Take off the rose colored glasses and read about current events. Chavez is about to die of cancer. He is being well challenged in an election. There are fears of a coup. Chavez has armed a half million defenders of his revolution who outnumber the army and are as well trained. The violence in Caracus is largely political thugs creating an excuse for Hugo's crackdown.
This is not the time for the people to be disarmed, unless you plan to enslave them.
Does the CNN author offer any kind of research with results supporting their theory? Or is it just someome's musing trying to find a way to make a buck off of fake science?
Is this another mercury vaccine trick that people will use to start suing the gaming and porn industries?
Finally, I find the concept laughable. There have always been socially inept boys that had a hard time connecting with girls and initiating sexual relationships with women. Have the numbers changed, or is gaming just a different boy pastime to replace pinball machines and skateboarding (and whatever your fad might have been)?
How could the Obama administration ever sign such an act into law and how could they possibly defend it in court? They have betrayed everything they said they stood for.
Facebook is a ridiculous joke. I can't understand why people use it or why anyone would invest in it. As for this founder dumping his citizenship, it just reflects how people of any means will screw anyone else for money. The so called 99% are only pissed off because they don't have money and if they did and were part of the so called 1% they would act no different.
1. It is unimportant "how big" Fox news is. Competitively, it is one choice among many in the cable and broadcast channel options. When you zap through the TV channels the ONLY right-leaning network you'll find is Fox in its few forms: Fox News Channel, Fox Business Channel, and a local Fox affiliate (which might or might not be right-leaning based on the local owner). NBC has a $57B market cap. Fox's market cap is $48B. So Fox is smaller than NBC (for what that's worth).
2. It is correct the General Electric no longer owns a majority of NBC, though it owns a large minority. It is ridiculous to conclude that NBC was ever right-leaning. GE's CEO, Immelt, has not only tanked the value of GE to its shareholders (~$41 when he took over, ~$19.25 now), but has maintained a very cordial personal relationship with Pres Obama since before he was President and serves in appointed positions in the Obama administration. Thus, your premise that GE is right-wing because it makes arms is false. GE makes almost everything, including lip-marks on the President's butt. But NBC was left-leaning before Immelt took over and it remains un-repentantly left-leaning today.
3. When you zap through the channels on TV you'll run into the following left-leaning "news" channels: NBC, MSNBC, CNBC, ABC, CBS, CNN, Headline News (HLN), PBS. This list ignores the right-leaning entertainment content you can find on channels like OWN.
I have no problem with broadcasters using their own resources to put forward material that supports the political point of view. It galls me, however, that so-called news sources (papers, magazines, channels, etc.) use their protections under the first Amendment (which includes freedom of the press) to support one political establishment over another. IMHO, they have a moral obligation to attack any and all political power holders to hold them accountable to the people, from whom all rights flow to the government.
Name a major right-leaning news publication or radio station.
--> Wall Street Journal (also owned by Fox, I believe).
--> There are many radio stations on a local basis that carry right-leaning content. "Every city" has a station that carries EIB (Rush L.), Hedgecock, Hanity, Beck, Ingraham, etc. The fact that these stations and channels make a living at this on a local and national level in the face of the print and television competition is interesting. It's very difficult to tell what it reflects in the thinking of the people to have these various view points in these different formats so readily available, and I suppose, all being supported by advertising revenues.
It's far easier to name left-leaning (liberal) publications: NYT, Washington Post, LA Time, Chicago Tribune, Newsweek, Businessweek, Time. Left-leaning radio isn't readily listed (at least for me).
Finally, if you think the right (conservative) side controls mass media you are smoking too much weed or are looking at the world through intolerant glasses. Hollywood is an almost exclusive left-wing bastion. Disney (which owns ABC and ESPN) is as left-wing as they come.
Science is based on the creation of a theory and the presentations of data supported arguments against it. They do or do not refute the theory. Claiming that those that offer arguments against the theory you happen to like are evil or stupid is counter to the scientific method. The presentation of counter argents should be endorsed not derided. The summary presented as this article is, I believe, extremely short sighted and indicative of someone with a vested interest.
Wind farms might have a local climate effect. Or they might not. Solar panels might too, since they take energy from where they sit and put it on the grid to be converted into heat somewhere else. If I build a campfire it might have an effect on the climate too. And if I drive my car. Or if I watch TV. Or if I use my computer.
By the way, is that impact positive or negative? Or is any impact objectionable? Because I like to have an impact on my environment. It's one of the ways that I survive, and why I elect to live in a solid dwelling.
Don't people get tired of hearing all these ridiculous climate claims?
Maybe first we can figure out if wind turbines have a serious impact on flying critters (insects, birds, bats, pterodactyls) and then we can decide to tear them all down for that reason before we argue about (as 1u3hr says) hockey sticks.
A spear is commonly as tall as a man, or comes up to his throat, or whatever. Different kind of spear, different gauge. But is that measuring or comparison?
Isn't measuring the same as comparing? When I measure a distance, I'm simply comparing it to a standard established by some guy a couple hundred years ago that I've been taught to use. We call the units "feet" here. Perhaps you call it "meters".
If I want a spear that is 2 meters long, I pull out the standard, compare it, and cut it. If I want a spear up to my chin I pull out the standard (me), measure it, and cut it.
Anyway, as I see it there are only a couple of things that are innate in humans: breathing and breastfeeding.
AKA, California (like Denmark and many other governments) punches above its weight.:)
I don't get the point of the argument going on here. The State of California is over $100B in debt. We have a non-sustainable union-driven government payroll and retirement system. The state is and has been controlled by one political party for the past 30 years. The state is, for all practical purposes, bankrupt. It doesn't matter that the businesses within it produce a GDP and pay taxes. The state government does not. It is the government that has caused the bankruptcy, and the people would be responsible if the government was actually controllable by the people instead of controlled by the unions. The State of California is in an irreversible decline, can't tax its way out of its problems, and doesn't have the political will to use other solutions.
And the final proof: California is the home state of Pelosi, Boxer, and Waters and they really are representative of the districts from which they come. QED
I hope they remember to make the "Charge 5 Project" along with it, because when I'm down to 10% of the charge I'm still going to start having range anxiety.
I haven't yet seen a reason they would be any more or less accurate (or altered in any way) because of Aereo.
Statistically, Aereo is going to have an affect on the ratings. If a serious number of people cut the cord and switch to Aereo the counts will drop unless Neilsen starts counting them at the ISP.
Then why did you say "Regarding commercial inserts:"? In broadcasting, that's when you replace an ad from your upstream with a local ad.
Rather than "quote the parent" I was attempting to reference the paragraph in your reply, the topic of which was the cable company doing ad inserts into the broadcast stream and which I attempted to reference with my 3 word heading.
In answer to your question, you could simply state that you disagree without resorting to the use of insulting words.
Now, regarding the sample size, what if one Neilsen user starts using Aereo? If the sample size is one, the impact will be 100%. If the sole size is 100 there will be a 1% impact on the ratings across the board. Isn't this how statistical sampling works? You might be one of many arguing about the validity of the Neilsen sampling and ratings, but they are the defacto method used today.
I never suggested Aereo was inserting or replacing ads.
You never replied what is your relationship to Aereo?
It is good to have people be skeptics. Science is not infallible. Governments are not to be trusted. People see that vocal proponents like Gore and Moore have an agenda of making themselves big money with their publicity-seeking claims. The man-made crowd has done this to themselves and to their own cause.
Slashdot Mirror
All assumptions
Take off the rose colored glasses and read about current events. Chavez is about to die of cancer. He is being well challenged in an election. There are fears of a coup. Chavez has armed a half million defenders of his revolution who outnumber the army and are as well trained. The violence in Caracus is largely political thugs creating an excuse for Hugo's crackdown.
This is not the time for the people to be disarmed, unless you plan to enslave them.
First they take away the guns.
Then they come for the gays.
Then they come for the Jews.
Then they come for the Catholics.
Then they come for you.
Then they come for me.
Does the CNN author offer any kind of research with results supporting their theory? Or is it just someome's musing trying to find a way to make a buck off of fake science?
Is this another mercury vaccine trick that people will use to start suing the gaming and porn industries?
Finally, I find the concept laughable. There have always been socially inept boys that had a hard time connecting with girls and initiating sexual relationships with women. Have the numbers changed, or is gaming just a different boy pastime to replace pinball machines and skateboarding (and whatever your fad might have been)?
He must be a republican. Only a republican would consider doing something so awful.
The lunacy of a, presumably, well paid VP ripping off boxes of Legos is astounding.
It's so wonderful to live in a first world country where watching a freaking TV show isn't a major life decision.
But we're talking about Game of Thrones here man!
Their GPS golf watch, I mean.
How could the Obama administration ever sign such an act into law and how could they possibly defend it in court? They have betrayed everything they said they stood for.
The rest of the world lives in peace? Are you talking about planet Earth? If so, ask the people in the Sudans how they are enjoying their peace.
Facebook is a ridiculous joke. I can't understand why people use it or why anyone would invest in it. As for this founder dumping his citizenship, it just reflects how people of any means will screw anyone else for money. The so called 99% are only pissed off because they don't have money and if they did and were part of the so called 1% they would act no different.
I don't know. Other than tulips and champagne does the EU export anything other than socialism?
I guess Germany makes some high price sedans. Guinness might be harder to get.
Anything else?
You are so right. The f-Ing Iranians did it.
1. It is unimportant "how big" Fox news is. Competitively, it is one choice among many in the cable and broadcast channel options. When you zap through the TV channels the ONLY right-leaning network you'll find is Fox in its few forms: Fox News Channel, Fox Business Channel, and a local Fox affiliate (which might or might not be right-leaning based on the local owner). NBC has a $57B market cap. Fox's market cap is $48B. So Fox is smaller than NBC (for what that's worth).
2. It is correct the General Electric no longer owns a majority of NBC, though it owns a large minority. It is ridiculous to conclude that NBC was ever right-leaning. GE's CEO, Immelt, has not only tanked the value of GE to its shareholders (~$41 when he took over, ~$19.25 now), but has maintained a very cordial personal relationship with Pres Obama since before he was President and serves in appointed positions in the Obama administration. Thus, your premise that GE is right-wing because it makes arms is false. GE makes almost everything, including lip-marks on the President's butt. But NBC was left-leaning before Immelt took over and it remains un-repentantly left-leaning today.
3. When you zap through the channels on TV you'll run into the following left-leaning "news" channels: NBC, MSNBC, CNBC, ABC, CBS, CNN, Headline News (HLN), PBS. This list ignores the right-leaning entertainment content you can find on channels like OWN.
I have no problem with broadcasters using their own resources to put forward material that supports the political point of view. It galls me, however, that so-called news sources (papers, magazines, channels, etc.) use their protections under the first Amendment (which includes freedom of the press) to support one political establishment over another. IMHO, they have a moral obligation to attack any and all political power holders to hold them accountable to the people, from whom all rights flow to the government.
Name a major right-leaning news publication or radio station.
--> Wall Street Journal (also owned by Fox, I believe).
--> There are many radio stations on a local basis that carry right-leaning content. "Every city" has a station that carries EIB (Rush L.), Hedgecock, Hanity, Beck, Ingraham, etc. The fact that these stations and channels make a living at this on a local and national level in the face of the print and television competition is interesting. It's very difficult to tell what it reflects in the thinking of the people to have these various view points in these different formats so readily available, and I suppose, all being supported by advertising revenues.
It's far easier to name left-leaning (liberal) publications: NYT, Washington Post, LA Time, Chicago Tribune, Newsweek, Businessweek, Time. Left-leaning radio isn't readily listed (at least for me).
Finally, if you think the right (conservative) side controls mass media you are smoking too much weed or are looking at the world through intolerant glasses. Hollywood is an almost exclusive left-wing bastion. Disney (which owns ABC and ESPN) is as left-wing as they come.
If global warming is a factual reality what would your proposed solution be?
Move up-hill?
Say goodbye to cute white bears? Well, cute unless you're within their scent range and they happen to be hungry.
Should we also assume in your hypothetical question that global warming is entirely man-made?
Panetta, thy name is Pander.
Science is based on the creation of a theory and the presentations of data supported arguments against it. They do or do not refute the theory. Claiming that those that offer arguments against the theory you happen to like are evil or stupid is counter to the scientific method. The presentation of counter argents should be endorsed not derided. The summary presented as this article is, I believe, extremely short sighted and indicative of someone with a vested interest.
Wind farms might have a local climate effect. Or they might not. Solar panels might too, since they take energy from where they sit and put it on the grid to be converted into heat somewhere else. If I build a campfire it might have an effect on the climate too. And if I drive my car. Or if I watch TV. Or if I use my computer.
By the way, is that impact positive or negative? Or is any impact objectionable? Because I like to have an impact on my environment. It's one of the ways that I survive, and why I elect to live in a solid dwelling.
Don't people get tired of hearing all these ridiculous climate claims?
Maybe first we can figure out if wind turbines have a serious impact on flying critters (insects, birds, bats, pterodactyls) and then we can decide to tear them all down for that reason before we argue about (as 1u3hr says) hockey sticks.
A spear is commonly as tall as a man, or comes up to his throat, or whatever. Different kind of spear, different gauge. But is that measuring or comparison?
Isn't measuring the same as comparing? When I measure a distance, I'm simply comparing it to a standard established by some guy a couple hundred years ago that I've been taught to use. We call the units "feet" here. Perhaps you call it "meters".
If I want a spear that is 2 meters long, I pull out the standard, compare it, and cut it. If I want a spear up to my chin I pull out the standard (me), measure it, and cut it.
Anyway, as I see it there are only a couple of things that are innate in humans: breathing and breastfeeding.
... they're pulling more than their weight.
AKA, California (like Denmark and many other governments) punches above its weight. :)
I don't get the point of the argument going on here. The State of California is over $100B in debt. We have a non-sustainable union-driven government payroll and retirement system. The state is and has been controlled by one political party for the past 30 years. The state is, for all practical purposes, bankrupt. It doesn't matter that the businesses within it produce a GDP and pay taxes. The state government does not. It is the government that has caused the bankruptcy, and the people would be responsible if the government was actually controllable by the people instead of controlled by the unions. The State of California is in an irreversible decline, can't tax its way out of its problems, and doesn't have the political will to use other solutions.
And the final proof: California is the home state of Pelosi, Boxer, and Waters and they really are representative of the districts from which they come. QED
I hope they remember to make the "Charge 5 Project" along with it, because when I'm down to 10% of the charge I'm still going to start having range anxiety.
I haven't yet seen a reason they would be any more or less accurate (or altered in any way) because of Aereo.
Statistically, Aereo is going to have an affect on the ratings. If a serious number of people cut the cord and switch to Aereo the counts will drop unless Neilsen starts counting them at the ISP.
Then why did you say "Regarding commercial inserts:"? In broadcasting, that's when you replace an ad from your upstream with a local ad.
Rather than "quote the parent" I was attempting to reference the paragraph in your reply, the topic of which was the cable company doing ad inserts into the broadcast stream and which I attempted to reference with my 3 word heading.
In answer to your question, you could simply state that you disagree without resorting to the use of insulting words.
Now, regarding the sample size, what if one Neilsen user starts using Aereo? If the sample size is one, the impact will be 100%. If the sole size is 100 there will be a 1% impact on the ratings across the board. Isn't this how statistical sampling works? You might be one of many arguing about the validity of the Neilsen sampling and ratings, but they are the defacto method used today.
I never suggested Aereo was inserting or replacing ads.
You never replied what is your relationship to Aereo?
It is good to have people be skeptics. Science is not infallible. Governments are not to be trusted. People see that vocal proponents like Gore and Moore have an agenda of making themselves big money with their publicity-seeking claims. The man-made crowd has done this to themselves and to their own cause.