Slashdot Mirror

Re. your sig:
http://www.snopes.com/photos/military/forthood.asp

if bush i in iraq i had decided to push on to baghdad and topple saddam in the early 1990s after racing across the desert unimpeded, then the world would have seen that as justified

George H. W. Bush

Trying to eliminate Saddam, extending the ground war into an occupation of Iraq, would have violated our guideline about not changing objectives in midstream, engaging in "mission creep," and would have incurred incalculable human and political costs. Apprehending him was probably impossible. We had been unable to find Noriega in Panama, which we knew intimately. We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect, rule Iraq. The coalition would instantly have collapsed, the Arabs deserting it in anger and other allies pulling out as well. Under the circumstances, there was no viable "exit strategy" we could see, violating another of our principles. Furthermore, we had been self-consciously trying to set a pattern for handling aggression in the post-Cold War world. Going in and occupying Iraq, thus unilaterally exceeding the United Nations' mandate, would have destroyed the precedent of international response to aggression that we hoped to establish. Had we gone the invasion route, the United States could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land. It would have been a dramatically different — and perhaps barren — outcome.

Its possible she faked it but nobody really knows.

Fun story, but fairly inaccurate.

To be fair, online gullibility and hysteria does tend towards a right wing bent.
One, Two, Three, Four, Five, Six, just for this month alone. The left is not immune to the chain-email urban legend phenomenon (e.g. talk of the draft a few years back) but it is the right, especially the religious right, that excels at propogating misinformation.

Conservatives are demographically older and more affluent. Older people are more gullible on the internet. So what? That's no excuse for the level of hatred toward the right we see on /. every single day.

To be fair, online gullibility and hysteria does tend towards a right wing bent.
One, Two, Three, Four, Five, Six, just for this month alone. The left is not immune to the chain-email urban legend phenomenon (e.g. talk of the draft a few years back) but it is the right, especially the religious right, that excels at propogating misinformation.

Conservatives are demographically older and more affluent. Older people are more gullible on the internet. So what? That's no excuse for the level of hatred toward the right we see on /. every single day.

To be fair, online gullibility and hysteria does tend towards a right wing bent.
One, Two, Three, Four, Five, Six, just for this month alone. The left is not immune to the chain-email urban legend phenomenon (e.g. talk of the draft a few years back) but it is the right, especially the religious right, that excels at propogating misinformation.

Conservatives are demographically older and more affluent. Older people are more gullible on the internet. So what? That's no excuse for the level of hatred toward the right we see on /. every single day.

To be fair, online gullibility and hysteria does tend towards a right wing bent.
One, Two, Three, Four, Five, Six, just for this month alone. The left is not immune to the chain-email urban legend phenomenon (e.g. talk of the draft a few years back) but it is the right, especially the religious right, that excels at propogating misinformation.

Conservatives are demographically older and more affluent. Older people are more gullible on the internet. So what? That's no excuse for the level of hatred toward the right we see on /. every single day.

To be fair, online gullibility and hysteria does tend towards a right wing bent.
One, Two, Three, Four, Five, Six, just for this month alone. The left is not immune to the chain-email urban legend phenomenon (e.g. talk of the draft a few years back) but it is the right, especially the religious right, that excels at propogating misinformation.

Conservatives are demographically older and more affluent. Older people are more gullible on the internet. So what? That's no excuse for the level of hatred toward the right we see on /. every single day.

To be fair, online gullibility and hysteria does tend towards a right wing bent.
One, Two, Three, Four, Five, Six, just for this month alone. The left is not immune to the chain-email urban legend phenomenon (e.g. talk of the draft a few years back) but it is the right, especially the religious right, that excels at propogating misinformation.

Conservatives are demographically older and more affluent. Older people are more gullible on the internet. So what? That's no excuse for the level of hatred toward the right we see on /. every single day.

For a second I thought the Slashdot headline was an Onion-esque headline, reporting the blindingly obvious and mundane as if it were news.

Because it's happened before -- it's how the whole Harry Potter moral panic got started. True story.

The original article: http://www.theonion.com/articles/harry-potter-books-spark-rise-in-satanism-among-ch,2413/http://www.theonion.com/articles/harry-potter-books-spark-rise-in-satanism-among-ch,2413/

And the snopes article: http://www.snopes.com/humor/iftrue/potter.asp

To be fair, online gullibility and hysteria does tend towards a right wing bent.
One, Two, Three, Four, Five, Six, just for this month alone. The left is not immune to the chain-email urban legend phenomenon (e.g. talk of the draft a few years back) but it is the right, especially the religious right, that excels at propogating misinformation.

To be fair, online gullibility and hysteria does tend towards a right wing bent.
One, Two, Three, Four, Five, Six, just for this month alone. The left is not immune to the chain-email urban legend phenomenon (e.g. talk of the draft a few years back) but it is the right, especially the religious right, that excels at propogating misinformation.

To be fair, online gullibility and hysteria does tend towards a right wing bent.
One, Two, Three, Four, Five, Six, just for this month alone. The left is not immune to the chain-email urban legend phenomenon (e.g. talk of the draft a few years back) but it is the right, especially the religious right, that excels at propogating misinformation.

To be fair, online gullibility and hysteria does tend towards a right wing bent.
One, Two, Three, Four, Five, Six, just for this month alone. The left is not immune to the chain-email urban legend phenomenon (e.g. talk of the draft a few years back) but it is the right, especially the religious right, that excels at propogating misinformation.

To be fair, online gullibility and hysteria does tend towards a right wing bent.
One, Two, Three, Four, Five, Six, just for this month alone. The left is not immune to the chain-email urban legend phenomenon (e.g. talk of the draft a few years back) but it is the right, especially the religious right, that excels at propogating misinformation.

To be fair, online gullibility and hysteria does tend towards a right wing bent.
One, Two, Three, Four, Five, Six, just for this month alone. The left is not immune to the chain-email urban legend phenomenon (e.g. talk of the draft a few years back) but it is the right, especially the religious right, that excels at propogating misinformation.

How does it ever 'make sense' for adults to start having sex with children before they have reached puberty? It does not matter how short life expectancies are. Sex with children just isn't going to produce more children.

From what I remember, I'm not a professional historian, a lot of the records we DO have are for the better off types of the time. The lowest of the Peasents don't have the record-keeping until later.

That means assets. Back in the day most marriages(where assets were involved) were economic alliances, if not political ones. The parents would make the deal whenever they could, keeping in mind that 'most' did want the best for their kids. Sometimes marrying a daughter off at nine might make the best sense at the time. Deal would normally be struck for the consumation to wait until a later date. Which even I'll fully admit would normally happen earlier than I'm comfortable with.

I'd also be careful of confusing 'minimum marriage ages' and actual marriage ages. As mentioned, just because menarch happened a little bit later than is normal today doesn't mean that there weren't variations. There have been cases of girls getting pregnant at 12. The 'world record' is FIVE. *shudder*

In an age where the median life expectency was something like 36, yes, there was intense pressure for women to be having kids as soon as they were able. This was generally signaled by menarch, which, while not happening all the time at 12, did happen.

Not implausible. It's often reported that the Hawaiian island of Kauai was plugged into a nuclear sub after a hurricane knocked out the local power. It never happened, but considered until power was restored.

The Army had a program for about two decades to supply power to remote locations and even powered the Panama Canal Zone.

Of all the things in life what do you want to be remembered for? A snarky comment on a newspaper website that probably won't exist a decade from now or a clear synthesis of your ideas and vision? Write a book if you are disappointed in your own family's genes. There are few ways to immortality. Mega structures, grand children, gene therapy, and reincarnation. Any structure that has a face is more than likely to be broken up to make room for housing in city limits. Children can die any number of ways. Genes are a programming challenge that has yet to be completely debugged. The rise of night-shot consumer grade cameras combined with EMF detectors that electricians use is another of histories greatest discoveries. Not unlike mistakes that led to great inventions like galvanized rubber. The market for taking your money with after you die has yet to arise. When it does we can expect greater divisions in society. Currently anyone can reincarnate as a wealthy individual by being born to rich parents. As an example of personal worth the Queen of England is tied to a desk job for life but is poorer than J.K. Rowling. A woman in poverty can earn more from fiction than a descendant of royal blood. The paradigm shift has happened. The more frequent that these shifts happen the healthier our society gets. When wealth is shoved from place to place the exchange is what drives our economy and leads to new discoveries. Would there be any ghosts at hospices if pregnant women were required to spend time at the place where their own grandparents died? Most of us don't think about what we want to do after the inevitable. So far M-theory does allow for another universe but not heaven or hell. http://www.snopes.com/college/exam/hell.asp

He could have had his birth certificate lost or destroyed (fires do happen, things get lost in traveling, etc).

If he doesn't actually have a birth certificate, he can't show it, can he? The best he can do is go back to the hospital and ask for a replacement. However, as Hawaii and other states don't give out copies of Birth Certificates, the best he can do is have a Certificate of Live Birth.

Further, as others have repeatedly pointed out, there is the birth announcement in the Hawaiian newspaper. It's a bit hard to claim that 40-some-odd years ago, someone placed a fake birth announcement in a newspaper so some black guy could be elected President.

As to the proof of his birth, which Birthers repeatedly deny isn't valid despite it being used by several states (and which goes back to the heart of this story):

Snopes

Gasoline really isn't that flammable.

Reread what your parent post said about the venting of vapors. Then read this:

http://www.snopes.com/autos/hazards/static.asp

"Unlike many Internet-circulated warnings, there is a fair bit to this one -- fires at gas pumps are on the rise, and static electricity is considered one of the likely culprits in this increase."

You can find videos online as well.

I think it's obvious who "came into this with their mind made up."

People that actually bother to analyze things, other than noting the CfC was not purely an environmental program, but also economic stimulus, are more rational, and note the program had both benefits and disadvantages:

Take a look herefor example:

First, an important point, it's not all about CO2:

"Of course, cleaner-running cars also spew fewer air pollutants such as carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxide, volatile organic compounds, benzene, formaldehyde, particulate matter, and other toxic materials that contribute to smog and respiratory disease."

And here is where we get some interesting numbers...

"According to a study by Christopher Knittel of the Center for the Study of Energy Markets, that would reduce annual gas consumption in the United States by roughly 186 million gallons per year, lowering emissions of carbon dioxide, the most important element in the greenhouse gases that are implicated in global warming, by about 1.9 million tons a year."

"Another criticism of the plan is that cash for clunkers is an expensive way to reduce carbon emissions. One estimate, by Henry Jacoby, co-director of the Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change at MIT, is that CARS will reduce carbon emissions at a cost of about $160 a ton; Knittel puts the figure at $237 and possibly much more. By comparison, a ton of carbon on the European trading system goes for about $20 right now.

"But while the direct environmental effect might be expensive and not necessarily huge, is it at least a meaningful step in the right direction? To answer that, one has to look at a more complicated picture. First of all, there is the environmental cost of manufacturing all those new cars; the process of making and transporting the average new car creates 6.7 tons of carbon dioxide. So that’s about 4.6 million tons of carbon dioxide created right there from the trading in of 690,000 cars."

If we went by that without considering side-factors, then CfC would eventually result in a net CO2 reduction.

However, they even take into account your point:

"What’s more, there is the “Mexico effect.” As Matthew Kahn, an environmental economist at UCLA, notes, the North Atlantic Free Trade Agreement has, in effect, been a hemispheric cash-for-clunker program, as the United States and Canada ship used but sellable cars south of the border. If these are sent to the scrap heap instead, that means that many older and dirtier Mexican clunkers will stay on the road longer, reducing the gains of the slightly greener U.S. fleet."

But in the end:

"Moreover, most of the the funds for cash for clunkers came by shifting money from the loan guarantee program for renewable energy, which is designed to make it easier to invest in and expand green energy projects. Unfortunately, there is no alternate universe in which to test whether there would have been more green for the buck had the money stayed where it was. But the point is that to determine the calculus of environmental impact, one has to go beyond the simple arithmetic of new cars and mileage standards. The most that can be said of cash for clunkers is that it probably has some modest environmental benefits, and that these will accrue over time — but at above-market cost." ...which, as programs that are primarily designed as economic stimulus, not environmental programs, go, is a pretty good side-benefit. History will show CfC to have been an effective program. I may wish that it was tweaked, but I am capable of recognizing that it did, indeed, work.

Also, it never hurts to ask snopes.

Or if I shoot a guy dead in the face (I'm looking at YOU, EA and MoH series) then they should fricking die or at least be horribly wounded!

Check out this story - doesn't always work that way in the real world, either...

Another urban legend is that there was every a great difference in quality in the first place. Consumer betamax gear (not to be confused with commercial beta decks) was comparable to VHS. Many issues killed Betamax as a consumer format, but a lack of porn wasn't one.

More discussion:
http://msgboard.snopes.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=30;t=002692;p=1
http://message.snopes.com/showthread.php?t=2126

Another urban legend is that there was every a great difference in quality in the first place. Consumer betamax gear (not to be confused with commercial beta decks) was comparable to VHS. Many issues killed Betamax as a consumer format, but a lack of porn wasn't one.

More discussion:
http://msgboard.snopes.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=30;t=002692;p=1
http://message.snopes.com/showthread.php?t=2126

Just like there's no conflict of interest in the fact that the US government just loaned the Brazilian state-run oil company Petrobras 2 billion dollars for offshore drilling in depths far exceeding the moratorium.

Do I detect the sweet odor of bullshit? http://www.snopes.com/politics/gasoline/braziloil.asp

> John Hancock famously signed his huge ass signature on the Declaration of Independence because he WANTED it to be known that he supported it.

Snopes does not agree: http://www.snopes.com/history/american/hancock.asp

Here is snopes debunking of your claims:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/gasoline/braziloil.asp

Or what if I have a head shaped like [Bert's]?

I take it you've been palling around with terrorists.

Even though this was a few years back, I still find it hard to believe the suspect was that stupid.

Sometimes when something is hard to believe, that's because it isn't true.

I heard a few years ago that some cops fooled a suspect into confessing, by pretending a photocopier was a lie detector. They wrote "Lie" on a sheet of paper, and every time they felt he was lying they pressed the Copy button.

Unfortunately this beautiful story has turned out to be an urban legend - http://www.snopes.com/legal/colander.asp . But it is funny to realize that *actual* lie detectors can be used in the same manner - as they may work only slightly better than 50/50 .

Still, they had their reasons for doing it the way they did. The Snopes article on New Coke is pretty informative.

Sure it's dingoes and not kangaroos?

http://www.snopes.com/humor/nonsense/kangaroo.asp

I tried wearing a sign that says "Remaining in my presence entitles me to have sex with your girlfriend and/or wife", but it turns out placing a sign informing people of how you think the law should work doesn't necessarily actually change the law :-)

Seriously, it amazes me how many people think "Of course they can do that! There's even a sign on the wall that says so!

Here's your sign!.

The 'feeding rice to birds will make them swell up & explode' is a myth. snopes even says so.

http://www.snopes.com/critters/crusader/birdrice.asp

microsoft scam email

which still does the rounds. classic stuff.

This is a new variation on the old 809 scam. Basically the call goes to a pay-per-call service (like 1-900 number). The phone company gets part of the money and the person who set up the scam gets the rest.

Anyways, back to my tangent - shit was actually an acronym for Store High In Transport. S.H.I.T, words will always change, from the proper to the colloquial.

No, sorry it wasn't
http://www.snopes.com/language/acronyms/shit.asp

And dictators can make the trains run on time

Nope, at least not in the example that created this idea: http://www.snopes.com/history/govern/trains.asp

True, it *might* be a picture of a SR-91. Alternatively, it might just be a prop for a movie... In the meantime, enjoy your conspiracy theories.

Back when the tea party movement actually was grassroots (for about 2 weeks) before Dick Armey's freedomworks and Fox News co-opted it. This is how the tea party movement got it's start.

Look. There's no excuse for violence at a non-violent protest. In any group some people are asses. I'm not faulting the tea party movement for it's fair share of idiots, I'm faulting it for the racist element it harbors above and beyond its idiot quotient. Aside from the really overt and disguistingstuff, there's only so many times you can say "real americans" need to "take back america" from Obama who isn't eligible to be president because he's a secret Kenyan Muslim Manchurian candidate before it comes across as racially motivated.

When polling finds this:

For instance, the Tea Party, the grassroots movement committed to reining in what they perceive as big government, and fiscal irresponsibility, also appear predisposed to intolerance. Approximately 45% of Whites either strongly or somewhat approve of the movement. Of those, only 35% believe Blacks to be hardworking, only 45 % believe Blacks are intelligent, and only 41% think that Blacks are trustworthy. Perceptions of Latinos aren’t much different. While 54% of White Tea Party supporters believe Latinos to be hardworking, only 44% think them intelligent, and even fewer, 42% of Tea Party supporters believe Latinos to be trustworthy. When it comes to gays and lesbians, White Tea Party supporters also hold negative attitudes. Only 36% think gay and lesbian couples should be allowed to adopt children, and just 17% are in favor of same-sex marriage.

When you put it all together, it's impossible to conclude that racism isn't an important motivating factor in the tea party movement.

Brian Peppers is the fella to whom you are referring. http://www.snopes.com/photos/people/peppers.asp

Well, technically there is no basis for this myth of Texas having the right to secede from the rest of the Nation at will. It's not mentioned anywhere in the Texas constitution nor is there a provision for it in the US constitution. Now some folks would claim that because there is no mention of it, that doesn't mean it's not possible. Check to the FAQ at this site, which seems to promote the idea.
Snopes briefly mentions this myth as well in the last sentence of this page, and also mentions that there is no such clause in any official documentation.
More proof

I think you nailed it on the head. I'm familiar with the several WI local news stations & anchors shown in the clips. I can't say I'm surprised. What passes for "journalism school" these days? There rarely seems to be any checking of sources, fact-checking, etc. In fact, they seem to enjoy repeating urban legend. They're as gullible as anybody you could think of in your office. I've snagged local journalists citing as fact things like Rand Corp 1954 Computer and repeating the urban legend of razors in apples (not sure why that one is marked "true" given the discussion that follows).

I think you nailed it on the head. I'm familiar with the several WI local news stations & anchors shown in the clips. I can't say I'm surprised. What passes for "journalism school" these days? There rarely seems to be any checking of sources, fact-checking, etc. In fact, they seem to enjoy repeating urban legend. They're as gullible as anybody you could think of in your office. I've snagged local journalists citing as fact things like Rand Corp 1954 Computer and repeating the urban legend of razors in apples (not sure why that one is marked "true" given the discussion that follows).

You seem to have missed the $10,000 a day fine they wanted to levy against the beavers.

You joke, but reality hews closer to satire all the time.

TRUE: The state of Michigan threatened local beavers with a $10,000 per day fine for failing to remove their dam.

Why would he want to do that? Carbon Credits is a gold mine for Gore and he is mining them for all he can.

I downloaded the FOIA.ZIP file and examined the 1,037 emails and other documents it contained. Gore claims that the emails are "all ten years old or older" and implies their contents are meaningless today. He lied or he is totally ignorant of the facts: http://www.examiner.com/x-25061-Climate-Change-Examiner~y2009m12d9-Al-Gore-talks-Climategate-on-CNN-and-Slate-misstates-the-facts#video
Of the 1,037 emails over 10% were written in 2009. The most recent had the following header:

From: "Thorne, Peter (Climate Research)" (peter.thorne@metoffice.gov.uk)
To: "Phil Jones" (p.jones@uea.ac.uk)
Subject: Letter draft
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 14:17:44 -0000

which was sent only FIVE days before the files were posted on line.

One has only to read HARRY_README.TXT to understand what was going on and see how the manipulation, cherry picking, cooking and creating "data" out of thin air was taking place.

The "reviews" whitewash the actions of the CRU and its cooperating agencies, all part of a subagency of the UN,the IPCC, all government funded. The "reviews" in effect say it is:

• OK to ignore Freedom of Information Acts, or subvert their intent, or make plans to destroy the data if no other recourse is available.
• OK to intimidate climate journals into getting AGW articles "peer reviewed" by cronies after getting equally qualified academics with apposing views thrown off of the list of peer reviewers.
• OK to slander non-AGW academics, some with more expertise and academic standing than they have, like MIT Prof Richard Lindzen, and try to destroy their careers. BTW, you can read the tactics they discuss and choose in the emails.
• OK to publish articles in those journals that posit conclusions which cannot be verified or replicated because the data is withheld from the journal, and thus its readers, a specifically NON-academic attitude.
• OK to publish articles making unsubstantiated claims about the Amazon forests or the Himalayan glaciers, or other topics, using the un-reviewed rantings of Green Peace activists as your authorities.
• OK to make contracts with UN agencies guaranteeing "deliverables" (data) at "milestones" which will support the AGW theory the UN supports, because AGW can be used to justify redistribute wealth from rich countries to poor ones (dialectical materialism) in the form of "Carbon Taxes". (Manipulating Carbon Tax Credits is where Gore is making his millions.)

To see who is putting their money AND actions where their mouth is just compare the homes of two prominent politicians:
http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/house.asp

Here is how Gore is putting his money where his mouth is:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/energy/6491195/Al-Gore-could-become-worlds-first-carbon-billionaire.html

I remember the "Global Cooling/Nuclear Winter" hysteria.
I remember the Club of Rome hysteria (I fell for that one until I analyzed the BASIC program and realized the program was rigged to produce the same results regardless of the input, just as the AGW computer models do. Using the "Hockey Stick" methodologies one can get a hockey stick using red noise. Similar manipulations of models were used by Federal Agencies to justify dictating water usage in the Mid-West US.)
Now I am witnessing the AGW hysteria

The people who pushed the first two are the ones (and/or their students), pushing AGW, along with their friends in the Left Wing media. The "solution" in each is the same: adopt Marxism world wide and we'll all stand around in the promise land singing Kumbaya.

...it should be able to remain in orbit indefinitely without deteriorating.

No, it won't. http://www.snopes.com/food/ingredient/twinkies.asp