My mama didn't raise no fool
Nature, nurture, whatever. The cause is beside the point. .
I have to say, these are so scary it makes me wish the scientists were lying.
Looks like the opposite of exponential growth, that is the negative of an exponential growth function (not to be confused with exponential decay).
The warm-cold pattern over the country has been observed over much of the past two years.
CIC showing off his reading comprehension skills again.
(a peek inside CIC's mind: imagine a William Shatner voice saying, "The context is.....just.....too....much.....to handle.".)
Oh, and by the way dim bulb, not that you should let facts mess with your propaganda, and of course you will say the source is commie pinko liberal homosexuals.
From Gore's speech:
Last September 21 (2007), as the Northern Hemisphere tilted away from the sun, scientists reported with unprecedented distress that the North Polar ice cap is "falling off a cliff." One study estimated that it could be completely gone during summer in less than 22 years. Another new study, to be presented by U.S. Navy researchers later this week, warns it could happen in as little as 7 years.2
And yes, the deniers cannot even add. Not only did Gore not say "by 2013," but it would be 2014 at the soonest. ... On to reality:
There you go again with your liberal propaganda. We all know that those commie liberal scientists rig all their data, because Al Gore and all the green energy people pay them to lie. Those greedy assholes are only interested in all the big profits that can be made by getting us off of fossil fuels. As if how "clean" energy" is makes a difference, when armageddon is happening soon anyway.
It was probably actually one of the coldest Februarys ever.
Liberals are so gullible.
Is fractional reserve lending ridiculous?
Certainly it's way less risky than trading conservative securities, real estate or commodities with 90% leverage. The risk is that there is some kind of crazy event, where everyone is simultaneously defaulting on their loans. Even then though, most loans are secured with assets,
I do have to acknowledge though, that banking does seem like a pretty awesome business.
It's pretty understandable that a couple ER doctors would be leading this plea.
THey see and deal with the reality of it in a way that's pretty much (and thankfully) beyond our imagination.
The WWII stats are pretty amazing.
At a time when civilian fatalities from gunshot wounds for 2004 to 2013 have outnumbered combat fatalities from World War II, the authors welcome the unprecedented support from leading organizations of health and legal professionals for policy recommendations to reduce gun violence.
Okay. I looked it up. His biggest contributor is National Assn of Broadcasters; number 3 is comcast; number 10 is AT&T
and number 16 is the National Cable & Telecommunications Assn; t number 20 is Verizon.
I have a feeling that number one National Association of Broadcasters, is probably an association of cable companies, that all happen to be ISPs
Well, I'll say this. At least in America we can still (sometimes) see who is behind this kind of nonsense.
He's probably going to succeed in convincing right wingers such as a few around here, that in actuality he's the one that's fighting for net neutrality, and the FCC is the one thats against the interest of the people.
More liberal propaganda.
YOu know what they say about asian women. They age well, looking younger than they are for a while, and then at some point boom. it hits hard, with a wave of aging in a few years that makes them all of the sudden look pretty much their age.
Thoes old guys that lift weights and take testosterone, look fit, but they still look pretty much their age. I think that the testosterone thing seems pretty risky. But who knows, maybe some other therapies will come out at some point that really do slow down aging.
I get it.. The current cover of TIME magazine says the Clintons make their own rules. I agree the reputation is there. I just question whether it isn't somewhat overblown.
Also, I'm not convinced that at this point it isn't a positive for them.
clintons seem to be skirting right on the very edge of the law constantly
IF it's constant you should be able to give me maybe 3 or 4 examples from the past 15 years. Please enlighten me.
Let's see,. There was that time when Hillary lied when she said they were broke at the end of Clinton's Presidency.. Actually, it wasn't a lie. Their net worth was probably negative, it's just that she didn't take into account the net present value of their future earning potential.
That was rather heinous. She's so fucking dishonest.
So, why did the liberal New York Times choose her (above everyone else) to investigate?
Only a republican would keep saying "the liberal new york times," as if that means much. The New York times is a national newspaper. IT has a reputation as liberal, mostly because reality has a liberal bias.
But to your point. It was an article written during Clinton's Presidential campaign. Politicians and their spouses are scrutinized to the nth degree when running for office. The fact that such an investigative article appeared in the NY Times doesn't mean anything to me. Who knows (and I mean this) maybe publicists working for CLinton's campaign were behind that article, because they knew that there were going to be attacks based on the story, and they wanted to get in front of it and put their spin on it.
Two of her criminal investigations
Really ? Criminal invetigations ? These were politically motivated investigations. I'm not saying they never did anything the slightest bit questionable. But if crimes had been committed, I think Ken Star for all of his efforts would have found more than lies about a blow job, to pin on Clinton.
The piece she referenced but did not link:
Very interesting, although I'm not sure I fully agree about the exponential pace of progress. Even Kurtzwell incorporates s curves onto his exponential curve to help explain the the choppy nature of the change.
Maybe it's just that I find his goo goo ga ga explanation of the exponential rate of change annoying. but it's also that some changes are much bigger in terms of how they affect us than others (e.g. fire, plumbing, electricity, fossil fuels) . At some point, the rate at which our day to day lives change will have to slow down.
But that's sort of beside the point. It is an intriguing and in some ways frightening topic.
Even if she said everything right, at this point, she's already demonstrated that there's little she'd NOT do to lie, cheat, or cover-up.
From my perspective, it seems like most of this reputation is due to non stop hate from right wing commentators such as Rush Limbaugh for about 25 years now. I can remember hearing this hate from my oldest brother in 1993 or so when Hillary had the gaul as first lady to actually be doing something as substantive as working on health care policy. How dare she ? She thought just because her husband was President that she should be able to help him ? What an arrogant cunt, right ?
If you're a republican or if you have republican friends, you've heard them whining about her for a very very long time. I've never fully understood the hate. THe thing they hated about BIll the most was his success. A successful democrat is a very dangerous thing. IT could lead to more democrats (the enemy) being elected.
Don't feel bad. We're all susceptible to propaganda. Especially when our friends and loved ones are buying it too.
just as bad as the leftwingnut sheeple like humanity
MY tolerance or lack of hate for Hillary make me a left wing nut ? Right.
This only shows how far to the right this country has slipped, when some idiots think the Clintons are representative of the "left."
Elizabeth would be a better choice
I agree, in some ways, although with HIllary you get BIll, and their experience is huge. But I'm surprised to hear you say it. Warren is more liberal than Hillary.
One of the reasons HIllary is such a strong contender is that a lot of people, even some republicans, are intrigued with the idea of an experienced and successful two term president, in the role of "first gentleman."
I find it staggering what people are willing to overlook in support of their "team."
I agree. Or for that matter, what kind of nonsense people are willing to buy, if it somehow tarnishes the images of politicians of the other team.
Politicians on both sides have huge ambitions and egos, and are willing to behave in what seems to be very manipulative and questionable ways. There is an element of "the end justifies the means" that comes up in ppolitics and in many corners of the business world too.
Ultimately we each have to decide which politicians have the greater good, and the better interests of us all at heart. Your beliefs about economics, and government, and even your basic intelligence come in to play in your ability to figure out which one really has our best interests at heart.
So if you sniff around a Clinton taint, you'll usually smell the GOP.
Not sure what you mean by this. But if you mean that in all intent and purposes, the CLintons are very middle of the road, which these days means leaning strongly in the interests of big business, big oil, the 1%, and against investing in the people, the nI agree.. I'm not saying she's a right wing wacko. But as a democrat in 2015 she's probably more conservative than either Nixon or about half the republicans in congress were in the 70s.
I think it's kind of cute how badly you guys want this issue to be significant.
Yeah, that wouldn't be significant... We're use to having liars in the Whitehouse.... SOP..
YOu're such a retarded moron. This isn't about her lying. It's about her not following email policies that previous secretaries didn't follow either.
You say she's lying when she said she did it for convenience. And maybe she did it for privacy reasons as well, which would make sense. Why do you think she did it ?
Was it because she thought some future witch hunt would find something they could nail her for ? Was she worried about some future Ken Star nailing her for something she said in an emial ? Was it her totally unfounded paranoia about a vast right wing conspiracy ?
Talk about dishonesty. I don't think you can have even a single thought about politics without lying to yourself. And you have the gall to call her a liar ?
One Age Group Where The Labor Force Participation Rate is Increasing
and will continue increasing for many years. Maybe when most of the boomers are over 75 it will level off for a while before going much higher. .
It's Obama's fault.
Nothing lower taxes and a few more wars wouldn't fix.
When the whole global warming brouhahaha started, they predicted Atlantic hurricanes of unprecedented force and much greater frequency as part of the scare.
Strangely, the hurricanes never materialized, Atlantic hurricane seasons have been unusually mild. That seems to be one of the scenarios that the "warmists" try to play down.
IT wasn't just because of global warming. It was also a radically increasing trend in bad storms and Hurricane's in the Atlantic. I recall in the 90s stories of insurance compaies laying off their risk, by essentially selling investments in insring against hurricanes. That is selling to reinsurers or other investment products created to help them hedge against what looked like an increasing trend.
Look at the data. This (link below) has very detailed data and an interesting graphic at the end.
What would you bet on for the next ten years ? Just based on trends, not the down trend of the past few years, but the longer term trend ?
I wouldn't want to be insuring against hurricanes in Florida, and I'm saying that just based on long term trends, nothing to do with AGW.
1. Actually there now is a time frame, that was what the 2014 amendment to the law did. There was no time frame specified in the law previously.
Oh you mean after she left the state department ?
She used a private email to avoid the freedom of information act.
This is one of your made up facts.
Records must be in government possession and accessible to the agency.
Didn't you just say that the time at which they must be in govt possession was established after her tenure as Secretary of State ?
“In the process of updating our records management — this is something that’s sort of ongoing given technology and the changes — we reached out to all of the former secretaries of state to ask them to provide any records they have,” she said.
Clinton was the only former secretary to send back e-mail records in response to the department’s request, Harf said.
She also said that the department has “no indications” that Clinton used personal e-mail for classified information.
“She had multiple other ways of communicating in a classified manner, including assistants or staff members printing classified documents for her, secure phone calls, or secure videoconferences,” Harf said.
This may be bad for Clinton politically. But I doubt it will be that bad. If the end result is to tighten up rules about government emails, then maybe that's a good thing. But I think the typicla Fox news watcher has no idea what the state of the art is in communication of sensitive information. They're just on another one of their stupid witch hunts.
IS this the best dirt they're going to be able to trump up against Clinton ?
"If you use a private email you must print it out and have it preserved or forward it to an official email account."
So, this makes it pretty much up to the individual to archive it. Right ?
Which hillary didn't. Pretty hard to believe someone that claims to be an educator doesn't understand the meaning of the word MUST.
I guess when you're making up your facts and you're only on here to insult people you don't know (and when your IQ is way below average) you just can't help yourself.
Like you, I've seen a few stories on this. But unlike you, I'm objective and don't have a huge hatred for the CLintons, so I actually don't know about how the law will eventually effect her on this. But here are some things that I think I do know, from the small amount I've read on this (infinitely more than you have gotten from Fox news, or the Drudge report).
1) The word 'must' archive has been used. But it doesn't say when.
2) Last fall when the records law was updated, Archived email records were requested from Hilary and other past secretaries that used their own email accounts. Hilary provided records at that time. She also provided Benghazi related emails back at the time of that oriinal investigation.
3) It's 2014/2015. People have hard drives and back ups of data such as emails. SO if a regulation says you must archive (with printed copies) but one instead archives on a hard drive,(able to print copies at any time) this does not seem like a big problem to me. Especially if the law does not explicitly state a time frame in which private emails must be printed.
Interesting, the largest percentage of greenhouse gases is water vapor... Why isn't THAT killing us?
I think somebody already addressed this. But here you go.
Not that you have any interest in learning anything. Why don't you just call this a commie libby site, so you can can continue to be king of the dim bulbs.
Yep, their still here...
Considering your only rebuttal to any comment of mine is something about me being a stupid teacher or lacking reading skills, one would think you would at least know the difference between 'their' and 'they're.'
Not that I didn't know you were an illiterate buffoon. Just thought I would point out the proof.
It might give people some insight in as to why you hate teachers. Trust me, teaching you was just as frustrating for your teachers as trying to learn anything was for you.