You didn't say reducing carbon emissions would "reduc[e] our economic output." You said, and I quote, reducing our carbon emissions would plunge us into "eternal poverty." That is the ridiculous, unsupportable claim.
but ignore the fact that this type of temperature rise has happened many times before
That is a lie. There is not a climate scientist alive who has ever stated global temperatures were a constant until mankind increased the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. It is the climate scientists themselves who tell us that global temperatures have varied widely over time.
all plunge ourselves into eternal poverty to satisfy the egos of a few climate cultists.
Anyone who thinks that reducing greenhouse gas emissions will "plunge" us into "eternal poverty" is either lying or profoundly ignorant. You get to pick which one.
The only problem is while Bush said his original plan involved education and trade reform people quite reasonably expected him to be a warmonger based on his neocon alliances. Predictably, he placed them in senior positions, and predictably they talked him into going to war.
They don't usually say "settle this," but they strongly suggest it by repeatedly ordering mediation, or making comments in their written orders intended to make both sides nervous about their chances.
"ven that the GP was referring to Bush's election and you are referring to something that happened years later, are you sure you are not the one being misleading?"
No, because he asserted that 9/11 "changed that plan." How was Bush Jr. forced into changing his plans if one of his moves was to invade a country that had nothing to do with 9/11? Why couldn't he have spent a lot of that money that went to Iraq on education reform?
"War was not an issue in the 2000 election. Bush Jr.'s plan was to focus on eduction reform, trade reform (in particular with China), etc. 9/11/2001 changed that plan. "
You're being intentionally misleading. Few people blamed Bush for war in Afghanistan. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. The neocon think tank crowd had been slavering to go to war with Iraq for years, and they just used that as an excuse.
"They take forever and a day partially because of the administrative costs of building the plant. As I understand it, regulations, insurance, and whatnot contribute a significant amount to the cost."
But a lot more because of the incredible building costs, which won't vanish even if those evil statist governments throw out all safety requirements.
"- Chiropractors have really come under fire in recent years as charlatans with little to no medical evidence of their claims"
Naah. They've been coming under fire for decades, not just recent years. And rightly so.
Want to live to 100? Well, tough. Longevity is mostly genetic.
The question isn't whether CIA has done bad things in the past, the question is whether they did THIS specific thing. The chances are slim. To engage in a conspiracy involving the NY DA's office, the police, and who knows how many others to do...what exactly? Silence someone who made a halfhearted suggestion that if anyone accepted might down the road inconvenience the US? You have failed to make your case.
In a hyper-connected world of ethics-free corporate drones apathetic about anything past this quarter's profits and stock price, Jobs stood apart by having a 5, 10, perhaps even 20 year plan for Apple that he ruthlessly pursued at the expense of anything standing in the way (be it under-performing employees or products). As a commenter last week put it, he set out to make a dent in the universe, and actually did it.
Do you really think Jobs has some sort of moral code? He's a narcissist; everything he does is for his own self-aggrandizement.
"But some people will never let a person like Mitnick let go of the past. In his review of the book, Rich Jaroslovsky, a technology columnist for Bloomberg News shows no sympathy for Mitnick when he pretentiously writes that "genius comes in many forms. Kevin Mitnick has at least two, neither particularly admirable".
Oh give me a break. Even by slashdot standards this doesn't make sense. He's writing a book about his past. He's trying to make money from his past. A REVIEWER of that book should not take a look at that past when reviewing that book?
Slashdot Mirror
You didn't say reducing carbon emissions would "reduc[e] our economic output." You said, and I quote, reducing our carbon emissions would plunge us into "eternal poverty." That is the ridiculous, unsupportable claim.
but ignore the fact that this type of temperature rise has happened many times before
That is a lie. There is not a climate scientist alive who has ever stated global temperatures were a constant until mankind increased the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. It is the climate scientists themselves who tell us that global temperatures have varied widely over time.
all plunge ourselves into eternal poverty to satisfy the egos of a few climate cultists.
Anyone who thinks that reducing greenhouse gas emissions will "plunge" us into "eternal poverty" is either lying or profoundly ignorant. You get to pick which one.
Haha yep, already bought...which is why I said I wanted to buy Ultima VII-X.
The name of the store is CALLED Origin. Why on earth have they not put up any actual Origin GAMES? Post-2009? Give me a break, let me buy Ultima 7-X.
The only problem is while Bush said his original plan involved education and trade reform people quite reasonably expected him to be a warmonger based on his neocon alliances. Predictably, he placed them in senior positions, and predictably they talked him into going to war.
They don't usually say "settle this," but they strongly suggest it by repeatedly ordering mediation, or making comments in their written orders intended to make both sides nervous about their chances.
"ven that the GP was referring to Bush's election and you are referring to something that happened years later, are you sure you are not the one being misleading?"
No, because he asserted that 9/11 "changed that plan." How was Bush Jr. forced into changing his plans if one of his moves was to invade a country that had nothing to do with 9/11? Why couldn't he have spent a lot of that money that went to Iraq on education reform?
For civil cases in the US, the usual standard is "a preponderance of the evidence," which just means more likely than not that X happened.
"War was not an issue in the 2000 election. Bush Jr.'s plan was to focus on eduction reform, trade reform (in particular with China), etc. 9/11/2001 changed that plan. "
You're being intentionally misleading. Few people blamed Bush for war in Afghanistan. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. The neocon think tank crowd had been slavering to go to war with Iraq for years, and they just used that as an excuse.
"They take forever and a day partially because of the administrative costs of building the plant. As I understand it, regulations, insurance, and whatnot contribute a significant amount to the cost."
But a lot more because of the incredible building costs, which won't vanish even if those evil statist governments throw out all safety requirements.
"- Chiropractors have really come under fire in recent years as charlatans with little to no medical evidence of their claims" Naah. They've been coming under fire for decades, not just recent years. And rightly so. Want to live to 100? Well, tough. Longevity is mostly genetic.
It's the whole field that is disreputable.
A significant majority of Congresscritters
Honestly, "Congresscritter" makes you sound just as childish as using "Rethuglican."
"reputable Chiropractor"
Oxymoron.
"Ask any reputable Chiropractor about how radiation causes serious subluxations due to DNA malformation."
http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/chirosub.html
The question isn't whether CIA has done bad things in the past, the question is whether they did THIS specific thing. The chances are slim. To engage in a conspiracy involving the NY DA's office, the police, and who knows how many others to do...what exactly? Silence someone who made a halfhearted suggestion that if anyone accepted might down the road inconvenience the US? You have failed to make your case.
You don't really believe that utterly ridiculous conspiracy theory, do you?
Definitely sounds a lot more interesting than working at Google.
In a hyper-connected world of ethics-free corporate drones apathetic about anything past this quarter's profits and stock price, Jobs stood apart by having a 5, 10, perhaps even 20 year plan for Apple that he ruthlessly pursued at the expense of anything standing in the way (be it under-performing employees or products). As a commenter last week put it, he set out to make a dent in the universe, and actually did it.
Do you really think Jobs has some sort of moral code? He's a narcissist; everything he does is for his own self-aggrandizement.
Why? There is no moral advantage to more business.
Yep, they were basically sold out the first day they were discounted. I doubt very much any more will become available.
Let's be fair, alcohol too.
Yeah but this looks better than the MacBook Pros.
Too expensive, but damn that is a badass looking laptop. You could bring it to the hipster coffee shop and look cooler than all the mac users.
"But some people will never let a person like Mitnick let go of the past. In his review of the book, Rich Jaroslovsky, a technology columnist for Bloomberg News shows no sympathy for Mitnick when he pretentiously writes that "genius comes in many forms. Kevin Mitnick has at least two, neither particularly admirable".
Oh give me a break. Even by slashdot standards this doesn't make sense. He's writing a book about his past. He's trying to make money from his past. A REVIEWER of that book should not take a look at that past when reviewing that book?
Didn't he admit it in a court proceeding? He's pretty much bound by that admission, as much as he'd like to recant.