marcus's comments

« First    « Previous     Comments 12238 - 12277 of 12,277     Last »

  marcus   ignore (1)   2018 May 18, 6:30am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

CBOEtrader says
You are forgetting the anti trump fake news they also put out there

No I'm not. I was referring to A COMBINATION OF FACTORS.

marcus says
based on the fact that Russians were involved in bombing key social media markets with anti Hillary fake news, and the Manafort connection and Trump Jr meetings with Russians in which information was offered on Hillary, and probably other reasons that the FBI had suspicions.

It was the combination of these things, further combined with things that Trump himself has said and done over the years, that made it something that needed to be investigated.

CBOEtrader says
So the MSM doesn't think Trump colluded with Russia?

That is correct. The MSM believes that Russian involvement (influence) in the election is being investigated, including and investigation of possible involvement of Trumps campaign.
  marcus   ignore (1)   2018 May 18, 6:39am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

Onvacation says
Snowflakes gotta toughen up

Are we talking about Trump, who wants to relabel factual stories he doesn't like (or that hurt his feelings) as fake news.
  marcus   ignore (1)   2018 May 18, 7:11am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

Does tinfoil interrupt the ability of this technology to work effectively ?

I'm not completely kidding (only partly). Because if you're right it might mean that some of the the tinfoil hat folks maybe had a reason (other than mental illness) for feeling the way they do.
  marcus   ignore (1)   2018 May 18, 8:43am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

The fantasy life of Trump cucks. Amazing stuff.
  marcus   ignore (1)   2018 May 18, 8:50am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

mell says
It was all very sad and frustrating for those of us who hadn’t lost our damn minds.

You mean those watching Brietbart, Infowars, Rush Limbaugh and listening to talk radio ? Those are exactly the folks that did lose their damn minds, long ago.

Proof: The outright and total inability to distinguish between outright lies and fantasies versus facts and reality.

I can respect the republicans I know that voted for Trump while acknowledging that they dislike him and see him as the most dishonest public figure ever. They just voted for him because of supreme court or because they buy a lot of the Hillary propaganda.

But that's not the point of view of most of the right winger Brietbart reading Trump cucks around here.
  marcus   ignore (1)   2018 May 18, 7:18pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote        


If the 5 hottest years on record have all occurred since 2010, you might be celebrating a "cooling trend" a little prematurely.
  marcus   ignore (1)   2018 May 18, 7:44pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

Onvacation says
Alarmist just can't admit that their CAGW theory is wrong.

I'd be more likely to believe that the stock market is in a secular down trend due to the action of the past few months, a very similar kind of claim. Ubviously untrue. (although possible - its just that the long term trend is not there).

ALthough, why is there nobody out there stupid enough to think that the stock market is in a bonafide long term downtrend based on a few months of lower lows and lower highs.

Perhaps becasue it's not political ?

THank goodness global temps swing back and forth, or we would have all fried or frozen long ago. The trend is still very clear to anyone with any sort of ability to take in reality.
  marcus   ignore (1)   2018 May 18, 8:08pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

or Trump just picked a bunch of suspected traitors to run his campaign. Trump is now complaining that the FBI was spying on said suspected traitors. How fucking dumb does he think people are?

Uhhmm, I think you might be asking the wrong person.
  marcus   ignore (1)   2018 May 18, 8:52pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

Sniper says
Wow, pretty amazing stuff!! I didn't know we had digital thermometers back in the 1880s that could measure in 1/10 of degrees to get such precise measurements.

Not that amazing. Even in the 1880 s they knew how to average a bunch of numbers (how yearly averages of large data sets of values are calculated) and get an answer even to the nearest 10 ten thousandth if they wanted to. (also data sets from back then probably still exist so computers can confirm the averages now. )

As for the accuracy of thermometers ?
  marcus   ignore (1)   2018 May 18, 9:21pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote        

TwoScoopsOfDragonEnergy says
we now have Democrats fighting against Congressional oversight of Federal Agencies.

The real question is: What are they afraid of?

Probably this kind of bullshit.
  marcus   ignore (1)   2018 May 18, 9:29pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

mell says
It was all very sad and frustrating for those of us who hadn’t lost our damn minds.
edvard says

today, as we speak, is that we have a man in office who:
-in fact is under several investigations, and not just the Russian thing. He's fully admitted to paying off a porn star.
-He's got a lawyer who is in hot water.
-His son met with a foreign power to dig up dirt on another candidate.
-He blames literally everyone and everything for anything he gets caught saying or doing, going after the press- ALL of the press- if they do something like post his actual tweets. -He attacks other people- even members of his own staff- all the time.
-He fires people who don't agree with him.
-He holds great big rallies and when he's not doing that he's probably playing golf at a resort and even charges the secret service to use the golf carts.
-At this point has broken all 10 of the 10 commandments, a few of them several times.

I could go on here but strip away party affiliation and we have a person who outright abuses his power and goes against even the most basic of our democratic freedoms. Perhaps in another time or period of history in this country people from BOTH sides of the isle would've rejected this kind of behavior. I can tell folks here for fact that my 97 year old grandmother, who's husband fought in WW2- a women who ALWAYS voted for the Republican despises Trump. She lived through a period of time where people in this country rejected the very sort of behavior Trump exhibits.

What I see from his supporters is denial. A LOT of denial. Denial that they in fact elected a person who in actuality goes against their own principles and furthermore, they've doubled down on this support. The worse he behaves, the more damning the growing evidence of his wrongdoing reveals itself, the more obvious it becomes to everyone that he's just a cheap snakeoil salesman the more blindly devoted and defensive they become.

Edvard sums it up very well, and Mell is right, it is sad.
  marcus   ignore (1)   2018 May 19, 11:23am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (2)   quote        

Malcolm says
Instead, the religious global warming left continues to explain away those things that challenge their predetermined model.

I see almost the complete opposite. There are different models that all the science people and most of the intelligent folks understand are only models based on educated guesses (not predictions). It was always about hypotheses, trends, scientific facts, evidence and RISK ..

IT was never about anyone claiming to have absolute certainty about what's happening. But it's the denier right wingers, that use the argument that without absolute certainty 9 different ways from Sunday, it's foolhardy to avoid risk simply by expediting the use of alternative and more environmentally friendly energy sources. Which is something that probably would have other long term geopolitical benefits anyway.

It's only those that massively profit from maximizing the use of fossil fuels that stand in the way of good common sense energy policy and investment.
  marcus   ignore (1)   2018 May 19, 11:40am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

Sounds rigged to me.

Maybe she should make another video arguing with someone that wants to ban all guns, and confiscate guns from citizens as well.

There are probably plenty of Britbart folks that will not only believe it's legit, they'll post it on facebook and there favorite forms, and go into a full on tizzie, about those damn libtards.

Jeez getting elected as a right winger is easy today, especially if you have no moral compass whatsoever.
  marcus   ignore (1)   2018 May 19, 12:28pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

MisterLefty says
Germans have never liked U.S. President Donald Trump

I wonder who he reminds them of.
  marcus   ignore (1)   2018 May 19, 12:35pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote        

TwoScoopsOfDragonEnergy says
Now the NYT is running a story admitting there was FBI/DOJ directed spying on the Trump Campaign, but it was for Muh Russia.

Look, Trump had me convinced long ago that he's an idiot. If Trump didn't want everyone including law enforcement people to think he was as stupid as he portrayed himself to be, then he shouldn't have behaved so stupidly.

His convincing TPB, Sean Hannity et all to be gaga over him, hasn't helped his image with me.

  marcus   ignore (1)   2018 May 19, 12:43pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

  marcus   ignore (1)   2018 May 20, 10:20am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote        

No it's not. What's wrong with you people ? Do all republitards have a character disorder ? Does emotion totally cloud your ability to reason ?

It's like all the idiots claiming that the "libruls" have said all along that Trump colluded with the Russians. No they really didn't. They suspect that he totally might have, and Trump had a bunch of shady characters (including his son) working in his campaign. And Trump even joked about Russians hacking Hillary.

It's an investigation !

Malcolm says
This is such an about face that I consider it an admission that the science is not settled and welcome you to the skeptic side, since you are no longer asserting that there is any foreseeable danger from global warming, I mean climate change.

Wtf ?

I still see a danger and a risk. I don't have to have absolute certainty about the exact magnitude of the danger in order to believe policies are justified.
  marcus   ignore (1)   2018 May 20, 10:50am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

You act as if what's happened is so incredibly far from the projections of models. Sure, the most outragious "predictions' didn't come true, but even those tell you a lot about the intellectual dishonesty of the right wing skeptics. They love to quote Al Gore who said something to the effect that one scientist says POSSBLY the ice caps would be completely gone in the summer by 2014 (or whatever year it was).

From that they get "Gore predicted it. " If you call them on this lie, it's as if they are zombies that are programmed to not comprehend what you're talking about.

Do the deniers ever stop and notice "oh my god the arctic ice is melting really fast, faster than many of the projections ?" Of course not.

instead you get the asinine lie "nya nya nya nya nya, Gore predicted there would be no ice on earth by 2014" or some such bullshit.

Here are graphs of a bunch of models. We know that so far is that several of these models are relatively accurate.. But they are just models. Nobody ever said with absolute certainty they were able to predict exactly how it will unfold. Models take a bunch of inputs, including some assumptions based on historical correlations and so on. Everyone knows the earths climate is too complex to predict perfectly. To use the fact that it can't be predicted perfectly, as a cop out for denying a trend that's unfolding right before your eyes is in my opinion beyond stupid.

  marcus   ignore (1)   2018 May 20, 11:19am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

I know that you guys are all about black and white, absolute certainty versus "I can ignore this," but please consider this question.

What probability would you have to attribute to one of the worse projections above being accurate in order to base government policy on the POSSIBILITY.

Would it take an 80% chance that one of the worst projections in that graph are what's going to happen ? A 50% chance ?

For some people that are in the habit of thinking about the reality of complex systems and risk in terms of probability, they would go as low as 5% or possibly even lower. Certainly for any rational and sane person, a 10% chance that those worst projections are correct would be enough for strong action.

  marcus   ignore (1)   2018 May 20, 11:35am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

Malcolm says
How can there possibly be consensus and settled science then?

Because all of the graphs are of exponential increase in land and ocean temperatures. Thats the part that there is nearly total agreement on.
  marcus   ignore (1)   2018 May 20, 11:40am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

Onvacation says
Oh yeah. Did the scientist predict the current cooling?

Yes. Well not this one, not sure. But they do predict that these will happen. Please note that all the graphs have little down blips. the couple blue graphs have some very decent sized downturns (FAR bigger than the current one you are referring to, occurring between 2040 and 2060.
  marcus   ignore (1)   2018 May 20, 12:33pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

Malcolm says
Except, that it didn't happen

What ? The most extreme prediction (or actually lies about predictions) didn't come true ?

This gets very old. By the way, I"m closer to agnostic on this than you, but I'm capable of taking in the whole picture and dealing with it in a real world in a probabilistic way. You on the other hand, have an agenda. Goes something like this. There's some extremely small chance that the scientific community is wrong, and if they are you can pat yourself on the back and tell everyone how smart you are.

CBOEtrader says
WHAT is the hypothesis and WHAT future empirical evidence determines support for your hypothesis vs disproving your hypothesis?

You're looking for this to match up with you're middle school science class. Science can be done using only past data and observations. Observations of data from the last few decades have everyone convinced that air and ocean temperatures are increasing, in a not very subtle way. The question has to do with the extent to which this is caused by man made pollution.

That's the only question. (becasue if it isn't it's out of our hands, and if it isn't maybe temperatures are going to go right back down). And that can't be proven by a method you are referring to in a time frame that would save us from ruin if indeed GW is casued by man. You will always be able to say, maybe it's sun spots, or maybe it's some other solar cycle we just don't understand yet.

Perhaps in a totally fucked world 2 centuries from now, the trust fund inheritors of fossil fuel fortunes will still be arguing that we just don't know what caused the earths great catastrophic global warming.
  marcus   ignore (1)   2018 May 21, 6:57am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote        

lostand confused says
Democrats are insane.

Says one of the guys that elected Donald Trump President of the United States.
  marcus   ignore (1)   2018 May 21, 7:09am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

someone else says
he may well be remembered as our most effective president ever.

And perhaps trickledown will kick in big time and the tax cuts will lead to the first surplus since Clinton was President !
  marcus   ignore (1)   2018 May 21, 7:13am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

FortWayne says
problem will solve itself in private sector.

This is the perfect thread for you to be making that claim.
  marcus   ignore (1)   2018 May 21, 10:26am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

CBOEtrader says
Without future predictions compared to future empirical observations, there is no science.

Yes, I'm sure you got an A on that middle school test about the scientific method. .The truth is, that if someone determines something is true based on past data analysis, it can be deemed true even if if the system so complex that it can't nearly be predicted perfectly going forward.

Is Geology a science ?

Besides, even by your reasoning, you should accept Global Warming. Scientists have predicted for decades that warming is occurring. The future (relative to when they predicted it) has shown them to be correct. Now you're going to change your rules and say it's not enough that they predicted warming and it happened, year after year after year after year after year and decade after decade. According to you, if they can't take in to account all variables and a highly complex system coming up with perfect predictions, then we can't use the warming that has occurred as confirmation of their theory.

It would be funny if it weren't so pathetic.

When the consensus finally agreed that cigarette smoking causes cancer, were there people saying that if it doesn't cause cancer in everyone, or if you can't say exactly how many cigarettes someone has to smoke in order for them to have cancer, or even how many years they have to smoke to get this result, then it just isn't settled science ?

For more on the scientific method and how it isn't nearly everything you think it is in science.

Also, even when experiments are done to confirm, often the theories are accepted as probably true before they are verified, based simply on the physics and the Math. Example:
  marcus   ignore (1)   2018 May 21, 10:45am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

I'm pretty sure I wouldn't run. But I'm not sure I would do the right thing. Would I freeze for too long ? Perhaps using your bicycle somehow would have been wise. Just fall on the cougar and your friend with your bicycle. Freak the thing out enough to make it run. I know, it's easy to say what you would do. Who knows ?

Trump said he would have run after the shooter at Parkland, even if he was unarmed.
  marcus   ignore (1)   2018 May 21, 4:23pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

Yeah, jeez !

It's almost as if they were erroneously perceiving Trump to be a dishonest and untrustworthy low integrity person with some very questionable connections.

It's wrong of them to just assume this is true based on little more than hundreds of examples of Trump's behavior.
  marcus   ignore (1)   2018 May 21, 9:12pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote        

CBOEtrader says
uggesting multi-trillion dollar worldwide initiatives

That's a little extreme. But you have to realize that investing a lot of money in 4th or 5th generation nuclear, possibly thorium, or other cutting edge and fairly efficient forms of enerrgy, and giving the fossil fuels a rest, is probably good for humanity regardless of the impact on AGW. Why wouldn't we do it when money is cheap ? (interest rates that is) But it does deny certain big interests some of their near and medium term profits. THat's really the only issue here. It's no big financial risk to put pressure bringing other energy sources online. Aren't we going to need it for electric cars anyway ?

Wtf is going on ??

marcus says
When the consensus finally agreed that cigarette smoking causes cancer, were there people saying that if it doesn't cause cancer in everyone, or if you can't say exactly how many cigarettes someone has to smoke in order for them to have cancer, or even how many years they have to smoke to get this result, then it just isn't settled science ?

yeah, I know quoting myself is kind of lame. But I don't have much else to say to CBOE other than that.
  marcus   ignore (1)   2018 May 22, 6:38am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote        

The "deep state" probably is guilty of wanting someone that's not a complete clown as POTUS.
  marcus   ignore (1)   2018 May 22, 12:23pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

When the Republican voters realize what's been done to them, it will be too late.

They will never realize it. They're being programmed 24/7 to blame the commie libruls.

jazz_music says
They were already cranking out buffoons such as Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly and Michael Savage: all total corporate shills from this teaching machine that produced an increasingly poisonous culture not just to liberalism, but to the formative culture that makes an aspiring to democracy even possible.

And sadly the small minority of left wingers that spout identity politics nonstop, don't realize they are creating fodder for the right wing propaganda machine. They're slowly moving us toward a corporate fascist dictatorship. Have you noticed the way that the media is slowly slipping into Trumps hands ? I heard a brooks shields analysis yesterday where David Brooks said that the republicans are at this point totally ready to back Trump firing Mueller if he does, due to the nonstop efforts of Fox news and Brietbart.

The media no longer serves its purpose of representing the third estate. It's function now is only to manipulate it.

Meanwhile we have Russian troll farms chiming in. Is it possibly that we lost the cold war, and that the people haven't been informed yet ? Were in transition ?
  marcus   ignore (1)   2018 May 22, 12:38pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

marcus says
Onvacation says
It just seems ridiculous to talk about a worldwide average temperature that can be measured down to hundredths of a degree.

When you average hundreds or thousands of numbers that are accurate to 1 or 2 tenths of a degree, you get a number that should probably be rounded to the nearest thousandth of a degree, for comparative purposes. Certainly at least to the one hundredths place.

Here's a mini example for you. Average 5 and 6 and you get 5.5. How can that happen when I'm averaging two integers ? Shouldn't the average be an integer too ?

Not sure why I'm explaining this to the same guy that thinks a brief cooling trend in the midst of a thirty year uptrend with higher highs and higher lows (thats the definition of an uptrent - the "higher lows" refer to the lows of down swings, which by definition occur in an uptrend)
  marcus   ignore (1)   2018 May 22, 3:15pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

Onvacation says

Please link to the calculations where thousands of thermometers are used to find the average year long temperature for the entire world with accuracy down to hundredths of a degree for the last century.

Even if you were averaging 100 numbers that were accurate to plus or minus on tenth of a degree, you would get an average that is accurate to one hundredth of a degree. The fact that this is hard for you to grasp is consistent with the fact that you think a downswing within an uptrend constitutes a significant downtrend.

That is, unless they always rounded up on the readings. But even then for year to year comparison purposes (considering differences from year to year) they would be accurate to the one hundredths place.

But hey, it takes all kinds as they say. Maybe there's an audience with a similar ummm, perspective (let's call it) to yours, that will appreciate your insights.
  marcus   ignore (1)   2018 May 22, 3:28pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

socal2 says
"we" are the growing number of Trump and Republican supporters (did you see the Reuters poll today?) who are very pleased with Trump's first 18 months and appalled at the corruption we are seeing with the Democrats, Media and vast Bureaucracy with all this Russia nonsense.

What you're referring to is the fact that Fox and Brietbarts constant opinion piece "news" has an impact on it's audience ?

Yes, it's what some call propaganda.
  marcus   ignore (1)   2018 May 22, 3:40pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

Onvacation says

Like I said, when the alarmist have no answers they go personal.

No, I was honestly surprised.

Maybe you're just TPB under a different name, and you're trolling. You think it's a victory if you can get me to explain something simple to you. But okay, if that's the case you win.

Here's an example, simpler, but the same concept. Say you use a random number generator to generate numbers between 6 and 7 inclusive, accurate to the tenths place. Suppose these are true random numbers, 6.0, 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4, ........6.9, 7.0

But you always round to the 6 or seven, whichever is closest. If it's 6.5, you flip a coin, heads you call it 6, tails you call it 7. You do this one thousand times, using true random numbers to generate the tenths place.

So you have one thousand numbers and each is either 6 or 7 due to rounding by as much as .5., you add these 6 and 7s together and divide by 1000, getting an average very close to 6.5, give or take a few hundredths. Which will be extremely close to the actual average of the original numbers between 6 and 7, without rounding them.

How can that be ? If all the numbers were 6s and 7s, how can I get an average that so much closer to the actual average than 6 or 7 are (the actual inputs in to the average) ?

Or how about this. Say you have two groups of people, and each group has 1000 people in it. The heights of all the people are measured carefully, always rounded to the nearest inch. If it looks exactly half way in between 2 inch values, to the extent they can't say, then they round up. This procedure is done the same way by the same people using the same devices to measure.

So say that the average for one group is .41 inches higher than the other. Do you think the one average really is higher than the other ? That is, that the average height of the one group really is .41 inches taller than the other? Even though the resolution of the measurement was to the nearest inch ?

Yes or no ?
  marcus   ignore (1)   2018 May 22, 9:40pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

socal2 says
Right - because Fox and Breitbart can totally eclipse all the negative reporting

I was only referring to you and the rest of the Fox audience.

Because if Fox reports bs to you and the rest of it's audience (which believe them when they say all the other news is fake news), and if they repeat the bullshit s often enough, you guys and republican congress people (also part of their audience) become quite confident about your lies.

It's where you people get your marching orders.
  marcus   ignore (1)   2018 May 23, 9:19am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

TwoScoopsOfDragonEnergy says
Buy guns and ammo

Do you get paid to spout this nonsense ? Will you feel no guilt when the next right wing terror incident occurs ?

That's some mighty cheap publicity right there. Million dollar advertisement for Fox, cost ? She had to dry some water off. No, I'm not saying she personally did it, although that's possible.

I wonder if Trump thinks it was done by a "leftist."
  marcus   ignore (1)   2018 May 23, 2:03pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

lostand confused says
Liberals now oppose prison reform because Trump supports it?

You're confusing democrats with republicans. Under Obama they often prevented bills that they otherwise would have liked, because of their desire to deny Obama success. They could care less about
the people.

Democrats are different. They're split, because many want much more reform than whats in the bill, but they will ultimately pass it, putting the interests of the people over their own selfish political interests. If only the republicans could learn from their example.
  marcus   ignore (1)   2018 May 23, 3:44pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote        

Sounds like a big deal, but isn't this just saying that there is organized crime within the prison system. Not exactly a surprise that Mexicans have a big presence in LAs prison system.

How much money is in there in prison, to be made with drug trade etc ?

The Housing Trap
You're being set up to spend your life paying off a debt you don't need to take on, for a house that costs far more than it should. The conspirators are all around you, smiling to lure you in, carefully choosing their words and watching your reactions as they push your buttons, anxiously waiting for the moment when you sign the papers that will trap you and guarantee their payoff. Don't be just another victim of the housing market. Use this book to defend your freedom and defeat their schemes. You can win the game, but first you have to learn how to play it.
115 pages, $12.50

Kindle version available

about   best comments   contact   one year ago   suggestions