There are plenty of scientists out there who don't believe in crank 'theories' like ID. I figure we have the luxury of waiting for one of those to come out and confirm this guy's findings, and ignore him until that happens.
If he's on to something, someone else will find it as well. Until he's got some credible support, I'm going to give the predominant consensus the benefit of the doubt.
Do you defend poorly written opinion papers from scientists that believe AGW *is* happening with such vigor? No? Then that's why I know I can discard your misguided rants without much thought.
For the record, when I saw the headline, I thought, "wow, is everyone wrong? That would be awesome news!" Then I find out it's from someone at the Heartland Institute and my optimism quickly waned.
and individual people are often horrified at the thought of having yet another government they can run afoul of.
Wait. What individual people are going to be afraid that they'll run afoul of international pollution standards? If this government body is created, as you say it must be to be effective, they aren't going to be going after Bob the farmer who burns some trash out on his farm. They're going to target large industrial polluters and enforce manufacturing standards (say... requiring 60mpg for all cars sold).
It would take a completely irrational level of paranoia to think that an international enforcement body is going to go after random individuals. Hell, NATO won't even go after countries developing nukes or committing genocide, and you think that there's somehow going to be an ultra-efficient worldwide agency that polices every Joe Schmoe out there?
And it's why I chose an Android phone that I knew was easily rootable so I could install whatever OS I wanted on it, and not be reliant on the manufacturer for updates.
Those who choose otherwise get no pity from me. It's easy enough to do the research beforehand, and it's not like hardware manufacturers have a good track record for providing support. Apple does do better than most, but they still drop support for phones that people are on contract for. Being less-bad than the alternatives isn't really a win in my book.
For the true skeptic. They want to look at all the data and all the claims.
No they don't. They want to hear one soundbite that confirms their "skepticism," so they can keep calling everyone else Chicken Little and not have to worry about their own impact on the planet.
You forget: suggesting in any way that people with a lot more money than everyone else should pay more in taxes than everyone else is SOCIALIST CLASS WARFARE.
But nobody seems to remember that Gore lost his own home state (Tennessee), which in my opinion should result in automatic disqualification. If your own state won't vote for you, go directly to epic fail.
That's just stupid, as others have pointed out.
So, essentially, every liberal presidential candidate from Idaho and every conservative candidate from New York should be automatically disqualified?
Did you take into account the various credits and deductions?
Of course he didn't, because that wouldn't make for a sensationalist argument.
Almost none of the people bitching about tax rates ever have any basis in reality. Hell, a large percentage of them believe that moving into a higher tax bracket means you take home less money -- as in, if you make money in a higher bracket, your *entire* income is taxed at the higher rate. The truly sad thing is how many people clearly have no understanding of how taxes actually work.
Can you convince your like-minded folks to seriously shut the fuck up about how government's stealin' your money and switch the conversation to how much money they should be stealing?
It's like we've got a debate going on about which color to paint something, and you idiots keep yelling "I want it to be square!" It's not productive and does nothing to further the discussion.
Obama, Pelosi and co. has done nothing to help the problem, but instead gave giant bail-outs to the banks so they could give giant bonuses to their executives.
Hey, dumbass -- TARP was passed while Bush was in office.
I'll grant that it was under a Democrat-controlled congress, but I get sick of hearing how Obama gave all this money to the banks by revisionist historians. The only TARP-related thing you can really pin on Obama is that he decided to use some of the money to keep the auto makers from going bankrupt.
The large financial institutions count on this: ethics only works if both sides remain ethical. If one side decides to take advantage of the other side's sense of ethics, the system breaks down.
Only a chump will stick to their ethics when it does nothing but lead to being taken advantage of.
How does any of your rant dispute the tiny bit of what you quoted?
Are you arguing that because Pelosi and crew haven't disbanded the DHS, the DHS must be ok? Are you arguing that because the Obama administration hasn't gotten rid of it, that it's now somehow entirely Obama's fault that it still exists? (government institutions have a lot of political inertia -- they don't disappear overnight.)
Or are you just a butt hurt Bush voter that can't own up to the fact that the dude(s) you voted for really screwed the pooch and try to rationalize it by saying "the other guys do it too"?
Red Box is a lot cheaper, unless you watch more than 15 movies a month. You don't have to sit through commercials...
Maybe I've just been unlucky, but all 3 DVDs I've rented from Redbox have had 20 minutes worth of unskippable, un-fast-forwardable previews and advertisements. For your additional convenience they also disabled the "menu" button, and even the "stop-stop-play" trick doesn't work. With that in mind, I'm not sure I agree with your "don't have to sit through commercials" statement.
Yes, I could get around it by ripping and removing the crap; yes, I could get around it by using a DVD player that respects its owner more than the content producers; for the few times per year that I actually watch a DVD with this garbage on it, it's not worth the effort.
If you don't like feeding the government through taxes in its ability to use "violence" to enforce its will on you, I invite you to quit using dollars (created and backed by said government) and see how far that gets you.
For me, the improvements in the GDI (better performance and no more windows leaving 'trails', among other things) and an improved Explorer interface are the largest benefits -- to the point that going back to XP feels a little painful. There are other niceties as well (libraries, much improved search indexing, better wireless networking configuration), but if the features aren't worth the cost of the upgrade to you, then by all means stay with XP.
Don't pretend that there's nothing new of value though, because that's just ignorant.
Frankly it's also a desire to see Open Source and other modern digital rights succeed. I've seen Apple become one of the few large companies championing those rights on auger level, thus I support them so in turn they can continue to help open up digital rights further and prevent collapse into a maelstrom of media company interests.
And yet you spend a lot of time railing against Android, a truly open platform. I'm not going to track down one of your old posts to show it to you -- I don't have the time or interest in reading through your posting history to find a link -- but you have somehow equated "jailbreaking" with "open," and the rest of us who know they aren't even remotely the same thing are calling you out on it.
Also, wrt to your earlier "why do you spend time posting about something you hate?" question, the same thing could just as easily be asked of you and your posts about how awful Android is and how we should all be locked in Apple's superior walled garden.
Finally, lest you be confused about *me* being an Apple hater -- I don't hate Apple. I don't have a whole lot of respect for them (I realized they had absolutely no respect for their customers when seeing Apple-branded iPod socks that cost $30 for a 3-pack), but I don't hate them. I have an iPod (original 2GB Nano), and believe it or not, a 17" MacBook Pro. But here's the difference between you and me: I don't think either of them is particularly special. I think they're basically overpriced commodity consumer electronics. I was willing to pay the price premium on them because they met my specific needs at the time. What I do hate, however, is the fanbois who think that these trinkets are Jobs' gift to the world; that they're some sort of unparalleled technical brilliance. So, specifically, I reserve my hate for people like you, and I believe I speak for a lot of people when I say that. It's not Apple. It's you.
Slashdot Mirror
There are plenty of scientists out there who don't believe in crank 'theories' like ID. I figure we have the luxury of waiting for one of those to come out and confirm this guy's findings, and ignore him until that happens.
If he's on to something, someone else will find it as well. Until he's got some credible support, I'm going to give the predominant consensus the benefit of the doubt.
--Jeremy
Do you defend poorly written opinion papers from scientists that believe AGW *is* happening with such vigor? No? Then that's why I know I can discard your misguided rants without much thought.
For the record, when I saw the headline, I thought, "wow, is everyone wrong? That would be awesome news!" Then I find out it's from someone at the Heartland Institute and my optimism quickly waned.
--Jeremy
Except that humans aren't capable of affecting the environment at a global scale, so that would never happen. Right?
--Jeremy
and individual people are often horrified at the thought of having yet another government they can run afoul of.
Wait. What individual people are going to be afraid that they'll run afoul of international pollution standards? If this government body is created, as you say it must be to be effective, they aren't going to be going after Bob the farmer who burns some trash out on his farm. They're going to target large industrial polluters and enforce manufacturing standards (say... requiring 60mpg for all cars sold).
It would take a completely irrational level of paranoia to think that an international enforcement body is going to go after random individuals. Hell, NATO won't even go after countries developing nukes or committing genocide, and you think that there's somehow going to be an ultra-efficient worldwide agency that polices every Joe Schmoe out there?
--Jeremy
And it's why I chose an Android phone that I knew was easily rootable so I could install whatever OS I wanted on it, and not be reliant on the manufacturer for updates.
Those who choose otherwise get no pity from me. It's easy enough to do the research beforehand, and it's not like hardware manufacturers have a good track record for providing support. Apple does do better than most, but they still drop support for phones that people are on contract for. Being less-bad than the alternatives isn't really a win in my book.
--Jeremy
Guess what: the phones are already wide open to attack. That's why they're so easily jailbreakable in the first place.
--Jeremy
For the true skeptic. They want to look at all the data and all the claims.
No they don't. They want to hear one soundbite that confirms their "skepticism," so they can keep calling everyone else Chicken Little and not have to worry about their own impact on the planet.
--Jeremy
Fortunately, the debt ceiling isn't up for a public vote.
Also, were you this up in arms about the debt ceiling when it was raised in every year of Bush's presidency?
--Jeremy
You forget: suggesting in any way that people with a lot more money than everyone else should pay more in taxes than everyone else is SOCIALIST CLASS WARFARE.
--Jeremy
But nobody seems to remember that Gore lost his own home state (Tennessee), which in my opinion should result in automatic disqualification. If your own state won't vote for you, go directly to epic fail.
That's just stupid, as others have pointed out.
So, essentially, every liberal presidential candidate from Idaho and every conservative candidate from New York should be automatically disqualified?
--Jeremy
Did you take into account the various credits and deductions?
Of course he didn't, because that wouldn't make for a sensationalist argument.
Almost none of the people bitching about tax rates ever have any basis in reality. Hell, a large percentage of them believe that moving into a higher tax bracket means you take home less money -- as in, if you make money in a higher bracket, your *entire* income is taxed at the higher rate. The truly sad thing is how many people clearly have no understanding of how taxes actually work.
--Jeremy
So you agree that we need some level of taxes?
Can you convince your like-minded folks to seriously shut the fuck up about how government's stealin' your money and switch the conversation to how much money they should be stealing?
It's like we've got a debate going on about which color to paint something, and you idiots keep yelling "I want it to be square!" It's not productive and does nothing to further the discussion.
--Jeremy
I think the evolution and ID people both have an agenda their are pushing and they are both damaging to the education of our children.
It's always amusing when creationists try to appear "balanced."
--Jeremy
Few business apps require a tablet *AT ALL*.
--Jeremy
Obama, Pelosi and co. has done nothing to help the problem, but instead gave giant bail-outs to the banks so they could give giant bonuses to their executives.
Hey, dumbass -- TARP was passed while Bush was in office.
I'll grant that it was under a Democrat-controlled congress, but I get sick of hearing how Obama gave all this money to the banks by revisionist historians. The only TARP-related thing you can really pin on Obama is that he decided to use some of the money to keep the auto makers from going bankrupt.
--Jeremy
Being a dick that yells at people as they drive by isn't illegal. Are you arguing that it should be?
--Jeremy
The large financial institutions count on this: ethics only works if both sides remain ethical. If one side decides to take advantage of the other side's sense of ethics, the system breaks down.
Only a chump will stick to their ethics when it does nothing but lead to being taken advantage of.
--Jeremy
Wall Street, that's in New York. Sorry, you're not going to find many conservatives there.
Yes, because Wall Street is a perfectly representative sample of the demographics in the whole of New York City.
<rolls eyes>
--Jeremy
How does any of your rant dispute the tiny bit of what you quoted?
Are you arguing that because Pelosi and crew haven't disbanded the DHS, the DHS must be ok? Are you arguing that because the Obama administration hasn't gotten rid of it, that it's now somehow entirely Obama's fault that it still exists? (government institutions have a lot of political inertia -- they don't disappear overnight.)
Or are you just a butt hurt Bush voter that can't own up to the fact that the dude(s) you voted for really screwed the pooch and try to rationalize it by saying "the other guys do it too"?
--Jeremy
Red Box is a lot cheaper, unless you watch more than 15 movies a month. You don't have to sit through commercials...
Maybe I've just been unlucky, but all 3 DVDs I've rented from Redbox have had 20 minutes worth of unskippable, un-fast-forwardable previews and advertisements. For your additional convenience they also disabled the "menu" button, and even the "stop-stop-play" trick doesn't work. With that in mind, I'm not sure I agree with your "don't have to sit through commercials" statement.
Yes, I could get around it by ripping and removing the crap; yes, I could get around it by using a DVD player that respects its owner more than the content producers; for the few times per year that I actually watch a DVD with this garbage on it, it's not worth the effort.
--Jeremy
Yeah, and those rural folk produce a lot of the food that the city dwellers eat so they don't starve to death. Seems to be a reasonable tradeoff.
--Jeremy
If you don't like feeding the government through taxes in its ability to use "violence" to enforce its will on you, I invite you to quit using dollars (created and backed by said government) and see how far that gets you.
--Jeremy
For me, the improvements in the GDI (better performance and no more windows leaving 'trails', among other things) and an improved Explorer interface are the largest benefits -- to the point that going back to XP feels a little painful. There are other niceties as well (libraries, much improved search indexing, better wireless networking configuration), but if the features aren't worth the cost of the upgrade to you, then by all means stay with XP.
Don't pretend that there's nothing new of value though, because that's just ignorant.
--Jeremy
Even if they had, you can rest assured that the unsuccessful gorillas would have climbed up to the next level and started rolling barrels
Nah, on level 2 they throw springs.
--Jeremy
Frankly it's also a desire to see Open Source and other modern digital rights succeed. I've seen Apple become one of the few large companies championing those rights on auger level, thus I support them so in turn they can continue to help open up digital rights further and prevent collapse into a maelstrom of media company interests.
And yet you spend a lot of time railing against Android, a truly open platform. I'm not going to track down one of your old posts to show it to you -- I don't have the time or interest in reading through your posting history to find a link -- but you have somehow equated "jailbreaking" with "open," and the rest of us who know they aren't even remotely the same thing are calling you out on it.
Also, wrt to your earlier "why do you spend time posting about something you hate?" question, the same thing could just as easily be asked of you and your posts about how awful Android is and how we should all be locked in Apple's superior walled garden.
Finally, lest you be confused about *me* being an Apple hater -- I don't hate Apple. I don't have a whole lot of respect for them (I realized they had absolutely no respect for their customers when seeing Apple-branded iPod socks that cost $30 for a 3-pack), but I don't hate them. I have an iPod (original 2GB Nano), and believe it or not, a 17" MacBook Pro. But here's the difference between you and me: I don't think either of them is particularly special. I think they're basically overpriced commodity consumer electronics. I was willing to pay the price premium on them because they met my specific needs at the time. What I do hate, however, is the fanbois who think that these trinkets are Jobs' gift to the world; that they're some sort of unparalleled technical brilliance. So, specifically, I reserve my hate for people like you, and I believe I speak for a lot of people when I say that. It's not Apple. It's you.
--Jeremy