

Adam

August 29th, 2011
3:30 pm

Zap: Cool, what do you do?

Wow who saw that one coming? I work for big oil, if you must know.

jm

August 29th, 2011
3:30 pm

“anybody know where I can get a good deal on tires this weekend?”

The governments giving them away. Just ask Obama, he has the answer.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
3:31 pm

stands @ 3:26

Just damn. I’m out of screen AND monitor cleaner. I gotta go make me a new batch now.

Thulsa Doom

August 29th, 2011
3:31 pm

Bosch,

For the man that thinks that a dollar spent by the govt is as efficient as a dollar spent by the private sector. I won’t get into macroeconomic examples to illustrate why states where the govt controls every dollar such as the Soviet Union or North Korea are abysmal failures relative to economies where the private sector spends most of the dollars such as Hong Kong or Singapore. Suffice it to say that the evidence is so self-evident that even you can understand the obvious.

Instead I’ll just leave you with a nice, easy to read essay on why a dollar spent in the private sector is far more efficient than a dollar spent by the govt. Its an easy read and hopefully you’ll learn something instead of clinging to stubbornness.

http://www.bobmcteer.com/essays/primer.html

Just Another Anonymous One

August 29th, 2011
3:31 pm

md wishes to live a past life. Perhaps as a 3-D person in a 2-D world or vice versa.

Joe Mama

August 29th, 2011
3:32 pm

Bruno — “The source of our hypotheses about the world can’t come from any type of deductive reasoning, but instead relies on inductive reasoning. Do you understand the difference between the two??”

I do.

While hypotheses may come from inductive reasoning, my understanding is that deductive reasoning has to pick up where inductive reasoning ends. I’m sure you’re familiar with Hume’s notion of skeptical inquiry.

“To deny the existence of, or prohibit discussion of the inductive part of the Scientific Method reveals a deep lack of understanding on your part.”

Inductive reasoning’s great for coming up with ideas and concepts that bear testing, examination and discussion. But IMO you seem to be minimizing the value of *those* parts of the Scientific Method in order to inflate the value of another.

“Can you possibly see past the false dichotomy of Science/Faith for a moment and ponder the fact that the Scientific Method is simply one more human-created tool to understand our world, one of many other tools??”

I wouldn’t say that induction is a tool *to understand* our world; I’d term it a single tool among many, and one that realizes its greatest utility when used in concert with other tools.

jm

August 29th, 2011
3:32 pm

Zap is getalife when he wakes up the wrong side of the bed

Adam

August 29th, 2011
3:32 pm

md: you do seem to be having a hard time grasping that science is only what we think we know

Right…. here’s the problem. You seem to think science is something that can be reasoned out of existence just by saying that somewhere along the line you have to rely on something that isn’t proven to your own personal satisfaction. Too bad that’s not how science actually works.

Paul

August 29th, 2011
3:32 pm

Bosch

I think that’s a great idea! Haven’t seen one of those since a Florida State halftime show.

Think of all the acolytes we’ll pick up. And their soccer moms…..

The Same Old Cliches

August 29th, 2011
3:33 pm

“I’m out of screen AND monitor cleaner.”

Bruno

August 29th, 2011
3:34 pm

Seems reasonable that for a subject to be taught in science class, it should meet the requirements of science. Want to examine the idea outside science? As I said, that could be considered.

Paul, Amvet, Adam and any others who think that the Scientific Method itself shouldn’t be examined in Science class: Are you guys for real?? To pretend that the SM stands on its own, and isn’t a branch of philosophy, is truly astounding to me. Please give me some valid reasons as to why the underpinnings of Science, i.e. the SM, should not only be discussed, but actively criticized. To not do so smacks of an intellectual totalitarianism which is worse than any religiously imposed dogma.

Also–Please point to me even one prediction that Darwinian Evolution has made that has come true that can’t be explained in some other way?? It all comes down to randomness vs. purposefulness. You can argue all day for a purposeless, random Universe, but I see no evidence of that, let alone proof.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
3:35 pm

Doom,

“I won’t get into macroeconomic examples to illustrate why states where the govt controls every dollar such as the Soviet Union or North Korea are abysmal failures relative to economies where the private sector spends most of the dollars such as Hong Kong or Singapore.”

You can get into that all you want, go for it, but it will still be your opinion.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
3:35 pm

“Perhaps as a 3-D person in a 2-D world or vice versa”

I think that would be painful, how ’bout you?

Kamchak

August 29th, 2011
3:36 pm

Julie Banderas is not an illegal immigrant.

Why would someone born in Hartford Connecticut be considered illegal?

Good little liberal

August 29th, 2011
3:36 pm

Just Another Anonymous One

Oh sure. Try publishing environmental studies paid for by Exxon, The Heritage Foundation, Massey Energy.

What is observed is easily altered. Take the global temperature reading stations. We used to look at all of them. Now we only look at the ones from the warmer areas of the globe. And shazaam!!! We have an average warmer global temperature.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
3:36 pm

Okay Paul, so is your light saber, blue, red, or green? I’m going to start color coordinating the stage set.

Zap Rowsdower

August 29th, 2011
3:36 pm

“Zap is getalife when he wakes up the wrong side of the bed”

Minus the drugs and welfare.

Midori

August 29th, 2011
3:37 pm

BOSCH @3:15 – don’t make me spank you!!

I’m serious

stands for decibels

August 29th, 2011
3:38 pm

Zap is getalife when he wakes up the wrong side of the bed

I thought he was a reluctant rescuer of a wan, sensitive tweener Canadian boy who winds up saving humanity from domination by a hooded race of proto natives who lived in the Great White North “long before the Indians.”

(I think wisecracking puppets were involved somehow, as well. but it’s been awhile since I knew the man.)

Keep Up the Good Fight!

August 29th, 2011
3:38 pm

Is the line for spanking stage left or stage right?

md

August 29th, 2011
3:39 pm

“md wishes to live a past life. Perhaps as a 3-D person in a 2-D world or vice versa.”

Now that would be cool……….where do I sign up?

Good little liberal

August 29th, 2011
3:39 pm

Zap Rowsdower

LOL!!

And don’t forget the dog. You will need a friend.

And I’m OUT!!!

Adam

August 29th, 2011
3:39 pm

Dusty: If you want to knock what they do, go spend your own life for one step forward.

Where in ANY of my posts can you come to the conclusion that I want to knock what they do?

Bruno: Paul, Amvet, Adam and any others who think that the Scientific Method itself shouldn’t be examined in Science class

Again with misunderstanding. Examining the scientific method is NECESSARY in science class. If you want to criticize the scientific method, go to a professor of science, any science, and start that conversation. You’ll find that it is sound.

Please point to me even one prediction that Darwinian Evolution has made that has come true that can’t be explained in some other way??

I can’t, because you can always explain the origin of something with POOF *sparkle sparkle*. Apparently.

You can argue all day for a purposeless, random Universe, but I see no evidence of that, let alone proof.

That argument isn’t science either. And it is not something that Evolution even talks about. That’s just something you hear from people trying to argue their end of the religious spectrum, and has no place in science.

Just Another Anonymous One

August 29th, 2011
3:39 pm

I have no objections to anyone criticizing the scientific method. Of course if you are attempting to disrupt class by nagging the professor with repetitions of “I Object”, you could find yourself writing quite the lengthy and Priceless essay or worse. Fortunately, the rule of law in the classroom is whatever the professor says.

jm

August 29th, 2011
3:40 pm

Bruno 3:24 – I agree with you, but only to the extent that the scientific method needs to be qualified with the following 2 tips (at a more advanced level)

1. In the realm of basic research, it is very difficult to know 100% of what is going on (also partially covered in the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle)
2. Bias, no matter how rigorously it is supposedly removed, is prevalent everywhere, especially in the social sciences, but also in the “higher level” sciences (biology / chemistry), because as complexity increases, causality is more difficult to determine.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
3:40 pm

Midori,

md,

NO! DON’T, I’m serious, I think it would hurt.

Schrodingers cat

August 29th, 2011
3:41 pm

And what are these so called “facts” of evolution Adam?

Zap Rowsdower

August 29th, 2011
3:41 pm

Adam

How many oil companies exist in the Atlanta area?

AmVet

August 29th, 2011
3:42 pm

Please point to me even one prediction that Darwinian Evolution has made that has come true that can’t be explained in some other way??

The question seems not that can it be explained in some other way but HAS it been explained in some other way.

And most significantly, in some other way that convinces the greatest minds of our species that it is a superior explanation over Darwin’s?

The answer 15 decades on, is still no; it has not yet happened.

And until it does, might as well explain it via Elvis and the Aliens doing the cosmological and horizontal bop!

OK, off to the gym for another kind of pain!

Later, taters…

Dusty

August 29th, 2011
3:42 pm

Hey, is MIDORI trying to get ahead of me at the tire dealers? I got there first!! All bargains are MINE! She can have Kaufmans. ( See their commercial where the old lady throws the tires through their window to return them?)

With blowouts in mind, this blog is getting a bit overblown. Will the blowhards please retire??

Just Another Anonymous One

August 29th, 2011
3:42 pm

Now that would be cool……….where do I sign up?

Try this one for starters.

By Definition

August 29th, 2011
3:43 pm

Demo: to destroy
Crat: to participate in

Living up to their name!

Adam

August 29th, 2011
3:44 pm

Zap: I don’t live in Atlanta

jm

August 29th, 2011
3:44 pm

“How many oil companies exist in the Atlanta area?”

Does this include Asian massage parlors on Buford Highway? If so, someone’s going to need a spreadsheet.

Paul

August 29th, 2011
3:44 pm

Bruno

“Paul, Amvet, Adam and any others who think that the Scientific Method itself shouldn’t be examined in Science class: Are you guys for real??”

I don’t? It is. Least it was when I took science classes. The introductory ones. Had sections on “what is the scientific method” and “why we use the scientific method” and even an analysis of the method. Had test questions on it, too.

But, just for argument sake (which never happens here), just because the scientific method isn’t examined to your satisfaction in science classes does not mean ideas that don’t avail themselves of the scientific method should be taught in science class.

Dusty

August 29th, 2011
3:44 pm

Adam

You put my name on something I did not write. That aint right!!

Joe Mama

August 29th, 2011
3:45 pm

Bruno — “Please point to me even one prediction that Darwinian Evolution has made that has come true that can’t be explained in some other way??”

I fail to see how the existence of other sufficient explanations invalidates the sufficient explanation that is currently the best fit with the extant data.

“It all comes down to randomness vs. purposefulness. You can argue all day for a purposeless, random Universe, but I see no evidence of that, let alone proof.”

Okay. How would one construct a replicable scientific test to demonstrate purposefulness, then? Or randomness?

Bruno

August 29th, 2011
3:45 pm

Most scientists would reply that unexplained is not unexplainable, and that “we don’t know yet” is a more appropriate response than invoking a cause outside of science.

Unfortunately, “We don’t know yet” seems to have been shoved into the background by folks who claim that they DO know, with the Big Bangers, Evolutionists, and Global Warmist leading the parade. And, at the same time, they’ve done such a great PR job claiming that anyone who questions science must be a religious nut that people like Adam and AmVet have lost the ability to analyze the credibility of scientific hypotheses on their own merit. It’s all one big ad hominem investigation now, with the “recognized experts” being divided from the “quacks”. Sad.

md

August 29th, 2011
3:45 pm

“You seem to think science is something that can be reasoned out of existence just by saying that somewhere along the line you have to rely on something that isn’t proven to your own personal satisfaction. Too bad that’s not how science actually works.”

I think the problem arises when only one of us seems to realize that science is science…….until it changes.

You yourself acknowledge that evolution is what we currently know about the growth of species……yet, you also acknowledge you know nothing about it’s starting point……which is actually the basis for the whole process……………..so if you don’t know the basis, how do you know what you think you are understanding?

As I’ve said……the earth used to be flat…….until it was round.

Aids could only be contracted through sexual intercourse………until that was no longer true……..

Change is what defines science…….or the lack of.

Joe the Plutocrat

August 29th, 2011
3:46 pm

Bruno, I’m not certain Darwin was in the “prediction” business, but I think his Origin of Species did suggest that as time goes on, species that adapt to environments continue (and sometimes evolve into new species) and this has been proved by the fact that hundreds of thousands of species have vanished from the planet, while new species are constantly being discovered. now, it is true that the “new species” were sometimes just really good at hiding, but others have genetic links to common ancestors. in fact, I heard an interesting bit on secular NPR a couple months back about carp or some such fish in the Hudson River and other waterways in the NE, which have dna, that has been “modified” or altered by exposure to PCBs and other (new) toxins in the environment. now, I doubt you or eye will be around to see when/if a new species of fish develops, as the carp species fades, but consider that when these fish ingest the toxins, they remain; so even as the fish survive, the homospaiens that eat them often die (years later), which means WE need to adapt as well (stop eating fish from polluted rivers)

Adam

August 29th, 2011
3:46 pm

Dusty: You put my name on something I did not write. That aint right!!

I did it again? Sorry

jm

August 29th, 2011
3:46 pm

That corporate cash chart is not the result of randomness. Looks like intelligent design to me…..

jm

August 29th, 2011
3:46 pm

Adam 3:46 – you make that mistake repeatedly and have done it at least twice with me.

Paul

August 29th, 2011
3:46 pm

Bosch

The color’s according to the mood of the opponent. When I’m practicing it’s pure white.

Of course.

Joe Mama

August 29th, 2011
3:47 pm

jm — “1. In the realm of basic research, it is very difficult to know 100% of what is going on (also partially covered in the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle)”

That’s not what Heisenberg’s UP addresses. Perhaps Mr. Cat will make an appearance so we can discuss it.

That Black guy

August 29th, 2011
3:48 pm

Warren Buffett, hypocrite
Last Updated: 11:51 PM, August 28, 2011

Posted: August 29, 2011

This one’s truly, uh … rich: Billionaire Warren Buffett says folks like him should have to pay more taxes — but it turns out his firm, Berkshire Hathaway, hasn’t paid what it’s already owed for years…

Obvious question: If Buffett really thinks he and his “mega-rich friends” should pay higher taxes, why doesn’t his firm fork over what it already owes under current rates?

Do as I say, not as I do maybe?

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
3:48 pm

“You put my name on something I did not write. That aint right!!”

What are you griping about Dusty, you do the same thing!

Joe the Plutocrat

August 29th, 2011
3:49 pm

md, have you ever read Thomas Paine’s Age of Reason? “science” doesn’t change; man’s understanding of science (knowledge) changes. astronomy has not changed since the magi followed the star (if you believe such lore). I mean, the universe is still the universe and the solar system is still the solar system. many used to believe the world was flat, and it is not. the world didn’t become a sphere, our understanding of the world is what changed, and we have science to thank for this.

Midori

August 29th, 2011
3:50 pm

Hi Paul

Thanks Kammy — the last time I bought tires I got them from Sams Club.

jm

August 29th, 2011
3:50 pm

Joe Mama 3:47 – I know perfectly well what it says, what its about, and how it came about. But thanks for playing anyway.

Joe Mama

August 29th, 2011
3:51 pm

Bruno — “And, at the same time, they’ve done such a great PR job claiming that anyone who questions science must be a religious nut”

I don’t think that’s what they’re saying.

I think they’re saying that anyone who uses a *non-scientific* system, outlook or basis to question scientific conclusions may possibly be a religious nut. Scientists question science all the time and they rarely get called nuts. The key is not in the questioning, but in the basis or *foundation* of the questioning.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
3:51 pm

“The color’s according to the mood of the opponent.”

Oh yeah, yeah, yeah, that was in Section Two of the Jedi Test, good thinking, I forgot.

“When I’m practicing it’s pure white.”

Damn Paul, that creates some problems in my color scheme. Although in it’s pure form, white is the combination of all colors….okay, I think I got it.

Thulsa Doom

August 29th, 2011
3:52 pm

Bosch,

Sorry Bosch but all the economic evidence in the world is on my side. Generally speaking a dollar spent by the private economy is more efficient then a dollar spent by govt. It is what it is and your refusal to acknowledge such a self evident truth is just stubborness on your part. End of discussion.

Just Another Anonymous One

August 29th, 2011
3:52 pm

The earth used to be flat, md. How old was your textbook.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
3:53 pm

“http://blogs.ajc.com/radio-tv-talk/2011/08/29/tmz-reports-atlantas-nancy-grace-joining-dancing-with-the-stars/?cxntlid=thbz_hm”

Atlanta’s Nancy Grace joining ‘Dancing With the Stars’

I just threw up — and not just a little in my mouth.

jm

August 29th, 2011
3:53 pm

Joe the Plutocrat – thou speaketh some truth at 3:49, or mostly anyway.

from one blogger to another, from deep inside a gravity well

Paul

August 29th, 2011
3:53 pm

Bosch

“Although in it’s pure form, white is the combination of all colors”

I’m a harmonizing kinda guy -

Bruno

August 29th, 2011
3:55 pm

Okay. How would one construct a replicable scientific test to demonstrate purposefulness, then? Or randomness?

I can’t offhand, which only supports my greater point that the Scientific Method is a limited form of investigation that can’t stand on its own. I see some reluctant endorsements of that assertion trickling in on the board, but an unwillingness to put Science into a larger context of Truth.

Gotta run, enjoyed the discussion.

Kamchak

August 29th, 2011
3:56 pm

“Harmonizing” is best done in groups.

jm

August 29th, 2011
3:57 pm

Doom 3:52 – well done. you just dropped that fact like the speed of light on him.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
3:58 pm

“Sorry Bosch but all the economic evidence in the world is on my side. ”

ALL the economic evidence. I hardly think that would encompass a concept that is relative to its core.

Oh, and BTW, your little essay was cute and all, a fascinating testimony to our favorite meth addicted, hard smoking Free Marketer (not that there’s anything wrong with that) but it didn’t prove your point (or even mention it) — in fact, it sort of actually disproved it’s own theory at the end because it mentioned that the whole primer did not include the involvement of government, so it’s not a valid source for proving your theory.

Also, it fails to take into account that the government itself is one of the biggest consumer of goods and services — therefore making it invalid.

“Generally speaking a dollar spent by the private economy is more efficient then a dollar spent by govt. It is what it is”

And again, I disagree. And again, that entire concept is completely subjective.

“End of discussion.”

Well, it certainly doesn’t have to be. I mean, what were you saying about North Korea and all that? Go for it.

jm

August 29th, 2011
3:59 pm

Well this will just do wonders for Social Security and Medicare……

http://online.wsj.com/video/could-we-really-live-to-150/03FD4A09-5DD2-4FFE-921E-169A47ECFA48.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_mpvidcar_3

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
4:00 pm

“Doom 3:52 – well done. you just dropped that fact like the speed of light on him.”

How so jm? All he did was say, “Uh UH!!! Your wrong.”

jm

August 29th, 2011
4:01 pm

“And again, I disagree. And again, that entire concept is completely subjective. ”

Bosch is a flat earther everyone. Fact.

jm

August 29th, 2011
4:02 pm

Bosch 4:00pm. Well Bosch, Econ 101 pretty much covers this. Sounds like you may need to also sign up for Physics 101 since you must not believe in the law of gravity either.

Kamchak

August 29th, 2011
4:03 pm

All that uncertainty has caused the major indices to drop 2.5 – 3% today.

What’s that you say?

The indices are up?

Never mind.

Joe Mama

August 29th, 2011
4:03 pm

Bruno — “I can’t offhand, which only supports my greater point that the Scientific Method is a limited form of investigation that can’t stand on its own.”

Could it not also mean that your assertion is flawed in some way?

“I see some reluctant endorsements of that assertion trickling in on the board, but an unwillingness to put Science into a larger context of Truth.”

I believe you are attempting to distinguish Truth from Fact, a situation that I find disquieting.

out of the blue

August 29th, 2011
4:04 pm

That Black Guy posts “This one’s truly, uh … rich: Billionaire Warren Buffett says folks like him should have to pay more taxes — but it turns out his firm, Berkshire Hathaway, hasn’t paid what it’s already owed for years…

Obvious question: If Buffett really thinks he and his “mega-rich friends” should pay higher taxes, why doesn’t his firm fork over what it already owes under current rates?

And who does he cite as the source “The New York Post” A tabloid owned by media mogul Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation.

Please “Mr That Black Guy” validate your source of information using something a lot more credible.

jm

August 29th, 2011
4:04 pm

I’m glad Democrats will be insisting that the working folks provide retirement and health care benefits for 85 years after retirement for these folks…..

http://online.wsj.com/video/could-we-really-live-to-150/03FD4A09-5DD2-4FFE-921E-169A47ECFA48.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_mpvidcar_3

Adam

August 29th, 2011
4:05 pm

jm: I am pretty sure that I got it right the one time I put “Jm” next to a quote and you mentioned it wasn’t you. Like I said then, it was probably a name-jacking!

Really though I’m not the only one who messed up on mis-attributed quotes today.

jm

August 29th, 2011
4:05 pm

Kamchack 4:03 – my personal theory is the shorts are too lazy to get to their trading terminals after inclement weather.

Kamchak

August 29th, 2011
4:06 pm

Well Bosch, Econ 101…

Seems to me that a lot of Econ 101ers worked for LTCM.

Might wanna hold off on playing the Econ 101 card.

Dusty

August 29th, 2011
4:06 pm

What is wrong with Bookman? Anyone can tell that the proper title for this blog is : THE INVASION OF THE PSEUDO SCIENTISTS.

They are here in droves, wrecking real science, throwing school books, and some even showing symptoms of cuteness.

I think RedCross has free shots for cuteness but pseudo is forever.

md

August 29th, 2011
4:08 pm

“md, have you ever read Thomas Paine’s Age of Reason? “science” doesn’t change; man’s understanding of science (knowledge) changes.”

And what exactly do you think I’ve been debating all this time?? Of course it is man’s understanding……or lack of it. But yes, “the science” does change……….

Do you know the basis (beginning) of evolution? Do you think the science has a good chance of changing once it is determined??

(and hopefully, we both know it can not be determined)

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
4:09 pm

Kamchak,

Apparently Econ 101 has changed in the past year or so. Who knew that in Econ 101 they now teach weird subjective relative concepts?

jm

August 29th, 2011
4:09 pm

Kamchak 4:06 – no those were the PHD economists. Who thought their science was as accurate and immutable as the laws of Physics. You know, those Krugman Keynesian guys fall into the same category….

I for one believe in the invisible hand, which is about as real as gravity. Beyond that things get more complicated and less reliable, but the PHDs sometimes forget that.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
4:10 pm

jm,

So your response is that I’m a flat earther? No, like economic theory or anything?

How lame is that?

getalife

August 29th, 2011
4:11 pm

Invisible hand in la la land…….

out of the blue

August 29th, 2011
4:12 pm

Dusty your 4:06…..I can’t believe you and I actually agree on something!

Fred

August 29th, 2011
4:12 pm

Adam: but I think you’re a bit behind on what exactly is left unanswered on both the subjects of evolution and climate change.

I think that you Adam on the other hand know so LITTLE about either subject, that you don’t even begin to know what questions to ask and as such are of the believe that human kind knows more than a small fraction. I’ve been following these “debates” since 1970. I’ve seen more “points” and “counterpoints” than you can even begin to imagine. I’ve had in depth conversations with PhD’s in meteorology, physics, astronomy, biology, and chemistry. Whether they take a “ID” position or an evolutionary, big bang, position, they will ALWAYS say in the end: This is what I believe, but we just don’t know enough yet. These are people who have dedicated their life to SCIENCE, not the POLITICS OF SCIENCE. The two are quite different. I’ve seen atheist Doctors have patience who recovered through the “power of prayer” from terminal diseases who say, “I can’t explain it. he/she should be dead.”

That was a particularly insipid claim young’in.

jm

August 29th, 2011
4:14 pm

Bosch 4:10 – as I pointed out, if you don’t want to take the law of gravity at face value, guess you better go take a physics course. And if you don’t believe private spending is more efficient than public spending, go take an Econ 101 course. I cannot draw diagrams and reference a couple of hundred years of economic theory on a blog. But this is the accepted starting point since you’re so eager.

http://www.amazon.com/Principles-Economics-N-Gregory-Mankiw/dp/0538453052/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1314648851&sr=1-1

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
4:14 pm

getalife,

jm better be careful with that “invisible hand” — I hear those can make you go blind.

Thulsa Doom

August 29th, 2011
4:15 pm

jm,

You just can’t reason with a man who thinks that a dollar spent by the govt is as efficiently spent as a dollar spent by the private sector. I don’t think Bosch understands the concept of rational outcomes in everyday economic decisions in the private sector vs govt sector economic decisions which do not captivate the principal of rational outcomes- nor of marginal utility for that matter.

Its like arguing with a flat earther. How do you convince someone who is so dug in and entrenched in their own foundation less dogma that reason and logic will not prevail? You can’t.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
4:16 pm

“And if you don’t believe private spending is more efficient than public spending, go take an Econ 101 course.”

Been there, done that.

Wouldn’t it just be easier for you to explain how private spending is more efficient?

@@

August 29th, 2011
4:16 pm

Consumer spending up, but recession still a threat

But everybody ends up in the wash that is Intelligent Design vs Evolution!!??!!

Time on their hands with no better way to spend it.

Kamchak

August 29th, 2011
4:16 pm

Bosch

josef had a pretty good definition of an Economist a couple of weeks ago that went along the lines of: An Economist is a person who will explain to you today why he was wrong in his predictions a year ago.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

…no those were the PHD economists. Who thought their science was as accurate and immutable as the laws of Physics.

Who do you think it was that taught the same Econ 101ers that have matriculated at all the Econ 101 diploma mills for a generation.

Geez….

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
4:18 pm

I don’t think Bosch understands the concept of rational outcomes in everyday economic decisions in the private sector vs govt sector economic decisions which do not captivate the principal of rational outcomes- nor of marginal utility for that matter.

So Doom, then why don’t you explain it to me?

Bruno

August 29th, 2011
4:18 pm

Forgot to acknowledge jm’s excellent post:

2. Bias, no matter how rigorously it is supposedly removed, is prevalent everywhere, especially in the social sciences, but also in the “higher level” sciences (biology / chemistry), because as complexity increases, causality is more difficult to determine.

Well said, jm, with the ultimate bias, the fact that we are human and can only understand reality in strictly human terms, being one that we can never remove from our investigations.

Could it not also mean that your assertion is flawed in some way?

Adaptive change is either purpose-driven, or it’s not. Darwinian Evolution postulates that random changes drive the system, I postulate that intelligent adaptation drives the system. Purely scientific investigation thus far has been unable to prove or disprove either postulate. To me, the problem isn’t in asking the question, it’s claiming that such kinds of questions are somehow invalid because Science can’t answer them.

I believe you are attempting to distinguish Truth from Fact, a situation that I find disquieting.

Not sure if we’re starting with the same definitions, but I value Truth far more than I do Facts. Look to this board day after day for “Facts”, isolated statements/incidences which shed little light on the bigger picture. “Truth” is the bigger picture, the sum total of all of the isolated “Facts”. The old six blindmen and the elephant.

jm

August 29th, 2011
4:18 pm

“Wouldn’t it just be easier for you to explain how private spending is more efficient?”

Sure. After you explain exactly how gravity works.

getalife

August 29th, 2011
4:18 pm

Bosch,

jm loves him some con ideology. Invisible hand is a fantasy.

They are credible on collapsing our economy with their invisible hand.

Paul

August 29th, 2011
4:19 pm

If any of you want to listen to something, you know, political…. Sen George McGovern wrote an open letter to Pres Obama and Diane Rehm had him on as a guest to talk about the political issues of the day.

Just go to the link and click on “Listen.”

http://thedianerehmshow.org/

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
4:20 pm

What Bosch does think is that Doom likes to say a bunch of fancy words and phrases, but has no freaking idea what they mean.

Thulsa Doom

August 29th, 2011
4:20 pm

your little essay was cute and all, a fascinating testimony to our favorite meth addicted, hard smoking Free Marketer-Ayn Rand card?

There’s your sign….

carlosgvv

August 29th, 2011
4:20 pm

1811/0311 – 12:10 – “the great bulk of American business people will hold back spending, hiring or expanding until Obama is gone”.

Actually, that is not true. The great bulk of American business will hold back hiring as long as they can keep piling more and more work on their existing employees, knowing they won’t dare quit. These employees will have to work a generous amount of unpaid extra hours just to keep up with their workloads If they refuse, they will be out on the street faster than you can spit. Companies have done this to me and others more than once over the years.

Schrodingers cat

August 29th, 2011
4:24 pm

Did someone mention Heisenberg?..
The uncertainty principle has more to do with particle physics than anything else. Heisenberg noted that you can’t measure a particles location and velocity (or future momentum) simultaneously…You can do one or the other but not both…since measuring it’s velocity will change it’s location and verse visa..
Although it could be said, that nothing is known with complete certainty

Fred

August 29th, 2011
4:25 pm

Doggone/GA

August 29th, 2011
2:39 pm

“And the opposite is also true…………….”

How was that supernatural creature created?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

When i die and stand before him I’m going to ASK him that damn question, (along with a butt load of others). If my faith proves to be unfounded, then not only will i not stand in front of him, it won’t matter because I’ll be DEAD. At that point, I’ll have ‘the answer” but not the means to know or communicate it with anyone.

Meanwhile, I don’t worry about it to much. Although to me it ties into md’s earlier comment about the impossibility of humans to really grasp “infinity.” When I think of the tenant that “God always was and always will be.” I also think but what was there BEFORE God? Who created him? The concepts are so similar.

Thulsa Doom

August 29th, 2011
4:25 pm

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
4:14 pm
getalife,

jm better be careful with that “invisible hand” — I hear those can make you go blind.- Bosch

So Bosch, You want me to continue trying to explain economics to someone who mocks Adam Smith and his groundbreaking work in understanding the principles of market economics- not to mention his book The wealth of nations which is still quoted and honored 230 years later? What point can I make to a man of such profound ignorance who mocks someone like Adam Smith? You probably mock Galileo and Isaac Newton too don’t ya?

As for terms like rational decisions and marginal utility I understand them quite well since I have a degree in economics including several masters level courses. But it doesn’t take a freaking degree to understand the concepts of free market economics. It really doesn’t. It only takes an open mind. And that quickly eliminates you.

jm

August 29th, 2011
4:25 pm

cat – bingo

getalife

August 29th, 2011
4:26 pm

This is a political blog geniuses.

The issue is jobs.

Focus.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
4:26 pm

“Sure. After you explain exactly how gravity works.”

Okay. Well, gravity is the force of objects with mass in relation to another.

Not sure what that has to do with economics, but oh well, you’re kind of weird.

Joe Mama

August 29th, 2011
4:27 pm

Bruno — “Purely scientific investigation thus far has been unable to prove or disprove either postulate. To me, the problem isn’t in asking the question, it’s claiming that such kinds of questions are somehow invalid because Science can’t answer them.”

I agree, but I’d go farther. There’s another problem I see, and that’s suggesting that the Scientific Method is somehow deficient and should somehow be bypassed, rejected or revised simply because it can’t prove or disprove these things.

I recognize that you’d like to see a methodology and schema that admits to the consideration and synthesis of both sides of the discussion, but it seems that there’s only a critique and nothing constructive to advance with. Perhaps this is something we could bat around on another day.

“Not sure if we’re starting with the same definitions, but I value Truth far more than I do Facts. Look to this board day after day for “Facts”, isolated statements/incidences which shed little light on the bigger picture. “Truth” is the bigger picture, the sum total of all of the isolated “Facts”. The old six blindmen and the elephant.

I’m the reverse; I value facts. I can’t arrive at truth without them.

When facts disagree with my opinion or worldview, I have to adjust to accommodate them or else address the problem of cognitive dissonance. Without facts . . . wait, what?

Without facts, I don’t see how truth can be arrived at at all.

Dusty

August 29th, 2011
4:28 pm

Maybe some people just don’t like working hard. But these are hard times.

jm

August 29th, 2011
4:29 pm

“you’re kind of weird.”

Yeah, me and Mitt Romney apparently.

Congratulations, you did a p-ss poor job of explaining gravity. Guess the moon could be twice as far away and traveling at the same rotational speed and nothing much different would happen. Right.

Thulsa Doom

August 29th, 2011
4:29 pm

Kamchak

August 29th, 2011
4:16 pm
Bosch

josef had a pretty good definition of an Economist a couple of weeks ago that went along the lines of: An Economist is a person who will explain to you today why he was wrong in his predictions a year ago.

There’s your sign……

The anti intellectual and anti science crowd at its best. And exemplified even better with people like getalife and Bosch mocking Adam Smith’s invisible hand concept. It just doesn’t get any funnier.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
4:30 pm

Doom,

Where did I mock Adam Smith? Or even the guy who wrote that essay?

Do not get all hysterical and project that hysteria onto me. K?

What I did write was that the essay was a great testament to Ayn Rand herself and was a good basic read, but that it did not, anywhere, validate your subjective opinion that private spending is more efficient than public spending.

As for terms like rational decisions and marginal utility I understand them quite well since I have a degree in economics including several masters level courses. But it doesn’t take a freaking degree to understand the concepts of free market economics. It really doesn’t. It only takes an open mind.

My mind is open, explain away Mr. Doom, the graduate of master level Economics Courses. I’m all agog!

jm

August 29th, 2011
4:30 pm

“Well, gravity is the force of objects with mass in relation to another.”

The invisible hand is what causes money spent by private individuals to be allocated and used more productively than money spent by the public sector.

Good, glad we cleared everything up.

Adam

August 29th, 2011
4:31 pm

Fred: If you know what has been answered and what hasn’t, then your blanket “I don’t know” for those two subjects is a staggering misattribution of how far both areas have come.

Now I’m not saying anything bad about you as a person. What I am saying is that there’s a lot less “I don’t know” than you are giving credit for. A LOT less.

Kamchak

August 29th, 2011
4:32 pm

cat – bingo

I thought Bingo was the name of the farmers dog.

Oh well….

Just Another Anonymous One

August 29th, 2011
4:32 pm

Did someone mention Heisenberg?..

I’m not sure.

Adam

August 29th, 2011
4:32 pm

Time to go home. See you all later

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
4:32 pm

Actually jm, I’ve put forth more effort in explaining gravity than you or Doom have into explaining how private spending is more efficient than public spending.

Keep Up the Good Fight!

August 29th, 2011
4:32 pm

As for terms like rational decisions and marginal utility I understand them quite well since I have a degree in economics including several masters level courses.

And of course this is by a poster who disputes the education claims of others but expects his to be believed and thus support his claim of “superior knowledge”….

getalife

August 29th, 2011
4:32 pm

doom,

You are not a intellectual.

You are a human con talking point parrot. .

adam smith was a kook.

Invisible hand.

Yeah, that is bs.

jm

August 29th, 2011
4:33 pm

JAA One – well done

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
4:33 pm

“The invisible hand is what causes money spent by private individuals to be allocated and used more productively than money spent by the public sector.”

How? How does the hand do that?

md

August 29th, 2011
4:33 pm

“Wouldn’t it just be easier for you to explain how private spending is more efficient?”

In 2 words……it’s cheaper…….or…….less costs……….

jm

August 29th, 2011
4:34 pm

Bosch 4:32 – didn’t elect to read my 4:30 I see

jm

August 29th, 2011
4:34 pm

“How? How does the hand do that?”

You first. How does gravity do that?

Just Another Anonymous One

August 29th, 2011
4:35 pm

I’m all agog!

Doesn’t that hurt!

@@

August 29th, 2011
4:35 pm

Paul:

Just go to the link and click on “Listen.”

I did. Got thru McGovern saying “I wish we were on television so everyone could see how magnificant you look.”

[snip]

“You look ten years younger than the last time I saw you.”

Then?

Our overwhelming debt is due to the military.

Almost didn’t make it to his comment on the military. His male condescension made me wanna hurl.

jm

August 29th, 2011
4:35 pm

“you first” (since you’re the one questioning one of the basic tenets of economics)

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
4:36 pm

“it’s cheaper…….or…….less costs”

How?

Kamchak

August 29th, 2011
4:36 pm

The “Invisible Hand”

Isn’t that the name of a ninja clan?

md

August 29th, 2011
4:36 pm

“and that’s suggesting that the Scientific Method is somehow deficient and should somehow be bypassed, rejected or revised simply because it can’t prove or disprove these things.”

I wouldn’t use the term “deficient”…….I’d use “limited”…….it’s limited to the input that we think we know………

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
4:37 pm

““you first” (since you’re the one questioning one of the basic tenets of economics)”

Yes I am, and btw, I really don’t give a f&ck about gravity. But I am interested in how this private vs. public more efficient spending thing works.

I’m listening. Go ahead.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
4:38 pm

“Doesn’t that hurt!”

No, JAAO, it’s like being all excited, but more tingly.

Just Another Anonymous One

August 29th, 2011
4:38 pm

md,

are you really here.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
4:39 pm

Kamchak,

I thought it was the Druids, but, as you say, “Oh well.”

getalife

August 29th, 2011
4:39 pm

In the real world, we have to recover 15 million jobs to get back to normal unemployment.

President Clinton added 23 million jobs so it is a achievable goal.

Now the gop refuse to put country first and work with our President to achieve this easy goal.

So what should our President do to add 15 million jobs know it alls?

jm

August 29th, 2011
4:39 pm

Bosch 4:37 – dude, as Doom says, this is about opening our minds a bit. And if we can’t explore something as simple as gravity further, then we won’t make much headway on economics either.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
4:40 pm

jm,

Well hell, we can talk about gravity more if you want, but I’d rather focus on this whole notion that private spending is more efficient than public spending thing if you don’t mind. My mind is open, explain away.

md

August 29th, 2011
4:41 pm

“How?”

With gov’t, the private sector must first “pay” for the bureaucracy that will spend the money vs just spending the money……goes back to that $100 we discussed the other day.

As an example, take that $100……..private sector generates it and spends it at face value…..to go through the gov’t, private sector generates the same $100, but also has to generate an additional $xxx to have it distributed……

jm

August 29th, 2011
4:41 pm

“So what should our President do to add 15 million jobs know it alls?”

Well, if he were dictator (which he isn’t), then repealing 1/2 the federal regulations register, revamping entitlements and the healthcare plan, and overhauling the tax code would work wonders

but that ain’t gonna happen. so probably better to move to Singapore. They have a labor shortage and pay a lot.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
4:42 pm

getalife and Kamchak,

Apparently from Doom’s earlier essay, this “Magic Hand” oh, excuse me, it’s “Invisible” hand somehow creates order out of chaos. Isn’t that that the shyt? I just wish they could explain this whole private v. public spending is more efficient thing to me.

Brosephus

August 29th, 2011
4:42 pm

invisible hands and gravity???

Does the invisible hand pull you down out of the sky, therefore creating the illusion of gravity keeping a person grounded?

The things that are discussed at Bookman’s.

Dusty

August 29th, 2011
4:42 pm

Would someone tell the gravity growlers that we have already cleared that one up?

The apple fell to the ground off the apple tree. Newton knew right away that it was gravity, not the usual squirrel biters.

I’m so glad for Sir Newton although they named those goodies “fig newtons” after him instead of “apple newtons”. There’s something unscientific about that.

Kamchak

August 29th, 2011
4:42 pm

Bosch

Earlier, I tried to post a video of Drogba getting knocked out this weekend but I guess the FA is all “it’s our property so you can’t post it.”

Maybe this one

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yabrlaKFX4E

Thulsa Doom

August 29th, 2011
4:42 pm

Bosch,

This is actually a pretty good example from wikipedia on the theory of rational choices made by the consumer. The bottom line as explained in that previous article is that individuals best left to their own devices with their own money make better decisions with that money than the govt can do for them. You musta missed that as well as the concept that when govt coercively takes money from a group of people it does not and cannot make the most rational decisions as to how best allocate resources as well as spending decisions. Also the marginal utitility derived from said decisions will vary among different groups. Govt cannot possibly spend other people’s money in the way each of those people want the money spent- its impossible. Its idea as to how a dollar is spent will differ from the rational decisions of how a consumer with his own dollar wants to most efficiently allocate that dollar or dollars. The concept carries over on a macro level and also in terms of business decisions regarding how best to allocate a dollar vs govt decisions regarding the same. This is all common sense and I’m just using some simple economics jargon but I dumbed it down enough for you to understand.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rational_choice_theory

jm

August 29th, 2011
4:42 pm

Bosch 4:40 – fine, I guess I’ll hack away at this for both of us. Let me waste 3 minutes and I’ll be back

Fred

August 29th, 2011
4:43 pm

Dusty@ 3;04: WHo are you and what have you done with the Dusty WE know? That was an awesome post and gave me a much needed chuckle.

Try Sam’s. Even Clark Howard likes them. Or (I’m serious), look online for some tires. Sam’s will STILL put them on reasonably, (another trick I learned fron good ole Clarky). Good luck though. I get my tires from my mechanic, Randies in Tucker. After much effort searching around a few years ago, I found he gave me the best deal. In fact, he pretty much gives me the best deal on everything.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
4:44 pm

“the private sector must first “pay” for the bureaucracy that will spend the money vs just spending the money……goes back to that $100 we discussed the other day”

Yeah, I remember that, but one thing you didn’t account for is “private” bureaucracy. You were basing your opinion that it didn’t exist. There are a whole lotta layers between the farm and the mouth — same in private and public.

Joe Mama

August 29th, 2011
4:44 pm

md — “I wouldn’t use the term “deficient”…….I’d use “limited”…….it’s limited to the input that we think we know………”

I’m all ears regarding the mechanisms and structures that we might rely on to determine Truth. But I expect I’ll apply a healthy dose of skepticism to them as well.

md

August 29th, 2011
4:45 pm

“md,

are you really here.”

No……shhhh……but don’t tell anybody………I only exist in the cyber world…….I live in your computer…….

Dusty

August 29th, 2011
4:45 pm

Brosephus,]

I’m kinda wishing the invisible hand would pull the plug on this one. The poor thing just will not die a natural death. Blogitis begorrah!!

Thulsa Doom

August 29th, 2011
4:46 pm

md,

Hell I didn’t even go into the fact that the govt acts as a middleman or bureaucracy in the allocation of resources, in this case dollars, decisions. I was just keeping it simple but that fact alone that a middleman is involved makes a dollar spent by the govt automatically less efficient. I was just looking at it from the aspect of rational decisions.

Just Another Anonymous One

August 29th, 2011
4:46 pm

Joe works for the government and Jim works for Goldman. Joe spends ten dollars on a big lunch and then works it off by digging a trench to pour concrete in for a sidewalk while Jim spends one hundred dollars on lunch and then goes back to his office and finishes transactions where he buys and sells oil for a quick profit of one million dollars for the day. Joe leaves work and fills up his vehicle with $4/gallon gas while listening to Bachmann on the radio promising to put Jim out of work so Joe can have $2/gallon gas. Who got the most bang for their buck.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
4:46 pm

” The bottom line as explained in that previous article is that individuals best left to their own devices with their own money make better decisions with that money than the govt can do for them.”

But “the government” is a consumer just like an individual, and a pretty big one at that when you are talking about demand, so how is it that an individual who makes less purchases spends the same amount of money more efficiently than the government who makes many, many purchases and is the main catalyst for demand in our economy?

Now, I’ll read the rest of your post.

md

August 29th, 2011
4:48 pm

“Yeah, I remember that, but one thing you didn’t account for is “private” bureaucracy. You were basing your opinion that it didn’t exist. There are a whole lotta layers between the farm and the mouth — same in private and public.”

Well Bosch……since the private sector has to generate all the funds, that private bureaucracy is a wash…..paid in both cases………….

Paul

August 29th, 2011
4:49 pm

@@

Condescension? He and Ms Rehm have been associated for years. She went thru some severe health problems. Was dicey for a while. While I’m not much for that kind of personal talk on an open forum, I can understand the sentiment on how well she looks now compared to a few years ago.

Military spending? If you take the levels over 40 years, back out the unnecessary stuff he spoke of, it’s quite a chunk of change.

You could always click on the progress meter and skip the first part. He has some interesting policy ideas. His view of the ‘enemies approach’ to politics is revealing, as is his view of Pres Nixon.

Just Another Anonymous One

August 29th, 2011
4:50 pm

Would someone tell the gravity growlers that we have already cleared that one up?

md swears up and down that one day the apple could fall up!

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
4:50 pm

Doom,

In regards to marginal utility, how can you say that the government spends it less efficiently in terms of demand? The government usually buys alot of one product or service, therefore making their dollar more efficient, when you buy in bulk, as the government does, marginal utility dictates that is more efficient.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
4:51 pm

md,

Can I answer your 4:48 or am I just talking to my computer?

Thulsa Doom

August 29th, 2011
4:51 pm

Yeah, I remember that, but one thing you didn’t account for is “private” bureaucracy- Bosch

By this one can only surmise that the public bureaucracy advocated by the old Soviets or the North Koreans was or is as efficient as the private bureaucracy in a capitalistic state. Hmmm. Interesting concept. Public Bureaucracy in North korea is for example as efficient as the public bureaucracy in say South Korea. Only in the imaginary world is this true. In the real world its a whole different story. Just ask the 2 Koreas.

Thulsa Doom

August 29th, 2011
4:52 pm

Public Bureaucracy in North korea is for example as efficient as the private bureaucracy in say South Korea. Should read this way.

Dusty

August 29th, 2011
4:52 pm

Thanks, Fred. Sounds like good tire info.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
4:54 pm

Why would you surmise that Doom? There is no private bureaucracy in NK, at least not to the degree we have here. It’s comparing apples and oranges.

jm

August 29th, 2011
4:55 pm

Bosch

On the law of gravity. Gravity is inversely proportional to the square of the distance between two objects and directly proportional to the product of the two masses times the gravitational constant. (good answer Bosch)

So where does the gravitational constant come from and what constitutes mass in an object?

Well the sort of easier one first, mass is the sum of the mass of electrons, protons, neutrons and any other quantum mechanical particles floating around. As far as the gravitational constant, why is it 6.67384(80) \times 10^{-11} \ \mbox{m}^3 \ \mbox{kg}^{-1} \ \mbox{s}^{-2} = 6.67384(80) \times 10^{-11} \ {\rm N}\, {\rm (m/kg)^2} . Well, we’re not exactly sure, and since we’re at the bottom of a gravity well, we even have a pretty hard time measuring it. Which is part of what Einstein’s theory of relativity helped address, but I digress. (good answer Bosch)

Well, ok. Why do protons electrons neutrons and quantum particles have their masses?

Well, now we’re down the rabbit hole. There are some answers to this, but frankly we don’t fully know. There are possibly alternate universes where the particles have different masses, gravity is different, or these particles don’t exist at all. We’re not even 100% sure what gravity is exactly, as much as we do understand it. It could be the byproduct of one of the other forces, or it could be something else we frankly just don’t completely understand. (wow, that was deep bosch)

For more info: http://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/11/science/what-is-gravity-really.html

Ok, Bosch, I’ll get to econ shortly. Sorry that took more than a few minutes.

md

August 29th, 2011
4:55 pm

“I’m all ears regarding the mechanisms and structures that we might rely on to determine Truth. But I expect I’ll apply a healthy dose of skepticism to them as well.”

yeh, me too…..especially the skeptical part………..

Science is a tool used to seek the truth……..it is not necessarily truth……..it is an equation in which we plug in what we think are known variables……………..but more often than not, always solving for x.

In the case of Big bang, evolution, etc, x can never be solved in an infinite universe…………

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
4:56 pm

jm,

I told you, I really don’t give a rat’s ass about gravity, and not sure why it you insist upon making it purview to our economics discussion, but hey, it’s your party….

jm

August 29th, 2011
4:57 pm

Bosch 4:46 – its not about consumption, its about investment

jm

August 29th, 2011
4:57 pm

Bosch 4:56 – because the invisible hand and gravity, such as they’re understood, have more than a little in common

Dusty

August 29th, 2011
4:58 pm

Just Another Anonymous One,

So “md swears that one day the apple could fall up.”

Do not worry, JAAO. md was standing on his head when he said that.

Brosephus

August 29th, 2011
4:58 pm

Well Bosch……since the private sector has to generate all the funds, that private bureaucracy is a wash…..paid in both cases………….

In essence, whether it’s the public sector bureaucracy or the private sector, the taxpayer or citizen ends up being the one getting soaked…

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
4:59 pm

jm,

What do you mean by “it?” And of course consumption plays into the equation, because demand is the main variable (if that’s the right word) of our economy.

Thulsa Doom

August 29th, 2011
4:59 pm

The government usually buys alot of one product or service, therefore making their dollar more efficient, when you buy in bulk, as the government does, marginal utility dictates that is more efficient.- Bosch

Yes of course Bosch. Which is why when the govt pays in bulk for thousands of hammers in military procurement it pays $600 a hammer for example in several cost overruns that we’ve read about.

In terms of raw purchasing power theoretically your point makes sense and in some cases I’m sure the govt does get a bulk rate on a particular item that I wouldn’t get if I were paying for the same item as Joe schmoe. But often in reality though it doesn’t quite work that way. And secondly while the govt would get a better deal buying thousands of something then I would as a joe blow those savings are quickly lost by the fact that I have to pay taxes for the bureaucracy that had to buy whatever widget you speak of.

md

August 29th, 2011
5:00 pm

“md swears up and down that one day the apple could fall up!”

I do? OK.

More like knowing the odds……….what are the odds that gravity will always make the apple fall down??

And 100% is not the answer……….which should give you some insight.

RGB

August 29th, 2011
5:01 pm

“Seattle Green Jobs Program Gets $20M, Creates 14 Jobs”

Who said Obama didn’t know how to create jobs?

Change you can believe in.

Soothsayer

August 29th, 2011
5:01 pm

Personal Saving Rate Plunges From 5.5% To 5.0% As July Energy Expenditures Soar

July personal income and expenditures were quite surprising in that while many were expecting the drop in the market to force consumer saving to upshift (lower spending than income), not only was this not true, but expenditures spiked by 1 whole percent from -0.2% to 0.8%, on expectations of 0.5%, even as Personal Income came in line with expectations of 0.3%, up from a revised 0.2% (concurrent with extensive prior data revisions). This was the biggest difference between a monthly change in income and spending since October 209. The net result was a plunge in the savings rate from 5.5% to 5.0%. And while on the surface this would be good news, as in Americans are spending again, a quick look at the PCE components indicates that virtually the entire surge is due to a spike in Energy goods and services. In other words, the entire spike in spending was to… pay for gas and associated energy expenses. Which makes sense: in June this was a drop of -4.5%, it is only logical that the subsequent jump in Brent and WTI forced American savings to drop. All in all: in July Americans continued to max out their credit cards to pay for gas.

Sorry to burst your bubble!

Brosephus

August 29th, 2011
5:01 pm

Bosch 4:46 – its not about consumption, its about investment

I’ve seen several different accounts that state consumption accounts for between 70% to 75% of our national GDP. Where does investment come in as a percentage of GDP? I’ve never seen anything that addresses that. I’m curious about that as we’re steadily headed towards being a financial based economy.

Kamchak

August 29th, 2011
5:01 pm

its not about consumption, its about investment

When an economist only has only a hammer as a tool, every problem looks like a nail.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
5:01 pm

“But often in reality though it doesn’t quite work that way”

And I would argue that we really don’t pay $600 for a hammer — or at least that is the exception and not the norm.

“I would as a joe blow those savings are quickly lost by the fact that I have to pay taxes for the bureaucracy that had to buy whatever widget you speak of”

You are talking now about paying, not spending. And again, you are discounting private bureaucracy as if it doesn’t exist.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
5:02 pm

Okay good Bro and Kamchak, that made absolutely no sense to me either.

Kamchak

August 29th, 2011
5:03 pm

Oops. Too many onlys

Thulsa Doom

August 29th, 2011
5:03 pm

In essence, whether it’s the public sector bureaucracy or the private sector, the taxpayer or citizen ends up being the one getting soaked…

Not really. Adhering to the theory of rational decisions private people and businesses make their own decisions based on what is best for them. You spend your dollar in a rational basis of what you best want for that dollar. And odds are you are going to get much greater marginal utility for an item that you want with your own dollar than what the govt wants to spend your dollar on.

Just Another Anonymous One

August 29th, 2011
5:03 pm

what are the odds that gravity will always make the apple fall down??

When another planetary body passes close enough to earth to overcome the earth’s gravitational force on the apple and make it go up, I won’t really give a crap about the odds. How about you.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
5:05 pm

“And odds are you are going to get much greater marginal utility for an item that you want with your own dollar than what the govt wants to spend your dollar on”

But there is no way to measure that, therefore no way to show one is more efficient. “The government” as a consumer does the same thing, and if you factor in marginal utility, it actually gets the better deal.

Thulsa Doom

August 29th, 2011
5:06 pm

Bosch,

And you are discounting rational decision making in regards to spending. People can spend their money much more efficiently and get far more marginal utility for their dollar than the govt can. Do you honestly think the govt can spend your dollar more efficiently on the things you want than you can whether we’re looking at it from the point of you as an individual or a business person’s perspective?

Dusty

August 29th, 2011
5:07 pm

Kamchak,

I thought you said every problem looked like a groundhog. Now you say it is a nail??

jm

August 29th, 2011
5:08 pm

And on to Bosch’s favorite topic.

The world is composed of individuals (particles) that are on average seeking to better their lot in life. The profit motive (invisible hand, gravity, whatever) of these individuals leads them to make decisions to try to further their lot in life. In order to make a profit, they must provide something to someone at a price less than the value to the purchaser, and at a price higher than their cost to manufacture. So the benefits of trade are also an integral part to the invisible hand.

In order to provide these goods at a profit, the provider must build them, find them, dig them up, pump them up from the ground, invent them and engineer them, making investments in order to do so. Those investments are sometimes in labor (time, entrepreneurship, invention) and sometimes in capital (purchasing a machine, a plant, materials, etc). When the producer makes these investments, he is helping provide something that has value to the world and was previously scarce (when there’s no scarcity, there’s no profit).

In contrast, the government has no profit motive. The government serves a variety of purposes, but none of these are related to profit. Common defense, the cumulative aggregation of political will and decisions in a democracy, the maintenance of property rights. Government does these things, but not out of a purpose to make a profit.

Therefore, the public sector, government, does not, on balance, provide things as efficiently that are scarce, than the private sector. Furthermore, there is no feedback mechanism (price doesn’t matter to government) in the public sector, whereas price makes the private sector more efficient.

Now, this is not to say the private sector free market is perfect. It makes mistakes. The difference is the private sector, through the mechanism of price and allocation of resources, tied to price, corrects failings more swiftly and more efficiently than the public sector can.

(good answer jm) Ok, my manifesto and time wasting are done. I’m sure Bosch is already asleep.

Keep Up the Good Fight!

August 29th, 2011
5:08 pm

doom cites a $600 hammer myth as “proof”?…..

Swami Dave

August 29th, 2011
5:09 pm

getalife

“So what should our President do to add 15 million jobs know-it-alls?”

For starters, we should open tapping of our nations domestic energy reserves (Gulf Coast, Alaska, & Midwest for oil and oil shale as well as our large available pockets of natural gas).

This would….

a) add additional revenues via the royalties

b) create jobs in the oil exploration, drilling, refining, and transport industries providing opportunities for those without work or underemployed and thereby increasing the tax base

c) have the added effect of putting a downward pressure on the worldwide price of oil & natural gas removing one of the major limiters of our current economy (the high prices of energy)

d) either (1) make us less dependent upon foreign oil or (2) ease our current trade deficits if the energy resources are sold as exports

So there, GAL, something that we should do right now that would be a POSITIVE impact on our economy and employment. Additional revenues, less unemployment, more taxpayers, better overall economic conditions…….so why won’t PrezBO work with Republicans to implement these proposals that have been recommended for the past couple of years which would actually DO something instead of continually trying to implement policies that are current and historic failures?

Go ahead and write him that letter.

-SD

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
5:09 pm

“People can spend their money much more efficiently and get far more marginal utility for their dollar than the govt can.”

But how do you measure that? How do you valiate that claim? What assessment tool do you use? It’s not proven until you do so, using your gut feeling as an assessment tool is not all that reliable (or valid).

Dusty

August 29th, 2011
5:09 pm

Where is Marginal Utility? If it “gets the better deal”, I’m checking out the tires.

Fred

August 29th, 2011
5:09 pm

“Now I’m not saying anything bad about you as a person. What I am saying is that there’s a lot less “I don’t know” than you are giving credit for. A LOT less.

Oh the arrogance of youth. “Lot” is a subjective word. Yeah there is a lot more answered today than there was 40 years ago Adam, but your “lot” is of statistical insignificance to the “lots” we still DON’T know.

Again I would suggest that you don’t know enough to ask the questions about WHAT you don’t know. You speak of “science” as if it WERE God. Do you forget that it wasn’t so very long ago that “scientists” thought the world was flat? Or that the sun revolved around the earth? These wweren’t stupid men. The were SCIENTISTS. They made the best hypothesis that they could given their limited knowledge of math and science. They “tested” and “supported” their theories. As science progressed, they were proven wrong, or right, depending upon the theory. Science is about QUESTIONING, not just accepting, yet you choose to “accept” something just because the popular “science’ of the day says it’s so. Your chosen method, in and of it’s self is in error. You deride those who DO question and who DO acknowledge how little we know.

When I was a bright eyed freshman in College my eyes about science were opened by………… a scientist. A chemist. He taught……… you guessed it, Chemistry. He’d go over things like atomic numbers. And he’d say something like the atomic number for [blank] is [blank]. Why? Because we SAY so and it works most of the time. And it does. The “atomic numbers” are just an average though, that DOES work most of the time. One day we will understand better. One day we WILL nail down pi. One day we WILL find a way to travel faster than light. But that day isn’t today. And on that day when they DO answer all those question? There will STILL be questions that they say, “I dunno” to. What those questions are, we at this point can even begin to guess, because we DON’T KNOW enough to even guess what question will have arisen from the answer they get from today’s question.

How can you not see this? It’s SO basic, SO simple. Is your mind just too closed or indoctrinated, is your imagination just too small, or perhaps your ego to big?

In all your claims that science is the end answer to everything, you really show your ignorance OF science. In claiming the infallibility of “science”, you show ignorance of what science really is. Science is questioning EVERYTHING, especially “science,” and entertaining possibilities. It’s being open minded. You however speak in absolutes and keep digging at those of us who try to educate you on the fact there there ARE no absolutes. Bosch claimed death was an absolute earlier, but I won’t. They might learn how to cure death tomorrow, I dunno.

When standing in front of a house and asked the color of the house, you Adam would say, “The house is white.” I would say, “It’s painted white on THIS side. I don’t know what color the other three sides are.

Kamchak

August 29th, 2011
5:10 pm

I thought you said every problem looked like a groundhog.

Perhaps you can go back and find where I said exactly that?

Weren’t you just admonishing someone here for attributing things to you that you didn’t say?

Glass house, meet stone.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
5:11 pm

“Do you honestly think the govt can spend your dollar more efficiently on the things you want than you can whether we’re looking at it from the point of you as an individual or a business person’s perspective?”

It doesn’t matter really what you or I think, until it can be measured and verified, we are still just speculating — therefore again, to my original point, that this whole concept is just your opinion.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
5:12 pm

Actually jm, I’m not asleep, I’m just skipping your posts now because you make no sense. Doom actually makes sense, his posts are easier to ask questions about.

Kthnx.

Doggone/GA

August 29th, 2011
5:12 pm

“When another planetary body passes close enough to earth to overcome the earth’s gravitational force on the apple and make it go up”

but it will only be going “up” from our point of view, from the point of view of the other planet it will still be going down

jm

August 29th, 2011
5:12 pm

And Bosch – if you just want the gravitational equivalent to the falling apple for the invisible hand, then look no further than the no longer existing USSR, or the economic liberalization of China.

Thulsa Doom

August 29th, 2011
5:13 pm

But “the government” is a consumer just like an individual, and a pretty big one at that when you are talking about demand- Bosch

Bosch,

Exactly. Govt is a consumer- of wealth in the form of taxation. Govt does not produce wealth Bosch. It exists solely because the private sector pays for it as a necessary evil that we must have for courts, police, military, fire protection. The reality is that govt is an overall drag on the private sector the bigger and bigger it is. Somehow no matter how much we try to explain this to you guys it escapes you.

Anyway, I’m out. Handing the ball off to others.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
5:13 pm

Actually Dusty, if you and Midori go in together, marginal utility dictates you might just get a better deal!!!

Dusty

August 29th, 2011
5:14 pm

Kamchak, love,

Have you forgotten your lament over the groundhogs in your garden? They are going to be hurt that you have forgotten them.

Now go eat your veggies. They are good for perking up the memory.

Fred

August 29th, 2011
5:15 pm

Dusty

August 29th, 2011
4:52 pm

Thanks, Fred. Sounds like good tire info.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

You could repay me by posting a good hot bacon salad dressing dip if you have one lol. I’m making spinach salad with avacados, mushrooms and tomatoes, and hot bacon salad dressing, along pan seared scallops for supper, but I don’t have a recipe for the dressing. It’s what I was SUPPOSED to be looking up on the computer, not blogging……..

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
5:15 pm

No Doom, it doesn’t escape me, it’s just that I disagree. Government and Business are symbiotic, they can not exist without the other, and to think one is better than the other is a fool’s errand.

Joe Mama

August 29th, 2011
5:16 pm

Doom — “Adhering to the theory of rational decisions private people and businesses make their own decisions based on what is best for them.”

That’s strange. It sounds like it doesn’t apply very well to individuals.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rational_choice_theory

“Because rational choice theory lacks understanding of consumer motivation, some economists restrict its use to understanding business behavior where goals are usually very clear. As Armen Alchian points out, competition in the market encourages businesses to maximize profits (in order to survive). Because that goal is significantly less vacuous than “maximizing utility” and the like, rational choice theory is apt.”

“Although models used in rational choice theory are diverse, all assume individuals choose the best action according to unchanging and stable preference functions and constraints facing them. Most models have additional assumptions. Those proponents of rational choice models associated with the Chicago school of economics do not claim that a model’s assumptions are a full description of reality, only that good models can aid reasoning and provide help in formulating falsifiable hypotheses, whether intuitive or not.[citation needed] In this view, the only way to judge the success of hypotheses is empirical tests.[4] To use an example from Milton Friedman, if a theory that says that the behavior of the leaves of a tree is explained by their rationality passes the empirical test, it is seen as successful.”

“However, it may not be possible to empirically test or falsify the rationality assumption, so that the theory leans heavily toward being a tautology (true by definition) since there is no effort to explain individual goals.”

jm

August 29th, 2011
5:16 pm

“you make no sense”

Translation: I don’t understand.

Thulsa Doom

August 29th, 2011
5:17 pm

Bosch,

We’ll talk later but for now I have x amount of money and I’m going to make the rational decision of what suits me best which is to go out and have some nice dinner and see some hotties even if it is a Monday. I derive a great deal of marginal utility(satisfaction) from a good dinner and possibly seeing some nice tail. And if I’m lucky maybe I’ll get a lot of marginal utility this evening. Later guys.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
5:17 pm

“Govt does not produce wealth Bosch. It exists solely because the private sector pays for it as a necessary evil that we must have for courts, police, military, fire protection. The reality is that govt is an overall drag on the private sector the bigger and bigger it is.”

And one last thing Doom, I’m not arguing against that point. There are fine lines between government intervention — how much is needed, etc. I know that, I think that’s all great and all.

But, it does not in any way shape or form validate your assumption that private spending is more efficient.

And since I stopped paying attention to jm because he was insisting upon talking about gravity for some strange reason and I don’t really care about that, and his other posts made no sense, and because my daughter is waiting to be picked up…I big you all, adieu.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
5:18 pm

TMI Doom! TMI!! But good luck with that.

Dusty

August 29th, 2011
5:18 pm

Bosch,

I’d go for the deal but Midori would probably put nails in my tires and Obama stickers on my bumper. My equilibrium is not that utilitarian although I am close to being a vegetarian.

Kamchak

August 29th, 2011
5:19 pm

Have you forgotten your lament over the groundhogs in your garden?

No.

How does that equate to,”every problem looked like a groundhog”?

Again, you are attributing words to me that I did not type.

Glass house, meet stone.

Fred

August 29th, 2011
5:20 pm

Never mind Dusty. Alton Brown answered before you did lol. Although if you have another one you’ve used I would try it instead. I have a feeling you are a damn good cook.

http://www.foodnetwork.com/recipes/alton-brown/spinach-salad-with-warm-bacon-dressing-recipe/index.html

Joe Mama

August 29th, 2011
5:20 pm

Doom — “go out and have some nice dinner and see some hotties even if it is a Monday. I derive a great deal of marginal utility(satisfaction) from a good dinner and possibly seeing some nice tail. And if I’m lucky maybe I’ll get a lot of marginal utility this evening.”

I’m going to go with ‘broke up with the GF over the weekend for $500, Alex.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
5:20 pm

“Again, you are attributing words to me that I did not type.”

Kamchak,

I’m worried about Dusty, she was doing that to me last Friday. Dementia maybe?

Keep Up the Good Fight!

August 29th, 2011
5:20 pm

Dang that govt….dragging the private sector down by spending that resulted in things like the space program (no new technology there) and the internet.

josef

August 29th, 2011
5:20 pm

So, what’s the argument about today? Catch me up so’s I don’t have to go scrolling back…just had five little ones running about the house…ready now for act II of Short Attention Span Theatre…

Brosephus

August 29th, 2011
5:21 pm

And odds are you are going to get much greater marginal utility for an item that you want with your own dollar than what the govt wants to spend your dollar on.

What about when you have a fixed market, such as Microsoft in the PC environment… does that not negate much of those odds?

Joe the Plutocrat

August 29th, 2011
5:21 pm

you guys need to get back to the intelligent design vs. evolution thing. Thulsa, holster the “bureacracy” talk. have you ever looked up the word? the key words/concepts are “inflexible routine” and “rigid rules”. even the tax codes have loopholes. listen, you all can spout all the red state blue state, liberal vs. conservative stuff you want; but the United States of America is a plutocracy. the oligarchs represent private sector interests in banking, defense, insurance, healthcare, agriculture, technology, etc.; and the oligarchs control legislation (government) via campaign contributes, lobbyists, and many times, outright bribery. and on top of it, the final system is driven by a fiat currency, the value of which is determined by the Board of Governors of the a central bank, and not intrinsic value. in fact, I would argue, that based on the continued polarization of wealth and the pulverization of the middle class; the system is profoundly “efficient” in the redistribution of wealth.

Brosephus

August 29th, 2011
5:24 pm

Govt does not produce wealth Bosch

Lockheed Martin investors… Haliburton investors… XE investors….

Dusty

August 29th, 2011
5:25 pm

Fred, so sorry but

My recipes have not been approved by Cordon Bleu. Maybe it is because they all end with BURN BABY BURN…

But good luck. Your dinner sounds wonderful!!

Mary Elizabeth

August 29th, 2011
5:25 pm

(1) I have never known private business to have the “common good” of the people at the forefront of their pursuits. Profit is at the forefront of their pursuits, and that is as it should be in business.

However, this nation was founded for more than business pursuits. It was formed, in part, to serve the “common good,” hence, Thomas Jefferson’s strong emphasis that public education be provided for all of America’s young, paid for by the tax payer, as well as his emphasis upon freedom of religion and freedom from religion having tentacles into state affairs (as had been true when the Head of the Church of England and the Kings had a nice coalition of power between themselves). Jefferson was prouder of his having penned the “Bill (in Virginia) for Establishing Religious Freedom and severing the Church from the State,” than of any public office he had held, including the presidency, itself.

(2) Public, government programs do not have profit as a motive. That, in some instances, can save the tax payer money. When Unicoi State Park was run, a few years back by a private company, instead of by the state of Georgia, it lost money and the patrons who used the facility paid much more for time spent there. After a year or so, the state again became the overseer of Unicoi State Park and the Park started to pick up business again.

Business interests are needed in our nation, but these interests must be balanced with public interests that serve the common good of the people as a whole. Besides that, having public, government programs in some areas of our functioning as a nation helps citizens to realize that we are all interconnected and that America does not simply stand for self-interest alone. We need to realize that, once again, and work for the proper balance between the public/private sectors of our lives. It is not healthy to denigrate one or the other entirely.

(I have simply offered these thoughts as a balance to the discussion, as you continue discussing. I am gone for the remainder of the day.)

Kamchak

August 29th, 2011
5:25 pm

Bosch

Dementia?

Possibly.

Holier-than-thou-itis?

Most definitely.

md

August 29th, 2011
5:26 pm

“Government and Business are symbiotic, they can not exist without the other,”

We do need both, it is how big is big enough is the question. There is a point where gov’t can be too big to do what it is designed to do…….it can not deliver the services if it also costs the private sector too much in terms of profit. And this bs about corps sitting on trillions in profit is just that….bs.

Some corps may be sitting on huge profits……..but the majority of corps are small businesses…and they are not sitting on all that cash…….many of them are just struggling to stay open……….

@@

August 29th, 2011
5:27 pm

Paul:

I didn’t know Ms. Rehm had been ill. He’s forgiven.

As far as cutting defense spending, he needs to take it up with Panetta and Hillary. They’re not pleased with the trigger put in place by the Democrats.

McGovern was way before my time. After doing a bit of research, I can find value in the knowledge that Democrats didn’t like him. When he wasn’t rubbing ‘em the wrong way, he wasn’t rubbin’ ‘em at all.

He told some guy to “Kiss his a$$.” I can DEFINITELY appreciate THAT!!!

Called for the impeachment of Bush and Cheney!!??!! Not kewl.

Fred

August 29th, 2011
5:28 pm

Dusty @ 5:25: S. much for my theory that you are a good good lol.

Bosch: Lay off Dusty. She’s in a good mood tonight and making me laugh for a change. Be nice to her.

Paul

August 29th, 2011
5:29 pm

Afternoon, josef

“So, what’s the argument about today? Catch me up so’s I don’t have to go scrolling back…j”

Not so much an argument as watching Bosch engage in a new style of self-flagellation –

’s what he gets for going agnostic pagan on us.

Brosephus

August 29th, 2011
5:30 pm

Some corps may be sitting on huge profits……..but the majority of corps are small businesses…and they are not sitting on all that cash…….many of them are just struggling to stay open……….

And that’s the problem with our economy right now. The few big guys are hoarding so much, they have our economy stopped up worse than somebody who’s eaten 100lbs of government cheese at one sitting. If they’d just circulate a portion of that money to the little guys, then we could probably see a bit of movement everywhere. Our economy needs an enema!!!!!

Normal

August 29th, 2011
5:30 pm

The Military does not buy 600.00 hammers…they are called Manually Operated Pounding Devices, MOP-Ds. That’s why they are worth 600.00.

josef

August 29th, 2011
5:30 pm

Joe the Plutocrat

Intelligent Design versus Evolution…which one won?

josef

August 29th, 2011
5:32 pm

PAUL

Agnostic pagan? Is that intelligent design or evolution?

Dusty

August 29th, 2011
5:33 pm

Sorry, Kamchak, I thought you had a sense of humor. Your groundhogs were funny at the time. I was just enjoying them.

Give my regards to your little goundlings!! And to Bosch who cannot read his own posts. Too much gravity I suppose.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
5:34 pm

md

Now that I agree with and I’d even concede that in the past Doom’s assumption may have even been true, but not now- now, the driving force of “too big to fail” is alive and well in public and private.

Joe the Plutocrat

August 29th, 2011
5:34 pm

Thulsa, did you just suggest government is “a necessary evil that we must have for courts, police, military, fire protection.” so, it is both “necessay” AND ‘evil”. interesting. and if we must have “courts, police, military, and fire protection” why not “protection” from white collar crime (SEC, FBI, FTC… is there still an FTC?), unsafe foods (FCC), etc.? what’s your take on the TSA vs, the FAA. are we to accept that the government should “police” air travelers, but not the aircraft we travel on? ditto the workplace; we have SWAT teams and police forces, even armed guards at banks to protect us in the workplace, but OSHA does not have the right to “protect” workers? that said, I applaud you for admiting that government IS necessary. the problem is not with our government so much as it is the corruption that infects it (oligarchs).

Normal

August 29th, 2011
5:34 pm

“Agnostic pagan? Is that intelligent design or evolution?”

Josef,
what ever it is, I like the ring to it…

josef

August 29th, 2011
5:35 pm

BTW

Did anybody find out who the lunatic was from last p.m. Inquiring minds want to know…

Joe the Plutocrat

August 29th, 2011
5:36 pm

josef, I believe the honey badger is proof BOTH are in play

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
5:37 pm

md

Oh wait – do not agree with your notion of corps sitting on huge profits as bs- I’m with Bro on that one

josef

August 29th, 2011
5:37 pm

Normal…
Is kinda catchy!

jm

August 29th, 2011
5:37 pm

Bro 5:21

“What about when you have a fixed market, such as Microsoft in the PC environment… does that not negate much of those odds?”

Good question. The answer is it reduces it, but it doesn’t eliminate the benefits. In reality, if a monopolist prices the product in excess of its utility, no one will buy it.

Paul

August 29th, 2011
5:37 pm

@@

I can understand why SecState Clinton and SecDef Panetta would abhor the automatic triggers. DoD is big on programming. New acquisitions, upgrades, quantities, milestones, they’re all planned and funded years in advance. A trigger that makes cuts in a couple months throws them into havoc, because they aren’t about to cancel those programs. So they default to the normal operations and maintenance accounts (training, travel, operations of their weapons systems, that sort of stuff) and day to day operations come to a grinding halt. Then they scream poverty and mission failure, even though they’ve fenced off a huge part of their program.

I liked what McGovern had to say about policy differences doesn’t mean enemies and the examples of Dole and Nixon and others. He comes across to me as an extremely decent human being.

Joe the Plutocrat

August 29th, 2011
5:37 pm

excuse me, the FDA protects us from unsafe foods

josef

August 29th, 2011
5:38 pm

Joe the Plutocrat…

Hmmm…there’s a lot to be said for that…! I think I’m in agreement…

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
5:39 pm

Paul

It’s Neo-Pagan Agnostic Christian…. Geez!

Kamchak

August 29th, 2011
5:39 pm

Irrational exuberance.

Spices
Tulip bulbs
Junk bonds
Internet stocks
And finally — the very abodes that we live in.

All in an effort to get-rich-quick.

The free market couldn’t predict any of those. That’s what Econ 101 can never address.

Even Greenspan admitted he didn’t have a handle on irrational exuberance.

jm

August 29th, 2011
5:40 pm

Brosephus

August 29th, 2011
5:24 pm

Govt does not produce wealth Bosch

Lockheed Martin investors… Haliburton investors… XE investors….

————
Bro, a real economist would not argue that is wealth. Defense is a cost. Some defense produces wealth (basic protection against theft and invaders). Past that, it is an economic loss. We are not better off having had to deal with the USSR and dropping a zillion dollars on nukes and a trillion on Iraq.

AmVet

August 29th, 2011
5:40 pm

jonix, more important than who won, it was a fun, respectful discussion among the adults. Notwithstanding that others offered nothing constructive but “wry”observations about it or the parties involved and poor little Zap throwing tantrums because no one would pay attention to him.

Paul

August 29th, 2011
5:40 pm

josef

“Agnostic pagan? Is that intelligent design or evolution?”

He designed the overall persona then let it evolve.

It’s that kind of duality has Bruno all in a dither -

Dusty

August 29th, 2011
5:40 pm

Josef,

You are just in time to join “The Invasion of the PseudoScientists” brought on by a surge from Irene. Overlook the seaweed and dead fish. This too shall pass.

Just Another Anonymous One

August 29th, 2011
5:41 pm

Did anybody find out who the lunatic was from last p.m. Inquiring minds want to know…

Could you be more specific.

Paul

August 29th, 2011
5:42 pm

Bosch

“It’s Neo-Pagan Agnostic Christian…. Geez!”

josef just got here. I wanted to ease him into it….

jm

August 29th, 2011
5:42 pm

“The free market couldn’t predict any of those. ”

But it does correct it. (in the absence of government intervention) Instead, one might argue the malaise we’re in is because of the government intervention stopping the correction.

Paul

August 29th, 2011
5:42 pm

oh, Bosch…

You forgot “Jedi.”

didja see that, josef? He’s no longer Padawan. You must congratulate him.

md

August 29th, 2011
5:43 pm

Bosch……the operative word is “some” corps…….when used in context that “corps” are sitting on huge piles of cash, then it is definitely bs…………..

Since the majority of carps are small businesses, do the math.

And some of the big boys are only sitting on bigger profits because they slashed spending to the bone (layoffs).

josef

August 29th, 2011
5:44 pm

PAUL

Trinitarianism ought to drive Bruno off the deep end, eh?

ZamVet

Did I miss Zap? He won’t play with me and L-rd knows I keep trying…you, on the other hand, can get a rise out of him with just a howdy-do…

DUSTY
Seaweed and dead fish? Sounds like a Japanese restaurant menu… probably best I missed it.

pogo

August 29th, 2011
5:45 pm

“Dang that govt….dragging the private sector down by spending that resulted in things like the space program (no new technology there) and the internet.”

Yea right. Obama wants NASA now to become a Muslim outreach program and for any further US endeavours into space to be carried there by Chinese or Russian rockets. Yea, he has a real vision for NASA alright. Don’t you get it? NASA is nothing to Obama but a parasite that sucks away money that he could spend paying off the unions for their vote and spending for his “social justice” programs (again to buy him votes). The people in the private sector that have the money, both “small and large”, will not spend it until he is gone and really why should they considering that they know that if he gets re-elected he is going to try to carry on with his disasterous progressive/social engineering programs which wastes massive amounts of money? It is about time that the American people start to save money and not spend it if they don’t have it. Yea, that isn’t good for our service based economy but so be it. That is the only way that things will be righted. And liberal politics will also die in the process.

Obama is a president who projects uncertainty because really, when it comes down to it, all he cares about is himself. To him, this country and its people are an afterthought and believe me, as much as the liberals would like to think that the country is too “un-informed” to pick up on that, they aren’t. He is a phony and an imposter and he is only carrying out what he was trained to do and that is to spend public/private sector money in pursuit of the almighty vote. He is a true child of corrupt Chicago politics.

Kamchak

August 29th, 2011
5:46 pm

But it does correct it.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Only after a small minority collect the lion’s share.

Joe Mama

August 29th, 2011
5:47 pm

Joe P — “excuse me, the FDA protects us from unsafe foods”

USDA plays a role in that, too.

josef

August 29th, 2011
5:48 pm

Ananonymous
I guess I should have been more specific…Newcomer Lunatic…

PAUL

Well, he IS an Episcopalian!

Oh, and Bosch…

Shut up!

Paul

August 29th, 2011
5:48 pm

josef

“Trinitarianism ought to drive Bruno off the deep end, eh?”

LOL!

I was just taking a break from work and reading an article that included examinations of Latin trinitarianism and social trinitarianism.

Keep Up the Good Fight!

August 29th, 2011
5:49 pm

I must have missed the Fox report on the evil NASA conspiracy….

Dusty

August 29th, 2011
5:51 pm

Yes, Paul,

the duality of the singularity is mindful of the Siamese seminar of only one cell in two brains. Those are joined by two cans and a string and have in all probability, the communibility of two jelly fish and one crab. But that theory is still under the longevity of investigation and cannot be dismissed in any way. In other words, you can’t kill it as we observe with this blog.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
5:51 pm

Oh damn Paul! I can’t believe I forgot Jedi! Blogging and driving makes me a little distracted.

And jm, your past few posts, I trust you have moved onto a different topic because nothing you’ve wrote proves the idea that private spending is more efficient.

Soothsayer

August 29th, 2011
5:51 pm

Gosh! Pogo! You had the “un-Obama” in the White House for 8 long years and things didn’t work out so well.

So, you’re saying that maybe we should try that again? Huh?

Joe the Plutocrat

August 29th, 2011
5:52 pm

Joe Mama, correct. I believe the FDA is specific to additives and drugs, whereas the USDA serves as the policeman for agriculturally produced foods (crops and livestock).

Paul

August 29th, 2011
5:52 pm

Dusty

Sounds more like survival of the fittest than intelligent design to me!

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
5:53 pm

Josef

LOL

Neo-Pagan Agnostic Christian or better known as Episcopalian!

getalife

August 29th, 2011
5:53 pm

Yeah, drilll, baby, drill will produce 15 million jobs?

Um, failed dave.

md

August 29th, 2011
5:54 pm

“Trinitarianism ought to drive Bruno off the deep end, eh?”

Sure confused the crap out of me as a kid……………..say what??

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
5:55 pm

md

The ones that are too big to fail? Sitting on tons of cash – not bullshyt-

md

August 29th, 2011
5:58 pm

No Bosch…….too many, including our esteemed host, have a tendency to throw out “corps are sitting on trillions of cash”…………………when in actuality, the majority are not.

Tends to be a misleading statement………………….

josef

August 29th, 2011
5:58 pm

PAUL

Trinitarianism…! Not long ago that was the topic drawn from the hat at the Sunday Morning Coffee Klatch..one of the participants is a rabbi…you should’ve been there for mine and his set-to…he decreed me a heretic because, divorced from the theological, I found no argument with the concept seeing’s how my argument was that we accept some amorphous Cre-ator, the Father, who made us in H-s own image, the flesh “The S-n,” but in H-s universiality is “The Sp-rit…” Rabbis ain’t always very fond of me, and that, as Granddaddy might say, is a good thing!

md

August 29th, 2011
5:58 pm

Going home to contemplate my space in infinity………………………..

kayaker 71

August 29th, 2011
5:59 pm

normal, 5:30,

funny, funny.

Doggone/GA

August 29th, 2011
5:59 pm

“Agnostic pagan?”

Is that someone who is waiting for proof that God doesn’t exist?

Kamchak

August 29th, 2011
5:59 pm

It is about time that the American people start to save money and not spend it if they don’t have it

The naïveté of that statement is beyond words.

Save money?

Where?

With interest rates at an effective 0% where is there a safe place to just save money?

With a bank and their endless fees?

Too funny.

jm

August 29th, 2011
6:00 pm

Bosch I thought you had something worthwhile to go do

josef

August 29th, 2011
6:01 pm

PAUL

But what if evolution IS intelligent design? Hunh? Remember Biff Rose’s “Evolution?”

AmVet

August 29th, 2011
6:01 pm

md, don’t hurt yourself! (grin)

Colin Powell was remarkably reserved in his condemnation of some of the crap in Dickhead’s new book.

How he ever got mixed up with the Bungling Gang the Couldn’t Shoot Straight is beyond me…

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
6:03 pm

No md we don’t say write or even hint that they ALL do, but the ones who drive our economy….like I’ve wrote twice now “too big to fail” DO

Paul

August 29th, 2011
6:04 pm

josef

That’s an interesting take on it. I can see where the rabbi would come at it from a traditional definition, and you would come at it as….. only you could! I would have loved to sit in on it.

I’m going to repost something I posted this morning and reposted when Bosch arrived. There are a couple of you I thought would appreciate the implications – the others already showed up around posting time. And most of those who were here than appear to have left. So the rest of you can skip to the next post.

Had an interesting experience yesterday (kinda fits in with the topic). My wife received an email from a friend of her’s who’s a member of the Latter-day Saint church. They were taking part in an interfaith outreach with the local Muslim community with the ending of that day’s Ramadan fast. We went. It is a small community, there were a few guests. They were very open, very gracious. Invited everyone in for prayers, then outside for their break the fast meal (wonderful food). I sat at a table with a petroleum engineer who’d taught at U of Oklahoma, Colorado School of Mines and Technology and a university in Ohio. Another guy was a CPA. Sat next to the imam.

They were open about their faith – I took away a lot of the same concerns as people of faith anywhere have. How to keep kids centered, true to their communities. How do they bring back those who’ve left How to engage those who come to America who want to keep one foot in their faith and another in the secular experience. Their overriding emphasis on giving, not taking and doing works of charity.

I asked if they’d been to other religious groups. Answer was LDS had invited them to several – youth programs, worship services, that sort of stuff. They’d attended. I asked who had responded to their invitations. Imam said the small independent church next door and the LDS. Said no one else had accepted their offers.

End of the day, it was all about understanding and acceptance. Theirs of the nonIslamic community and the nonIslamic community of them. It was a great way to spend a Sunday.

jm

August 29th, 2011
6:04 pm

“How he ever got mixed up with the Bungling Gang the Couldn’t Shoot Straight is beyond me…”

Translation: I only agree with someone and think they’re smart when they agree with me on one issue.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
6:05 pm

jm

I do. I’m picking up my daughter. With my iPhone I can blog and drive at the same time!

Dusty

August 29th, 2011
6:05 pm

And now comes TRINNITARIANISM. Is that three fatties in a volkswagon? Larry, Curly & Moe? The Andrews Sisters?

Sorry, but the stupefying studies of serious subjects by subprime students invokes the greater child of irreverance. I shall depart to the realm of reason, the KITCHEN. It’s Fred’s fault. He told me about all the good stuff he was cookin’. I’m hungry!!

poison pen

August 29th, 2011
6:07 pm

Mental illness rise linked to climate

Erik Jensen Health
August 29, 2011.

I can now understand what happened to Liberals.

josef

August 29th, 2011
6:07 pm

PAUL
Ooops…the title is “Paradise Almost Lost…”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RsrS_vQLCnQ

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
6:08 pm

Doggone

Yes exactly with the stipulation that if your wrong the God is the Christian one.

AmVet

August 29th, 2011
6:09 pm

Translation: jm voted for that bungling gang twice.

“The president knows that I told him what I thought about every issue of the day,” Powell said.

At the time, Powell said he told the president, “If you break it, you own it,” in reference to the invasion. That was advice he said Cheney “may forget.”

“You have got to understand that if we have to go to war in Iraq, we have to be prepared for the whole war, not just the first phase,” Powell said. “And Mr. Cheney and many of his colleagues did not prepare for what happened after the fall of Baghdad.”

Paul

August 29th, 2011
6:12 pm

josef

Thanks for the link. Cleared up the earlier post -

getalife

August 29th, 2011
6:14 pm

A vast left wing conspiracy Jay.

You betcha

Paul

August 29th, 2011
6:15 pm

Jay

“Personally, it is hard to imagine a more intellectually bankrupt position than that adopted by those who try to explain away climate change by alleging fraud on the part of the scientific community.”

Well, Gov Perry did say all those scientists did it so they could get grant money so they’d have jobs…..

If Perry survives, Huntsman ought to hit a Perry response with “that’s what happens when politicians think in sound bites and get policy from bumper stickers.’

josef

August 29th, 2011
6:16 pm

PAUL

I’m glad you had the experience. I’ve had many similar ones. The Muslims make the point that, they keep asking us to speak up and out, yet when we invite them to come visit with us and see who we are, what we think, what we believe and how we worship, they won’t.

I guess it’s just the way I was raised, but I was taught to go and find out. If you want someone to respect the way you believe, you have to respect theirs and that means going to see and hear them on “home turf.”

Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)

August 29th, 2011
6:16 pm

I shall depart to the realm of reason, the KITCHEN. It’s Fred’s fault. He told me about all the good stuff he was cookin’. I’m hungry!!

And I’ll pray for your husband when he’s in the hospitle again with food poisoning, Sister Dusty.

Anyhow, I’m headed for the trash cans outside with the 10 lbs. of junk mail I got last week. One teeny power bill, one teeny gas bill, one teeny cable bill, and the rest pure junk from the shysters that run the stores and think I’m stupid enough to buy three pizzas to get one free. Except for the 3 lbs. from AT&T, which just sent the last of 33 ads I’ve got about AT&T UVerse. If it’s so good, why do they need to advertize it so much to get people to buy it?

Then it’s a couple or ten PBRs, some fried pork skins, and FoxNews till bed time. That’s the only way I can get The Truth and indigestion all at the same time. I guess I’ll turn my laptop off. Wouldn’t want the missus to see that picture of Michelle Bachmann Sooth sent me. That’s some hot dog! Have a good night everybody.

Soothsayer

August 29th, 2011
6:18 pm

That would explain why sea level is 15 inches higher now than at the start of the industrial revolution.

josef

August 29th, 2011
6:19 pm

JAY

More importantly, is climate change science or intelligent design?

jm

August 29th, 2011
6:22 pm

Bosch 6:05 – remind me to keep an eye out for drivers like you…… or depending on how machiavellian you are, maybe you won’t

Paul

August 29th, 2011
6:24 pm

josef

I was struck by the openness. Table I was at, very little of a doctrinal nature. Lots about the practical aspect of their religion and how the American experience affected them and their families.

Kamchak

August 29th, 2011
6:26 pm

…… or depending on how machiavellian you are…

Bosch is a real prince.

jm

August 29th, 2011
6:27 pm

Jay 6:16 – I’d say the odds are like 99.99% certain that manmade CO2 is warming the planet. (physics 101, a discussion Bosch and I had, or mostly I had with myself earlier that you missed)

Now, that doesn’t mean the temperature is going to go up or down simply because of CO2 because there are a lot of other things that could be influencing the temperature (given that we had ice ages and thaws way before humans popped up).

Point is, I think if we can find a good way to minimize CO2 emissions, and maintain an improving quality of life for everyone, we should do so. But we should minimize the financial cost as much as possible.

Soothsayer

August 29th, 2011
6:27 pm

Jay, if you think I’m gonna give up my SUV, you’re crazy! My ego just won’t fit in nothing smaller!

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
6:28 pm

Paul

Yeah ALL those scientists live on the federal grant high hog. LOL

Seriously somebody should tell Perry that for every federal grant only about 30 percent of applicants get funded (last figures I heard were even lower)

Keep Up the Good Fight!

August 29th, 2011
6:29 pm

Since when is “ego” a code word for what you put in your seat?

Dusty

August 29th, 2011
6:29 pm

Who in the world awoke/awakened Bookman? We finished off climate change a long time ago and went to something interesting like TRIINITARIAISM just after we left gravity.

Then Bookman comes dragging in. You’d think he’d be proud of this intellectual crowd (espcially RedNeck). But no! Gripe gripe gripe!!

josef

August 29th, 2011
6:30 pm

“Bosch is a real prince.”

Of Peace?

PAUL

Well, you knows they was jus puttin’ on a show to lull us into complacency whilts they prepare to impose Sharia on us all…

jm

August 29th, 2011
6:30 pm

On CO2 emissions, you’d think this would be a relatively simple argument.

Between national security, economic, and environmental reasons (even if this one is dismissed, the first 2 make huge sense), you’d think we’d be driving natural gas (or diesel) cars (and trucks) and making intelligent investments in the grid…..

jm

August 29th, 2011
6:32 pm

“the moon is made of green cheese.”

Bosch doesn’t want to discuss gravity and mass, so for all he knows it is green cheese.

outta here

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
6:32 pm

Kamchak

I think jm’s upset because I stopped paying him theattention he sooooooo desperately craves.

Joe Mama

August 29th, 2011
6:32 pm

Dusty — “And now comes TRINNITARIANISM. Is that three fatties in a volkswagon? Larry, Curly & Moe? The Andrews Sisters?”

It’s Sting, Stewart and Andy. The Police.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Police

Soothsayer

August 29th, 2011
6:35 pm

“Between national security, economic, and environmental reasons (even if this one is dismissed, the first 2 make huge sense), you’d think we’d be driving natural gas (or diesel) cars (and trucks) and making intelligent investments in the grid…..”

Between national security, economic, and environmental reasons (even if this one is dismissed, the first 2 make huge sense), you’d think we’d be driving hydrogen-powered cars and camelina-powered trucks (and aircraft) and making intelligent investments in the grid…..(like converting to solar power and abandoning nuclear power and pouring research into new battery power).

Kamchak

August 29th, 2011
6:35 pm

Of Peace?

More so than say — Cesár Borja.

Joe the Plutocrat

August 29th, 2011
6:36 pm

Sooth, you’re looking at it all wrong. if sea levels have risen 15 feet in the past 200 or so years; think of it as “more water” which we need because our population has increased probably 15x as well.

JB, do you really think people who listen to Rush Limbaugh, or support Rick Perry, Michelle Bachman or Sarah Palin have an interest in the scientific opinions of “tens of thousands” of scientists? these are the same people who think the Mission was Accomplised, Brownie did a great job, and the 2008 meltdown was caused be people who “bought too much house”. while I agree there is a conspiracy to profit (financially and politically, as if there is a difference) from the reality of climate change, there is also an climate change denial conspiracy being executed by those who would profit from the reality if evangelical Christianity; and I am CERTAIN evangelical Christianity is “manmade”

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
6:36 pm

No j’m I don’t because it had nothing to do with what Doom and I were discussing but the next time I’m actually discussing gravity I’ll play with you, K?

Joe the Plutocrat

August 29th, 2011
6:37 pm

Sooth, lo siento – 15″

Soothsayer

August 29th, 2011
6:37 pm

The entire argument from the Right can be boiled down into one simple statement:

We focked up the entire economy. Your guy can’t fix it. Now, therefore, elect us. (Again)

Makes sense to me. How about you?

poison pen

August 29th, 2011
6:39 pm

Dr David Evans’ address to the Anti-Carbon-Tax rally, Perth Australia, 23 March 2011.

Dr David Evans consulted full-time for the Australian Greenhouse Office (now the Department of Climate Change) from 1999 to 2005, and part-time 2008 to 2010, modelling Australia’s carbon in plants, debris, mulch, soils, and forestry and agricultural products. Evans is a mathematician and engineer, with six university degrees including a PhD from Stanford University in electrical engineering. The area of human endeavour with the most experience and sophistication in dealing with feedbacks and analysing complex systems is electrical engineering, and the most crucial and disputed aspects of understanding the climate system are the feedbacks. The evidence supporting the idea that CO2 emissions were the main cause of global warming reversed itself from 1998 to 2006, causing Evans to move from being a warmist to a sceptic.

“I am a scientist who was on the carbon gravy train, understands the evidence, was once an alarmist, but am now a sceptic.”

It’s a Scam

Good Morning Ladies and Gentlemen.

The debate about global warming has reached ridiculous proportions and is full of micro thin half-truths and misunderstandings. I am a scientist who was on the carbon gravy train, I understand the evidence, I was once an alarmist, but I am now a sceptic.

Watching this issue unfold has been amusing but, lately, worrying. This issue is tearing society apart, making fools and liars out of our politicians. Let’s set a few things straight.

The whole idea that carbon dioxide is the main cause of the recent global warming is based on a guess, which was proved false by empirical evidence during the 1990s. But the gravy train was too big, with too many jobs, industries, trading profits, political careers, and the possibility of world government and total control riding on the outcome. So rather than admit they were wrong, the governments, and their tame climate scientists, now cheat and lie outrageously to maintain the fiction about carbon dioxide being a dangerous pollutant.

Let’s be perfectly clear. Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas, and other things being equal, the more carbon dioxide in the air, the warmer the planet. Every bit of carbon dioxide that we emit warms the planet. But the issue is not whether carbon dioxide warms the planet, but how much.

Most scientists, on both sides, also agree on how much a given increase in the level of carbon dioxide raises the planet’s temperature, if just the extra carbon dioxide is considered. These calculations come from laboratory experiments; the basic physics have been well known for a century.

The disagreement comes about what happens next.

The planet reacts to the extra carbon dioxide, which changes everything. Most critically, the extra warmth causes more water to evaporate from the oceans. But does the water hang around and increase the height of moist air in the atmosphere, or does it simply create more clouds and rain? Back in 1980, when the carbon dioxide theory started, no one knew. The alarmists guessed that it would increase the height of moist air around the planet, which would warm the planet even further, because the moist air is also a greenhouse gas.

This is the core idea of every official climate model: for each bit of warming due to carbon dioxide, they claim it ends up causing three bits of warming due to the extra moist air. The climate models amplify the carbon dioxide warming by a factor of three – so two thirds of their projected warming is due to extra moist air (and other factors), only one third is due to extra carbon dioxide.

I’ll bet you didn’t know that. Hardly anyone in the public does, but it’s the core of the issue. All the disagreements, lies, and misunderstanding spring from this. The alarmist case is based on this guess about moisture in the atmosphere, and there is simply no evidence for the amplification that is at the core of their alarmism. Which is why the alarmists keep so quiet about it and you’ve never heard of it before. And it tells you what a poor job the media have done in covering this issue.

Weather balloons had been measuring the atmosphere since the 1960s, many thousands of them every year. The climate models all predict that as the planet warms, a hot-spot of moist air will develop over the tropics about 10km up, as the layer of moist air expands upwards into the cool dry air above. During the warming of the late 1970s, 80s, and 90s, the weather balloons found no hotspot. None at all, not even a small one. This evidence proves the climate models are fundamentally flawed and they greatly overestimate the temperature increases due to carbon dioxide.

This evidence first became clear around the mid 1990s.

At this point official “climate science” stopped being a science. You see, in science empirical evidence always trumps theory, no matter how much you are in love with the theory. If theory and evidence disagree, real scientists scrap the theory. But official climate science ignored the crucial weather balloon evidence, and other subsequent evidence that backs it up, and instead clung to their carbon dioxide theory – this just happens to keep them in high-paying jobs with lavish research grants, and gives great political power to their government masters.

There are now several independent pieces of evidence showing that the earth responds to the warming due to extra carbon dioxide by dampening the warming. Every long-lived natural system behaves this way, counteracting any disturbances, otherwise the system would be unstable. The climate system is no exception, and now we can prove it.

But the alarmists say the exact opposite, that the climate system amplifies any warming due to extra carbon dioxide, and is potentially unstable. Surprise – surprise, their predictions of planetary temperature made in 1988 to the US Congress, and again in 1990, 1995, and 2001, have all proved much higher than reality.

They keep lowering the temperature increases they expect, from 0.30C per decade in 1990, to 0.20C per decade in 2001, and now 0.15C per decade – yet they have the gall to tell us “it’s worse than expected”. These people are not scientists. They over-estimate the temperature increases due to carbon dioxide, selectively deny evidence, and now they cheat and lie to conceal the truth.

One way they cheat is in the way they measure temperature.

The official thermometers are often located in the warm exhaust of air conditioning outlets, over hot tarmac at airports where they get blasts of hot air from jet engines, at wastewater plants where they get warmth from decomposing sewerage, or in hot cities choked with cars and buildings. Global warming is measured in tenths of a degree, so any extra heating nudge is important. In the US, nearly 90% of official thermometers surveyed by volunteers violate official siting requirements that they not be too close to an artificial heating source. Nearly 90%! The photos of these thermometers are on the Internet; you can get to them via the corruption paper at my site, sciencespeak.com. Look at the photos, and you’ll never trust a government climate scientist again.

They place their thermometers in warm localities, and call the results “global” warming. Anyone can understand that this is cheating. They say that 2010 is the warmest recent year, but it was only the warmest at various airports, selected air conditioners, and certain car parks.

Global temperature is also measured by satellites, which measure nearly the whole planet 24/7 without bias. The satellites say the hottest recent year was 1998, and that since 2001 the global temperature has levelled off.

So it’s a question of trust.

If it really is warming up as the government climate scientists say, why do they present only the surface thermometer results and not mention the satellite results? And why do they put their thermometers near artificial heating sources? This is so obviously a scam now.

So what is really going on with the climate?

The earth has been in a warming trend since the depth of the Little Ice Age around 1680. Human emissions of carbon dioxide were negligible before 1850 and have nearly all come after WWII, so human carbon dioxide cannot possibly have caused the trend. Within the trend, the Pacific Decadal Oscillation causes alternating global warming and cooling for 25 – 30 years at a go in each direction. We have just finished a warming phase, so expect mild global cooling for the next two decades.

We are now at an extraordinary juncture.

Official climate science, which is funded and directed entirely by government, promotes a theory which is based on a guess about moist air and is now a known falsehood. Governments gleefully accept their advice, because the only way to curb emissions is to impose taxes and extend government control over all energy use. And to curb emissions on a world scale might even lead to world government — how exciting for the political class!

A carbon tax?

Even if Australia stopped emitting all carbon dioxide tomorrow, completely shut up shop and went back to the stone age, according to the official government climate models it would be cooler in 2050 by about 0.015 degrees. But their models exaggerate tenfold – in fact our sacrifices would make the planet in 2050 a mere 0.0015 degrees cooler!

Sorry, but you’ve been had.

Finally, to those of you who still believe the planet is in danger from our carbon dioxide emissions: sorry, but you’ve been had. Yes carbon dioxide is a cause of global warming, but it’s so minor it’s not worth doing much about.

Guardian, 2/feb/2010 is another article on Scientists cheating.

Sorry Jay, But i’d rather believe scientists than a Journalists. This is almost as bad as you stating around Oct,27 2010 that no one has ever gone to jail for Voter Fraud, which you were mistaken, 18 people went to jail for it.

« Before Are These Guys “Extremists” Too ???? April 10, 2011

AfterHow Politically Intelligent is Julia Gillard ? May 9, 2011 »

.

About

Thanks for visiting my site. If you are looking for a left of centre opinion here Im sad to say you have come to the wrong place. I hope to share with with you common sense opinion that seems to be sadly lacking in today’s media. Please leave me feedback … Continue reading »

Archives
•August 2011
•June 2011
•May 2011
•April 2011
•March 2011
•July 2010
•May 2010
•April 2010
•January 2010
•December 2009
•November 2009
•October 2009
•Federal Politics
•Uncategorized
•Social Comment
•History
•Sport
•Media Comment
•Parenthood

Etc

RSS Feed

.

Blog at WordPress.com. Theme: DePo Masthead by Automattic.

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
6:39 pm

Jay

As I’ve pointed out before the wingnuts like to think their voice in the discussion is being taken seriously.

Kamchak

August 29th, 2011
6:39 pm

I think jm’s upset because I stopped paying him theattention he sooooooo desperately craves.

Probably why he’s in the financial services industry.

josef

August 29th, 2011
6:39 pm

K’Chak…

Well, Bosch does have certain connections with that time and place he won’t tell us about…

Dusty

August 29th, 2011
6:40 pm

Josef,

Several Muslims have come to our church at our invitation. One was a businessman. The other a young women in theatre who was a friend of a church member. They were both gracious, attractive people and we enjoyed their presence. They explained how they felt the goodness of their faith. We enjoyed their interpretation although we did not have much time for discussion. They spoke between the main services.

There is no way we could connect their personal belief to terrorism. Nor did we want to. Extremism is a thorn in every faith.

poison pen

August 29th, 2011
6:41 pm

Sorry for the last piece, don’t know how that got in, and sorry for the long post.

There are many sites that claim the opposite of what Jay claims. Google is your friend Jay.

josef

August 29th, 2011
6:41 pm

poison

Can we get an abstract?

josef

August 29th, 2011
6:42 pm

DUSTY

Amen!

Soothsayer

August 29th, 2011
6:43 pm

Those who doubt that global warming is man-made should view this chart and then this chart. To imagine otherwise is ludicrous.

Joe the Plutocrat

August 29th, 2011
6:43 pm

man, that was SOME POISON PEN. knocked me out… ta ta

poison pen

August 29th, 2011
6:44 pm

Josef, I said sorry. lol

Have a good evening, I’m done.

Paul

August 29th, 2011
6:44 pm

Dusty 6:40

Nicely said.

That was you, wasn’t it?

Kamchak

August 29th, 2011
6:45 pm

Well, Bosch does have certain connections with that time and place he won’t tell us about…

BOSCH HAS A WAYBACK MACHINE?!

I see.

Bosch is Sherman, and Starbuck is Mr. Peabody.

pogo

August 29th, 2011
6:45 pm

Global warming; the last bastion of fading liberalism. Oh, that’s right, it is “climate” change.

AmVet

August 29th, 2011
6:46 pm

For pen,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ITeuaqcpckc

Dusty

August 29th, 2011
6:46 pm

Paul

Whatcha mean, was that you? I’m waiting………..

josef

August 29th, 2011
6:46 pm

poison

That you did…our posts crossed…seriously, though, I figured that’s what happened…

Bosch

August 29th, 2011
6:47 pm

Poison

You mean this Dr Evans?
http://bravenewclimate.com/2008/08/10/dr-david-evans-born-again-alarmist/

And yes there all kinds of sites who deny climate change, but personally I don’t care too much what say, historians have to say on the matter.

Schrodingers cat

August 29th, 2011
6:48 pm

I’m not sure that there are even 10k scientists that have a basic understanding of Global Climate Change…much less complete agreement amongst those that do

josef

August 29th, 2011
6:48 pm

PAUL

Today’s Dusty’s “nice day…” Don’t get her riled up!

Kamchak

August 29th, 2011
6:51 pm

Global warming; the last bastion of fading liberalism. Oh, that’s right, it is “climate” change.

If you have an issue with the phrase “climate” change, I suggest you take it up with the author of that phrase, Republican wordsmith and spinmeister extraordinaire Frank Luntz.

Yet, the phrase “global warming” is often replaced by the term “climate change,” a phrase first advanced by Republican political strategist Frank Luntz, who found in his focus groups that the term sounded more positive to viewers.

Schrodingers cat

August 29th, 2011
6:51 pm

Sooth…looking at your charts reminds me how “chaos theory” was founded and the introduction of the “butterfly effect”….w/o trying to do long term weather predictions we wouldn’t have noticed either…that whole significant figure thing can bite ya…and hard

Soothsayer

August 29th, 2011
6:53 pm

“’m not sure that there are even 10k scientists that have a basic understanding of Global Climate Change…much less complete agreement amongst those that do.”

I wonder how many scientists would agree that releasing >30 BILLION tons of CO2 into our atmosphere each year will have no effect on our atmosphere.

kayaker 71

August 29th, 2011
6:53 pm

Dusty,

Did you watch George W. Bush last night on the Nat. Geo. channel when he described what it was like on Sept 11th? If not, I am sure that it will be re-run. Showed a lot of humility and lots of emotion. Worth tuning in.

Dusty

August 29th, 2011
6:54 pm

Oh shut up, josef. I’m nice every day and doncha disagree with me, Mr. Weekend FireWorks..

Schrodingers cat

August 29th, 2011
6:56 pm

Sooth – I wonder how many would say that much CO2 or more can be released naturally? ie w/o mans help

josef

August 29th, 2011
6:56 pm

DUSTY

Come on, Baby, light my fire!

Kamchak

August 29th, 2011
6:57 pm

Did you watch George W. Bush last night on the Nat. Geo. channel…

The same Nat. Geo channel that is majority owned by Murdoch.

Schrodingers cat

August 29th, 2011
6:58 pm

Sooth – If a scientist says it’s possible…he doesn’t mean it’s a slam dunk…he may mean like 1 in 10^9

getalife

August 29th, 2011
6:59 pm

w was a disaster and the cons are very unpatriotic.

Dusty

August 29th, 2011
7:00 pm

No, KAYAKER 71

I’m sorry I missed that. I hope to see a rerun. Bush is a man of good character. He was a strong leader for us during the terrible days of 9/11.

Schrodingers cat

August 29th, 2011
7:01 pm

BTW – Science can’t even agree on how long a second is…yes a basic measurement in time…but you’re gonna convince me that got the rest figured out?

AmVet

August 29th, 2011
7:04 pm

“Global warming; the last bastion of fading liberalism.”

Yep, because it’s all melting away (get it?!) Not.

“Oh, that’s right, it is “climate” change.”

And has been for at least five years. For the umpteenth (plus one) time…

Scientists often use the term “climate change” instead of global warming. This is because as the Earth’s average temperature climbs, winds and ocean currents move heat around the globe in ways that can cool some areas, warm others, and change the amount of rain and snow falling. As a result, the climate changes differently in different areas.

http://environment.nationalgeographic.com/environment/global-warming/gw-overview/

Soothsayer

August 29th, 2011
7:05 pm

“Sooth – I wonder how many would say that much CO2 or more can be released naturally? ie w/o mans help.”

If you can post some authoritarian link that substantiates that claim, I would be willing to read it. Again, that’s >30 BILLION TONS!

Paul

August 29th, 2011
7:05 pm

Dusty

No one got thumped. Just a nice post, is all -

Paul

August 29th, 2011
7:06 pm

josef

sorry……

Schrodingers cat

August 29th, 2011
7:06 pm

Jay – speaking of people who understand data…..didn’t you just a few months ago refer to “the butterfly effect” as mythical?
don’t make me dig it up…but you referred to the “mythical butterfly” whose wing flutter cause Katrina

Dusty

August 29th, 2011
7:07 pm

Oh gee, Bookman is still here blubbering about climate change. Aint nobody got no understanding!!

Well, I’m really gone this time. Where IS that can opener?? Ive got to fix dinner.

Thomas

August 29th, 2011
7:08 pm

I believe that stuff put out into the atmosphere like emissions is not good, probably not neutral, and most likely bad. Ergo, the more stuff put out the more the result could be negative. I believe a lot of folks- the extremes we shall say- look for easy to digest and understand answers. Flowers are pretty- God made them and it is hotter- man or the devil did it. The answer is most likely rather complex and, I would say 3 dimensional.

I tend to think the below is, at least, more than 10% of the “issue”. The axis moved during the Japan earthquake. Anyway-

The Earth’s Axis has shifted

This has created severe changes in our global weather, seismic & volcanic activity… And it will get much worse. You need to know the facts & scientific details about these increasing global problems from authentic, verifiable sources.

Paul

August 29th, 2011
7:09 pm

Okay, Dusty, now I believe it’s you -

1811/0311

August 29th, 2011
7:09 pm

Headline: “Carney Grilled Over Potential Hillary Primary Challenge: ‘You’ll Have To Ask Her’…”

Headline: “1 in 4 Dems Want to Dump Obama… ”

Ah ……………………………. no comment.

josef

August 29th, 2011
7:09 pm

K’chak

Oh, he’s got our number, all right, I ain’t messin’ with him

http://www.ibiblio.org/wm/paint/auth/bosch/judge/judge-c.jpg

Doggone/GA

August 29th, 2011
7:10 pm

“did not intend it to cast aspersions on chaos theory”

And using the term “mythical” is not casting aspersions anyway. “Myth” is not neccessarily the same thing as a fairy tale. Heck, camels were once “mythical” creatures!

carlosgvv

August 29th, 2011
7:11 pm

Schrodingers cat

Maybe it’s just because it’s been a hard day – I don’t know – but exactly WHAT is your position on global warming in terms of it’s reality and causes? And what do you think the long term effects will be?

Just Another Anonymous One

August 29th, 2011
7:14 pm

There are many sites that claim the opposite of what Jay claims. Google is your friend Jay.

Why is it that such people always want to dump their load and then tell others to clean it up for them.

Schrodingers cat

August 29th, 2011
7:16 pm

As I’ve said before Sooth…I’m not a (read your) research assistant…

Schrodingers cat

August 29th, 2011
7:22 pm

carlosgvv – Same as it ever was…the planet will adapt….us a species, I’m not too sure
but I have seen where early data determination can lead to failed long term results…sometimes we just have to watch a lil while longer…I’ve seen where a 1000 data points paints a different picture than the first 50 of the same experiment…GCC is a for profit industry after all so I’m naturally suspicious …thanks for asking

josef

August 29th, 2011
7:25 pm

A lot of us tend to forget that M-ther N-ture is in charge and Sh-’s a b*tch when it comes to house cleaning…a Designing Woman, Sh-…

Schrodingers cat

August 29th, 2011
7:27 pm

Jay, I got the meaning of your statement, but couldn’t resist the “parse” it seems so popular here, I thought I’d give it a try

josef

August 29th, 2011
7:28 pm

PAUL
Some people just don’t know how to take a compliment…

josef

August 29th, 2011
7:29 pm

CAT

The Imam don’t take highly to others doing the parsing…he wants it all to himself…

Soothsayer

August 29th, 2011
7:31 pm

Yes, sirree! That Rick Perry’s the guy for me!

carlosgvv

August 29th, 2011
7:32 pm

Schrodingers cat

I generally agree. The main reason conservatives and Business deny it is because it would cost MONEY to fix this (if it’s not too late already) and Business will avoid like the plague anything that adversely affects the bottom line, even if it means the future trashing of the planet. The planet will adapt but, you’re right, if the worst case scenaro is correct, our chances aren’t looking too good. The worst thing is that if we come to realize that global warming is man made and is a reality, we will be well past the tipping point and there probably won’t be any way we can stop it.

josef

August 29th, 2011
7:35 pm

That’s Parse-On, Brother Brownlow!

Soothsayer

August 29th, 2011
7:38 pm

See how simple all of this is? It’s really simple!

Just Another Anonymous One

August 29th, 2011
7:41 pm

I was reading this paper by Curry and Webster and I must say that I was left with a feeling of emptiness. All of that buildup of uncertainty into a monstrous crescendo only to be squelched with statements such as:

Symptoms of an enraged uncertainty monster include increased levels of confusion, ambiguity,
discomfort and doubt. Evidence that the monster is currently enraged includes: doubt that was
expressed particularly by European policy makers at the climate negotiations at Copenhagen (van der
Sluijs et al. 2010), defeat of a seven-year effort in the U.S. Senate to pass a climate bill centered on
cap-and-trade, increasing prominence of skeptics in the news media, and the formation of an
InterAcademy Independent Review of the IPCC.

and other apparently political rhetoric. Then again, perhaps the true message is that the monster that opposes the body of work to date by climate scientists is indeed nothing other than trumped up myth with no basis in reality.

Schrodingers cat

August 29th, 2011
7:43 pm

carlosgvv – I’ve said this at work…
I don’t do “Failure Mode Analysis” until the testing is complete….and then “Corrective Action” after that…I Iook at it like this…If we are so insignificant to not stop a hurricane or tornado…It works both ways…and….you’ll kill me for this…but man-made GCC is so Godless…not that God would save us from ourselves, but it’s arrogant to think we are more significant that the rest of the universes systems…we may cause a rash…but total destruction…not on your life….and all of it could be caused by natural phenom no matter what we do

so why lie awake at night worried about any of it?

Soothsayer

August 29th, 2011
7:44 pm

“Hairdo” prepares for his next speech!

josef

August 29th, 2011
7:49 pm

JAY

Since you’re here…who WAS that masked man last p.m.? A fruitcake even by our standards…

Schrodingers cat

August 29th, 2011
7:49 pm

Can I predict an Alan Parsin’ Project” post on Friday?

josef

August 29th, 2011
7:51 pm

CAT

Duly noted…

Soothsayer

August 29th, 2011
7:52 pm

For all my Rightie friends out there.

Just Another Anonymous One

August 29th, 2011
7:52 pm

Failure Mode Analysis is good to do on things like broken bridges and such but for some reason I don’t care too much for the prospect of anyone being handed the assignment by the boss entitled, “The Earth is Broke, What Went Wrong.” (And by “broke”, I’m not talking in a monetary sense.) For one thing, what would this sole survivor that happened to be in the space station at the time that it broke be expected to do.

josef

August 29th, 2011
7:54 pm

Anonymous

Go fishing? Remember that from the book “On the Beach?”

Soothsayer

August 29th, 2011
7:55 pm

It just ain’t fair Michele Bachmann gettin’ all that attention and me not gettin’ none!

Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)

August 29th, 2011
7:57 pm

Ugh, Sooth. Why did you have to go and ruin a image for me?

josef

August 29th, 2011
7:59 pm

SOOTH

@ 7:55

Oooooh…I wouldn’t touch that one for all the tea in China…or in the GOP

Schrodingers cat

August 29th, 2011
7:59 pm

JAAO – It’s difficult to understand the universe when you only have one to study

There is no instant gratification or instant proof…it really is a waiting game…and really ZERO sense of urgency…let’s just continue to take data for now…and in the mean time take reasonable measures to have a cleaner planet … no crisis

Just Another Anonymous One

August 29th, 2011
8:00 pm

Go fishing? Remember that from the book “On the Beach?”

Or hope for a treed ape or two in need of a theory to prove.

josef

August 29th, 2011
8:01 pm

JAY

As Mama would say, he’s a mess, bless his heart…I felt kinda special, though, being top of his list…I mean with 6 billion of us, that’s nuthin’ to sneeze at…

Just Another Anonymous One

August 29th, 2011
8:02 pm

and in the mean time take reasonable measures to have a cleaner planet

If only… by the way, have you heard. CO2 is a pollutant. I’m game.

Soothsayer

August 29th, 2011
8:04 pm

Sorry, Redneck, here’s the original so’s you can get “the feelin’” back!

@@

August 29th, 2011
8:05 pm

Josef, I have no idea. I do believe he has poked his head in briefly once before, before being bounced due to his penchant for belittling every human being who in his opinion fails to meet his own lofty standards.

That’s what I like about PoliFore. He’s not selective in his belittling.

Being someone who likes a little spice in her life, PoliFore is like Aleppo Pepper.

Funny and beyond. Just my opinion.

Schrodingers cat

August 29th, 2011
8:07 pm

JAAO – So is water vapor…what’s ypur point?

Schrodingers cat

August 29th, 2011
8:08 pm

or “your” point

JKL2

August 29th, 2011
8:09 pm

soothsayer- To imagine otherwise is ludicrous

Maybe Al Gore could get you a job in his wealth distribution department selling peices of paper representing air from third world countries. You’ve proved nothing. A hundred years out of millions doesn’t make a very good sample.

@@

August 29th, 2011
8:10 pm

And Bosch is like filler in jay’s “crabcake”.

Schrodingers cat

August 29th, 2011
8:11 pm

OK…I pose you all this
What is the purpose of testing?…be it a scientific experiment or high school grades
This is where we (or most) have lost their way…IMHO

Soothsayer

August 29th, 2011
8:17 pm

“You’ve proved nothing.”

I wasn’t trying to prove anything. I simply posted two charts of observed data. The data is irrefutable.

What you’re arguing is that there is no — nor can there be no — correlation between increasing atmospheric CO2 emissions and rising global temperatures.

I argue, and most of the scientific community argues, that there is a correlation between increasing atmospheric CO2 emissions and rising global temperatures.

I think almost anyone can, without too much difficulty, infer that, given the two charts presented, there is a correlation between atmospheric CO2 emissions and rising global temperatures.

josef

August 29th, 2011
8:18 pm

CAT

“What is the purpose of testing?…be it a scientific experiment or high school grades”

To get more of that gubmint money?

Schrodingers cat

August 29th, 2011
8:21 pm

Sooth – “I argue, and most of the scientific community argues, that there is a correlation between increasing atmospheric CO2 emissions and rising global temperatures”
_______________________________________

Trust me the scientific community can parse with the best….

josef

August 29th, 2011
8:23 pm

CO2 emissions? H3ll, do your part, Stop breathing,

Just Another Anonymous One

August 29th, 2011
8:25 pm

So is water vapor…what’s your point?

When CO2 is added to the atmosphere, as a greenhouse gas it has a warming effect. This causes more water to evaporate and warm the air more to a higher (more or less) stabilized level. So CO2 warming has an amplified effect, beyond a purely CO2 effect.

What is your point, Cat. Could it be that by controlling CO2, we also control the corresponding increase in water vapor. Is that your point.

Schrodingers cat

August 29th, 2011
8:25 pm

No josef in it’s purest form ?
hint:
are you trying to find something that is there or something that is not there?

sorry I’m not really political…I’m not represented

AmVet

August 29th, 2011
8:27 pm

Only in the hyper-dysfunctional organization called the GOP could one even conjure up ifnoramuses like Perry and Inhofe who “argue the globe is moving into a cooling period.”

TV writers and stand up comedians must love these nuts…

Schrodingers cat

August 29th, 2011
8:28 pm

JAAO – For the record, I’m not making a statement…or a judgment…..but
Sometimes we don’t know what leads and/or what follows

AmVet

August 29th, 2011
8:29 pm

Make that ignoramuses, as in the type that Clarence Darrow identified 85 years ago during the Scopes Monkey Trial…

Soothsayer

August 29th, 2011
8:31 pm

I had some parched peanuts once. They was pretty good!

carlosgvv

August 29th, 2011
8:31 pm

Schrodingers cat

Actually, I don’t worry at all about it since, if it turns out to be a bad as predicted, it will be about 2100 before the spit hits the fan and I won’t be around by then. If there is honest scientific disagreement, that’s one thing and that is clearly your right. Unfortunately there are others, not you, who don’t want to acknowledge the possibility of man-made global warming for political and business reasons and I find that most disagreeable.

Schrodingers cat

August 29th, 2011
8:36 pm

I respect your opinion carlosgvv….and wasn’t suggesting that you were among those sleepless in Seattle

Keep Up the Good Fight!

August 29th, 2011
8:37 pm

Fox’s Megyn Kelly On Presidential Elections: “Does It Matter — Should It Matter — If Somebody Is Dumb?”

The answer and the blame by the cheerleader to the “liberal media” is one of those “neutral, factual, newsier” time slot stories we all love about Fox. You can almost see the gears grind right before she goes into attack-blame mode.

Disgusted

August 29th, 2011
8:37 pm

Unfortunately there are others, not you, who don’t want to acknowledge the possibility of man-made global warming for political and business reasons and I find that most disagreeable.

Bingo! That’s the crux of the argument. Polluters don’t want to pay a penalty for their transgressions. They’re perfectly willing to kick the can down the road to future generations. But when it comes to the national debt and cutting funds to the people and causes they hate? That’s diffo!

Just Another Anonymous One

August 29th, 2011
8:39 pm

Sometimes we don’t know what leads and/or what follows

And that is a good basis for further study and there has been a lot wrt climate change… a good starting point would be the work on the Milankovitch cycles, assuming you have not already studied it. Just a suggested reading.

Soothsayer

August 29th, 2011
8:40 pm

Well, good night everyone! I know you’ll enjoy this one! It was recorded sometime between 1949 and 1954 so it’s not as “slick” as today’s recordings. The message is right on point though!

Noah's neighbors

August 29th, 2011
8:41 pm

Actually, I don’t worry at all about it since, if it turns out to be a bad as predicted, it will be about 2100 before the spit hits the fan and I won’t be around by then.

“I’m singing in the rain
Just singing in the rain
What a glorious feeling
I’m happy again
I’m laughing at clouds
So dark up above”

JKL2

August 29th, 2011
8:41 pm

soothsayer- I think almost anyone can, without too much difficulty, infer that, given the two charts presented, there is a correlation between atmospheric CO2 emissions and rising global temperatures.

So what you’re saying is we need to kill all the cows to save the planet?

josef

August 29th, 2011
8:43 pm

Cat
Not meant to be taken seriously, of course

Schrodingers cat

August 29th, 2011
8:44 pm

I have yet to see an “honest baseline”

Schrodingers cat

August 29th, 2011
8:46 pm

j – I’ve got plenty thick skin,and have a fond appreciation for humor….even at my own expense

Fred

August 29th, 2011
8:51 pm

Jay

August 29th, 2011
6:11 pm

Personally, it is hard to imagine a more intellectually bankrupt position than that adopted by those who try to explain away THE FLAT EARTH THEORY by alleging fraud on the part of the scientific community.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

There. I fixed your stupid crap for you Jay. Carry on……………..

Schrodingers cat

August 29th, 2011
8:51 pm

the testing thing….are you trying to show the absence of failures or the presence of them?

@@

August 29th, 2011
8:52 pm

On second thought…

But that doesn’t mean Huntsman thinks evolution is a purely scientific process. In fact, Monday morning he suggested it has divine underpinnings.

During a “Fox and Friends” appearance, Huntsman reiterated that he trusts evolutionary science, but explained: “I believe in evolution. I think it’s part of God’s plan.”

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/62226.html

On that, we agree. On Cap & Trade, we don’t. Talk about a man-made disaster.

Fred

August 29th, 2011
8:56 pm

Soothsayer

August 29th, 2011
6:18 pm

That would explain why sea level is 15 inches higher now than at the start of the industrial revolution.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

And what is it’s depth when compared to the ice age? Until you can tell me THAT, have a cup of this:

http://humour.200ok.com.au/image_nicebigcup.html

1811/0311

August 29th, 2011
8:57 pm

NEW STORM TRACK: NOT AGAIN?!

1811/0311

August 29th, 2011
8:58 pm

P.S.

http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/graphics_at2.shtml?5-daynl?large

1811/0311

August 29th, 2011
8:59 pm

Well, there you go !

“RATES of mental illnesses including depression and post-traumatic stress will increase as a result of climate change, a report to be released today says.”

Schrodingers cat

August 29th, 2011
9:00 pm

or better Fred…what’ the right temperature or conditions? let’s say we can change it?….when do we we know when cool enough is cool enough??

1811/0311

August 29th, 2011
9:01 pm

Headline: “Syracuse 15-year-old gets two to six years for 7-cent robbery”

Let’s see ……….. that comes out to about …………… Jay help me.

josef

August 29th, 2011
9:02 pm

Cat
I went back and reread that post. I can see how you would have thought it was directly to you. It was meant as a general (everybody) “suggestion”. My apologies…

getalife

August 29th, 2011
9:02 pm

He is not a nut.

He is trying to be a comedian.

He was called Political Foreskin.

That was his Sheen bit.

Have a conversation with him.

1811/0311

August 29th, 2011
9:02 pm

Oh, did I mention the headline conveniently left this part out:

“Stewart was convicted by a jury of first-degree robbery in July, two days before Ninham pleaded guilty. According to prosecutors, Stewart and Ninham ran up behind the victim Dec. 22 and knocked him to the ground. Ninham kicked the victim and Stewart punched him in the face, breaking his glasses, before the victim handed over the seven cents in his pocket, prosecutors said.”

Just Another Anonymous One

August 29th, 2011
9:03 pm

And what is it’s depth when compared to the ice age?

Are you planning on doing some time traveling and want to make sure you don’t land your open-air machine in a spot that is under water.

1811/0311

August 29th, 2011
9:03 pm

Headline: “NASA: Space station may be evacuated”

Wow ! That “Irene” was something else.

Kamchak

August 29th, 2011
9:04 pm

Headline: “Drudge rabbit holes mysteriously manifest at Jay Bookman’s blog. No one shocked or awed.”

Schrodingers cat

August 29th, 2011
9:05 pm

Josef…you worry too much…I have a habit of speaking mind before I can filter…we’re good

Just Another Anonymous One

August 29th, 2011
9:07 pm

when do we we know when cool enough is cool enough??

When you no longer have to worry about setting the AC on 72 degrees F and wonder if your unit will be able to handle it without causing a brownout. Then again, you guys might be those 68 degree F types that just have to screw it up for the rest of us.

Schrodingers cat

August 29th, 2011
9:10 pm

Think San Diego

Schrodingers cat

August 29th, 2011
9:13 pm

Kam – you used to annoy me…now you slay me..LOL, that’s some funny stuff….
“geta…” too a little

Fred

August 29th, 2011
9:13 pm

JAAO: The only point I want to make is that according to all the data I have seen based upon the theories and principals of the adherents to Evolution, the big bang theory, and the rest of that stuff, use the notion that climate changes and weather patterns change over centuries, millenium. How long have we had had empiracal data on this “global warming’ thing? We sure as HELL had some serious “global warming” after the ice age don’tcha know?

I guess to those whose idea of “science’ is jiggling the toilet handle to stop it from leaking the short term scare tactics are good. but not for me. I’m all for limiting CO2 as we ALL know it’s harmful. Maybe we could start by cutting down the jungles, I mean “rain forests.” let’s get rid of bovine flatulence. Unfortunately though, I’m not a Luddite nor do I subscribe to the pagan philosophy that ‘mankind” is a parasite on this earth and should be eradicated.

I think we should do all that is reasonably possible to limit CO2 emissions. But every step we here in America have taken is undermined by the rampant disregard by the Chinese and Mexicans………. and former Soviets……..

Uncle Jed

August 29th, 2011
9:16 pm

Irene Hype=Swine Flu Scare.

1811/0311

August 29th, 2011
9:16 pm

Rabbit hole = afraid to debate

Fred

August 29th, 2011
9:17 pm

“When you no longer have to worry about setting the AC on 72 degrees F and wonder if your unit will be able to handle it without causing a brownout.”

Really? I keep mine on 78. maybe you should invest in some insulation and lowE double paned windows. And I’m not even a tree hugger……….

Just Another Anonymous One

August 29th, 2011
9:22 pm

Fred,

Your hyperbole and $3.50 will probably buy you a good cup of Joe. As for the actual CO2 emissions, try this. Compare the data for China versus the US and look closely at the per person data as well. Of course, once China is up to the 2.7 cars per household or whatever it is standard of living of the US, then they will be putting out some global warming. Then there’s India and every other country that has yet to be brought up to our output level per person. Maybe it’s time for a change.

Kamchak

August 29th, 2011
9:28 pm

Rabbit hole = rabbit hole

Fred

August 29th, 2011
9:29 pm

Uh huh JAAO: Nice try. Try the industrial crap and stick that “per capita” stuff up your ass. Fudge data on someone else. Homey don’t play that crap. When you have to go up your elbow and around your back to get from your head to your ass, you have already “lost.” Whether it’s politics, horse racing or religion. Quantitative unmassaged data speaks for itself.

Get back to me when you aren’t shooting blanks you American hating twit.

Just Another Anonymous One

August 29th, 2011
9:32 pm

Right Fred. I think I’ve seen all the moon shadows I care to see from you. Enjoy your lame attempts at elevating yourself via your mud slinging.

1811/0311

August 29th, 2011
9:35 pm

Kammie = LOL !

Keep Up the Good Fight!

August 29th, 2011
9:39 pm

Rabbit hole = unattributed and unlinked questionable “headline” with some snark comment that twists the story to purportedly suggest the continued diatribe of a poster who’s has a stated purpose of using whatever it takes to oppose Obama by almost any means possible including innuendo, rumor, propaganda, fear, untruths and distortions. Nothing is too underhanded. There is no hole too low.

Birthers

1811/0311

August 29th, 2011
9:44 pm

Good Fight:

Spoken like a true liberal who can’t stand the light of day !

buck@gon

August 29th, 2011
9:45 pm

Jay,

“It would be fascinating to read how future historians and economists analyze this era and the decisions made by government and business leaders.”

It will be catalogued as a combined record of Jimmy Carter part deux and Nero’s fiddling.

Keep Up the Good Fight!

August 29th, 2011
9:46 pm

why Scout I was outside for a good portion of the day…. no problems here. You dispute your acknowledged effort to oppose Obama?

Fred

August 29th, 2011
9:49 pm

Mudslinging JAAO? I just speak clearly and truthfully. Rather brusque in my mannerisms if you will. those crappy little massaged data thing you attempted didn’t wash and doesn’t wash. “Per capita?” REALLY? Are f’ing SERIOUS? China has over ONE BILLION MORE people than the US. At 1.15 BILLION people for a population, India is just under America’s ENTIRE population coming in as number 2 on the most people per country list. And you want to use a “per capita” comparison for CO2 emissions? REALLY?

One of us is REALLY stupid, and I don’t think it’s me. You are comparing apples to apple. You aren’t even comparing apples to oranges. You are TRYING to compare apples you rotten dog crap and yet you think I’m supposed to take a bite of each and argue the merits of one over the other? That’s just insane. Try using a little truth. It would serve you better.

Fred

August 29th, 2011
9:51 pm

wow, and I had about 47,000 typo’s in that last post. It may be time for a new keyboard. I know I hit the right keys so it can’t be MY fault………….

Uncle Jed

August 29th, 2011
9:51 pm

I now understand why democrats/liberals/progressives are so darn interested in the Republican candidates for POTUS in 2012. It is inevitable that Barry is once and done. Yeah, it is early; and sure, the knuckleheads will play dirty; take comments out of context; and try to scare the seniors and all the rest; but today’s Gallup numbers must make even the diehard sycophants weak in the knees and heavy in the diapers…

Obama Job Approval:
Approve 38% (-3)
Disapprove 55% (+4)

U.S. Unemployment: 9.1% with Underemployment at 18.2%

Economic Conditions:
Excellent / Good: 7% (-1)
Poor: 56%

Economic Outlook:
Getting Better: 18%
Getting worse: 77%

If the democrat party doesn’t field a challenger to FOTUS they have no chance. It will be interesting to see how many democrat voters, where allowed, will vote in the Republican primaries in order to help pick BHO’s successor IF there is no democrat challenger to the Failure-In-Chief.

Mick

August 29th, 2011
9:54 pm

keep

The birthers were vanquished, the remnants of that crew are now after birthers.FYI

Uncle Jed

August 29th, 2011
9:55 pm

Watch out, the “birthers” may be born again. Smoke signals may spell heap big doo-doo.

Kamchak

August 29th, 2011
9:57 pm

It will be interesting to see how many democrat voters, where allowed, will vote in the Republican primaries…

Oh, puh-leeeeze.

My folks, die hard Republicans, have been voting in Democrat primaries for decades.

Mick

August 29th, 2011
9:58 pm

uncle jed

You conveniently leave out the poll that shows a majority of voters still think the previous president was the major cause of our economic stall, they actually get it, no matter how much you wail and moan…
http://www.nationalconfidential.com/20110825/poll-bush-still-to-blame-for-bad-economy/

Fred

August 29th, 2011
9:58 pm

Uncle Jed: That’s just silly. Right now the REAL “poll numbers” that are verifiable for the upcoming Presidentaial election are, 30% (ALL of mindless fanatical Republicans) for whomever the Republicans pick as their candidate and 30% (ALL of the mindless fanatical Democrats) for President Obama.

This election will be decided, as all of them are, by folks like me who have a brain and think for themselves, the independents. I can’t say I’m all that happy with President Obama, but I CAN say I like him (or at least dislike him less) than any of the clowns the Republicans keep trotting out.

Really? These folks are the best you can do?

Keep Up the Good Fight!

August 29th, 2011
10:00 pm

Afterbirthers battle cry: Remember the box 26!

Of course no matter that box 26 is as nonexistent as the basement in the Alamo.

Fred

August 29th, 2011
10:01 pm

Yo Mick: Florida song for you bro. Don’t know of you like these guys or not, but I think it’s one of the great tunes of all times:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R82OM5tzcrk&list=PL7981219DC0966F35&index=27&feature=plpp

Mick

August 29th, 2011
10:04 pm

fred

Yes, great tune, one of the few I actually know how to play on mi guitar…

Kamchak

August 29th, 2011
10:06 pm

Afterbirthers battle cry: Remember the box 26!

Gimme box 26, or gimme death!
You have but one life to give for box 26!
The box 26 is coming! The box 26 is coming!

Fred

August 29th, 2011
10:07 pm

Yo Keep, waiting for the check to clear. I’m the cautious type sometimes lol. Drop you a line tomorrow.

1811/0311

August 29th, 2011
10:08 pm

Good Fight !

“You dispute your acknowledged effort to oppose Obama?”

Nope …………. you got that part right.

Fred

August 29th, 2011
10:10 pm

OK. I’m stupid. What is box 26? (unless you are referring to income tax but then i STILL don’t see the significance……)

1811/0311

August 29th, 2011
10:13 pm

“The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of the blessings. The inherent blessing of socialism is the equal sharing of misery.”

Winston Churchill

1811/0311

August 29th, 2011
10:14 pm

“I don’t make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts.”

Will Rogers

Kamchak

August 29th, 2011
10:16 pm

“The inherent blessing of box 26 is the limitless possibilities of mocking.”

Keep Up the Good Fight!

August 29th, 2011
10:20 pm

Fred, Scout at times denies he is a “birther” but there is “something” in Box 26 of the long form that Obama wants to “hide”. Something so bad (innuendo) that he has to fight the disclosure of the long form.. Something so bad that Scout would never describe what it could be…. except when the long form came out….NO box 26. As if you had any reason to consider Scout credible at this point ( ), that certainly nails that “inherent blessing”.

Paulo977

August 29th, 2011
10:21 pm

Doggone

“Heck, camels were once “mythical” creatures!”

Hmmmmm some of us still bbelieve OBL WAS /IS one!!

Kamchak

August 29th, 2011
10:22 pm

Keep

Box 26 = rabbit hole.

Keep Up the Good Fight!

August 29th, 2011
10:25 pm

kam, definite wabbit hole with a cloaking device!

1811/0311

August 29th, 2011
10:28 pm

To My Conservative Friends:

Notice how even when I’m gone or not directly responding to some of their nonsense they keep talking about me and bringing up prior posts?

It’s kind of like one of those commercials you can’t stand but you keep thinking about it …………… because it’s working !

Kamchak

August 29th, 2011
10:28 pm

Ooooh, a Klingon rabbit hole.

1811/0311

August 29th, 2011
10:28 pm

LOL !!!!

AmVet

August 29th, 2011
10:29 pm

buck ragging on Carter?

Hysterical.

He seems to have an EXTREMELY short memory regarding good old #39 George.

LOL.

1811/0311

August 29th, 2011
10:30 pm

Actually it’s block #23 “Reason for Delayed Filing or Alteration”.

You can look it up on the internet if you want ………….. or not.

getalife

August 29th, 2011
10:32 pm

Scout is a cartoon character.

Elmer Fudd going to get that rascally Obama.

1811/0311

August 29th, 2011
10:33 pm

It’s “rascawwy”.

1811/0311

August 29th, 2011
10:34 pm

Hey ……….. this looks interesting. What happened to transparency? Let’s see the stuff !

Headline: “Obama’s Justice Department refuses to release significant portions of Bush administration memos justifying program that allowed warrantless searches for national security after 9/11.”

Keep Up the Good Fight!

August 29th, 2011
10:34 pm

Scout: The “mock me” posts are working! Congrats! You and Charlie are WINNING!
______

Kam: Romulan rabbit hole I believe if you follow Star Trek history. But I am far from a certified trekkie.

getalife

August 29th, 2011
10:39 pm

Yeah Scout.

Obama voted for amnesty for spying.

Old news.

1811/0311

August 29th, 2011
10:44 pm

getalife:

Release it then.

getalife

August 29th, 2011
10:46 pm

Do you want him to release the torture stuff too?

Thulsa Doom

August 29th, 2011
10:50 pm

Scout,

You must be doing something right if the blog’s 2 cyber stalkers tweedledee and tweedledum are trying to razz you. I expect a post from tweeledum momentarily. Why? Cause he is sooooo predictable.

Thulsa Doom

August 29th, 2011
10:53 pm

Uh Oh,Now they are going after my write in candidate Elmer Fudd. Its when they get nervous and they really think a candidate is going to take down Obozo that they start with the mudslinging. Elmer watch out! They know you’re a better candidate than Obozo so watch yer back Elmer.

getalife

August 29th, 2011
10:55 pm

Gotcha Scout.

If you want to look back, I say go for it.

1811/0311

August 29th, 2011
11:05 pm

getalife:

“Do you want him to release the torture stuff too?”

Transparency ! Let ‘er rip !

1811/0311

August 29th, 2011
11:06 pm

Thulsa:

The main thing is (and they of course will never admit it) they hate me so much and what I stand for that they can’t let it go even when I’m not posting.

1811/0311

August 29th, 2011
11:10 pm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJ8zw_iuo_4&feature=related

Kamchak

August 29th, 2011
11:10 pm

Keep

Nah, it’s the Klingons

Klingon wabbit: I knew I should’ve turned left at Alpha Centauri.

Mick

August 29th, 2011
11:12 pm

1811

Actually, it’s good that you are here and showing your colors, what the hell would this world be like if we were all the same robotic thinkers? I also find it ironic the way you think of obama is exactly the way many of us thought of the previous president. This all culminated on sept of 08, when our fears were proven correct…

getalife

August 29th, 2011
11:13 pm

So Scout wants to look back at w’s crimes.

I guess they can arrest cheney promoting his book and charge him on torture.

Works for me.

Thulsa Doom

August 29th, 2011
11:13 pm

Scout,

I’ve kinda noticed that even when you’re not around the kooks still rant against your views. Its akin to the Bush or Palin derangement syndromes. We’ll call it scout syndrome. Stay strong brother Scout. All they got is dey science fiction books and world of warcraft video games. Ya gotta wonder what kind of a goober gets into that science fiction escapism. Bwahahahahahahaha!

Thulsa Doom

August 29th, 2011
11:15 pm

Mick,

What are you up to? I thought you mostly stayed on the day crew nowadays.

Thulsa Doom

August 29th, 2011
11:16 pm

getalife,

Do cons lie? And should we indict Bush and Cheney?

Mick

August 29th, 2011
11:22 pm

doom

I’ve cut back, too much of the same argument over and over again. There are many good people here with a sense of humor, that helps. Also, making as much money as possible even in this crummy economy. There’s opportunity behind every corner, who is president at any given time has never held me back…just sayin

1811/0311

August 29th, 2011
11:24 pm

getalife:

You miss the entire point.

Obama won’t do it because his administration is continuing the same thing ……………. it’s called the “real world”.

He doesn’t want “his” released later.

Mick

August 29th, 2011
11:28 pm

**He doesn’t want “his” released later**

Excellent point, meet the new boss, same as the….

Thulsa Doom

August 29th, 2011
11:43 pm

Mick,

Good point. Likewise I’ve chosen not to participate in the bad economy- its a frame of mind more than anything. Got a good week lined up and my busy season is coming up next month so I’m going to be balls to the wall 12-14 hours a day for 2 months or more. Gonna take a nice vacation before October hits and a nice one in December- I’m thinking somewhere warm. We are rehashing the same arguments over and over on here but like you said some folks sense of humor is what keeps it going. Personally I like getalife who is the ultimate political homer. No matter what he says I find humor in it.

Paul

August 29th, 2011
11:51 pm

Scout

“Obama won’t do it because his administration is continuing the same thing ……………. it’s called the “real world”.”

I’d imagine the principle has more to do with defending the power of the Executive branch. The records are just the items illustrating the principle.

getalife 11:13

Good one!

g’night

Fred

August 29th, 2011
11:53 pm

Mick

August 29th, 2011
11:28 pm

**He doesn’t want “his” released later**

Excellent point, meet the new boss, same as the….
+++++++++++++++++++++

Excellent choice Mick. Done:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rp6-wG5LLqE

Now off to watch episode 2 of ROME.

Keep: Thanks for the explanation.

getalife

August 30th, 2011
12:03 am

Thanks Paul.

Should we actually arrest our pols?

Of course silly.

Start the investigations.

Go for it.

Jm

August 30th, 2011
12:30 am

Aug. 29 (Bloomberg) — The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. objected to Bank of America Corp.’s proposed $8.5 billion mortgage-bond settlement with investors, joining investors and states that are challenging the agreement.
The FDIC, the receiver for failed banks, owns securities covered by the settlement and said it doesn’t have enough information to evaluate the accord, according to a filing today in federal court in Manhattan.

Screw the FDIC

The government is crooked

oldguy

August 30th, 2011
12:48 am

Just dropped in to spread a bit of sunshine to the resident Libs…… Obama approval rating down to 38%!!
Obama does his Limbo routine…..”How low can you go!!”
http://www.gallup.com/poll/113980/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Job-Approval.aspx

USinUK

August 30th, 2011
5:22 am

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/8730133/US-man-impaled-through-eye-with-pruning-shears.html

ew..

ew.

ew

USinUK

August 30th, 2011
5:24 am

Col Gaddafi in hiding:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/matt/

USinUK

August 30th, 2011
5:27 am

it would be interesting to see a similar study done in the US:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/8729589/Banks-responsible-for-over-a-third-of-UK-economic-slump.html

Normal

August 30th, 2011
6:46 am

Good Morning everyone…I wondered about this too…

http://news.icanhascheezburger.com/2011/08/29/political-pictures-martin-luth-king-jr-irony/

and…of course, my day couldn’t start without my digs.

http://news.icanhascheezburger.com/2011/08/29/political-pictures-election-2012-so-many-choices/

Mark in mid-town

August 30th, 2011
6:46 am

Jay Bookman writes: ““recession” has a definitive meaning in economics — an actual decline in economic activity — and we’re not in a recession now by that definition and haven’t been since the second quarter of 2009.”

Jay, can you elaborate on the changes in how inflation is calculated today compared to how it was in the 1980s. If inflation was still calculated as it was in the 1980s, would the official inflation rate be higher than it is — and if so, under that higher inflation rate, would we then not be seeing a decline in GDP today, rather than a small trivial increase? And wouldn’t that decline mean we would still be in a recession?

USinUK

August 30th, 2011
6:52 am

Mark – 6:46 – of course inflation calculations have changed – just as the “basket of goods” is constantly updated. Our lives are different now than they were in the 1980s.

Normal

August 30th, 2011
6:54 am

http://icanhascheezburger.com/2011/08/30/funny-pictures-two-spooning-cats/

Normal

August 30th, 2011
6:55 am

http://icanhascheezburger.com/2011/08/29/funny-pictures-you-want-me-to-splain/

Normal

August 30th, 2011
6:57 am

Mornin’ USinUK…Love your “In Hiding” cartoon! It’s a keeper…

USinUK

August 30th, 2011
6:58 am

Normal – this was my favorite:

http://icanhascheezburger.com/2011/08/22/funny-pictures-hang-on/

USinUK

August 30th, 2011
7:15 am

okay, weather nerds – check out the storm that’s half-way between the horn of Africa and South America

http://hurricane.accuweather.com/hurricane/atlantic/basin.asp?partner=accuweather

that could turn into something nasty …

Jm

August 30th, 2011
7:19 am

Usinuk 6:52 why is usinuk, a self proclaimed expert in economics, so bad at this

The artificial deflator of the CPI is not the substitution effect, which is widely accepted. Rather it is hedonic quality adjustments that can be very dubious

This is another lesson in Econ 101 brought to usinuk by jm

USinUK

August 30th, 2011
7:30 am

jm – “The artificial deflator of the CPI is not the substitution effect”

aw, bless. you really do have reading comprehension problems don’t you. I didn’t say the basket was the only change – I said that the calculation was changed JUST AS the basket was changed.

why were the calculations changed? because our lives change and were significantly different in the late 70s/early 80s than they were in the 50s (when the previous adjustment was made). Accordingly, in the mid-90s, technology had radically changed our lives from what it was (and what costs were) in the late 70s/early 80s.

Lastly, calculations are updated because economists are able to find more stable ways to define and track certain expenses such as housing costs, which is why it went from a flat house prices to owner-equivalent rent.

next time, try reading what I actually said rather than what you wish-oh-wish-oh-wish I said.

Jm

August 30th, 2011
8:09 am

Usinuk

Bs honest

U posted that to attempt to rebut his point

But u didn’t

Put the agenda aside and try to be honest about this stuff

He has a fair point

1811/0311

August 30th, 2011
9:16 am

Jay:

May I ask which post(s) got Fred banned for the week ?

Mick

August 30th, 2011
10:05 am

scout

Yes, I’d like to know to; everything seemed to be going fine last night as far as I could tell…

That Black guy

August 30th, 2011
6:27 pm

out of the blue
August 29th, 2011
4:04 pm
“And who does he cite as the source “The New York Post” A tabloid owned by media mogul Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation.

Please “Mr That Black Guy” validate your source of information using something a lot more credible.”

So….even if the report the Buffet’s OWN company released confirms that they DO in fact owe back taxes, it’s not to be believed because it was reported in a Murdoch owned paper?

“We anticipate that we will resolve all adjustments proposed by the US Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) for the 2002 through 2004 tax years … within the next 12 months,” the firm’s annual report says.

Anyone who believes or discounts information based solely because of the source without verifying for themselves should not comment on the source of others information.

Consumer spending up, but recession still a threat

904 comments Add your comment

About Jay Bookman

Search this blog

Recent Posts

Archives

More from the AJC

Blogroll

FairTax archive

Laffer Curve debunked

The House GOP budget

All AJC blogs »

Tell us what you think about the site

Subscribe »

Customer Care »

AJC Services

Sections

Other Editions

Guides

Affiliates

Advertising

AJC Sites

Special Reports

Blogs

Opinion

Blogs

Topics

Features

Blogs

Topics

Features

Topics

Features

Features

Blogs

Topics

Features

Consumer spending up, but recession still a threat

904 comments Add your comment

About Jay Bookman

Search this blog

Recent Posts

Archives

More from the AJC

Blogroll

FairTax archive

Laffer Curve debunked

The House GOP budget

All AJC blogs »

Tell us what you think about the site

Subscribe »

Customer Care »

AJC Services

Sections

Other Editions

Guides

Affiliates

Advertising

AJC Sites