Obama on Letterman

[Mark]

MY point exactly Bob. Science is never over. Apparently only those choosing to believe a particular scientific study simply to prove their own seperate agenda, ever think it is over and the case has been proven.

That's why it is so easy being a scientist, you are never actually wrong, you go with what you know at the time..........

Lawyers eh? In my experience the essence of Law, is that the the winner is usually the one who has nothing better to do or bottomless pockets allowing them to continue without end. They rely on their opponents getting worn down till they give up realising the futility of it all. Which is not the same as proving your point.

 

[Bob Fechter]

What a miserable life, arguing about someone's money all the time.

 

[Jim Craik]

Mark, earlier today you commented on scientists being wrong, you said:

Now you say:

That's why it is so easy being a scientist, you are never actually wrong, you go with what you know at the time..........QUOTE]

So Mark just a few minutes ago you said scientists were wrong about alot of things, now you say scientists are never actually wrong.

You can't have it both ways, so what is it, we're you wrong a few minutes ago, or are you wrong now?

 

[Jeff Young]

MY point exactly Bob. Science is never over. Apparently only those choosing to believe a particular scientific study simply to prove their own seperate agenda, ever think it is over and the case has been proven.

That's why it is so easy being a scientist, you are never actually wrong, you go with what you know at the time..........

Lawyers eh? In my experience the essence of Law, is that the the winner is usually the one who has nothing better to do or bottomless pockets allowing them to continue without end. They rely on their opponents getting worn down till they give up realising the futility of it all. Which is not the same as proving your point.

Now, now, we've been through this before. There are basically four positions you can take here:

1. I don't believe in man made warming no how, no way -- it's all some crazy world wide consipiracy of scientists and governments to steal from me and tax me (Bob)
2. I acknowledge the science exists, and the majoriy of scientists agree but i have my doubts and think the credible portion of the minority makes good points (you, I think)
3. I acknowledge the science exists, and the majority viewpoint, but understand climatology is comlicted and it is possible the majority is wrong (we)
4. It's all settled (whack job greenies).

2 and 3 are reasonable positions to take. I have my doubts too, and read the "contra" literature -- not the youtube comics or blogs or whatever -- when I can.

It's the guys in categories 1 and 4 that spook me, and there are a lot of 1s around these parts.

 

[Doug S.]

Now, now, we've been through this before. There are basically four positions you can take here:

1. I don't believe in man made warming no how, no way -- it's all some crazy world wide consipiracy of scientists and governments to steal from me and tax me (Bob)

It's the guys in categories 1 and 4 that spook me, and there are a lot of 1s around these parts.

Bob can't help it, Jeff. Read between the lines in his posts....there's a history there that indicates long term "issues". Conspiratory theorists seldom come to that place in just a day or even a week or a month or a year, they most often develop those attributes because of a lifetime of difficulty adjusting to the demands of a reasonable society...everyone is always out to get them.

Happened in my family recently....a cousin became convinced that "they" were tracking her through electronics and electricity, ended up tearing the wiring out of her house and the underneath of her car's dash, and destroying every computer they had. She spent a while in a mental-health wellness center, but is now back at home...still insisting that "they" were after her all along and still are, but is less excessive about her actions now....we'll see how long she can fly under the radar, some can, some can't. Would be interesting to find out if our friend LB has a history of run-ins with the authorities.

Despite having dedicated a career to education, though, I have to admit I have always liked the Pink Floyd song! There is a growing community of home-schoolers in our country who think they can do it better, and some of them actually manage to achieve satisfactory academic growth, but the one thing the home-schoolers can't provide is a feeling of being part of the overall society, they are isolating their kids and that usually results in adjustment difficulties. When I was kayaking I was proud to offer my services as part of the PE curriculum for home-schooling groups around Houston, even welcomed them into the competitions we sponsored. It was fun watching them!!

Cheers!

Doug

 

[Mark]

Doug and Jeff. Don't feel a need to protect me from or leave me out of your critisisms. It isn't only Bob who feels that way on this issue. It is a shame that to even critisize taxation on Global Warming 'cough', credentials, is to be labelled a consiracy theorist, a nut job or an old white guy.

Not all of us nut jobs are white, old or have porches on which to rock while we rock. Question it all gentlemen. Question it all.

Doug you have recently admitted it is not paranoia if they are out to get you. I would add that it is not paranoia simply to ask and expect accountability before one is taxed. There is a reason you keep your receipts. So you can prove that which is to be taxed and that which is not. The IRS wouldn't just take the word of a scientist who argued on your behalf that you could have spent your money on non taxable items. That's right, they ask you to prove it!

I ask tha they prove the Global issues they wish to tax me on. They have not. yet they tax me anyway. Simple really. But you trusting softies let them get away with it so that the rest of us are screwed!

 

[John Milmont]

I agree that the general public has no idea about the current state of affairs and politicians like the president take advantage of this by saying whatever they want - and people like Mr. Craik will believe it. But that's not saying this doesn't happens on the right as well, it does and it happens just as often.

I bet if you asked any uneducated person about the Clinton surplus, they would most likely say that we had no national debt at that time. The level of political ignorance is just that bad!

You are a fool if you dont think politicians havent perfected taking advantage of the uneducated so they disseminate this kind of misinformation for their gain. You guys must not follow politics very closely because this is what being a politician is all about!

I didn't see Letterman, but if Tom P quoted the show correctly, this illustrates my point exactly. Jim is really grasping at straws trying to defend Obama on this, its clear to anyone without political motivation that Obama's response had nothing to do with the question. But, his response does a good job at misleading people who are not educated in the matter or are not politically savvy.

Obama has done this in the past as well. A few months ago he was giving a campaign speech and was talking about how McCain outspent him in his 2008 campaign. A pure lie, but again, the uneducated eat that stuff up. [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cAVN0vi88nY]Obama Bizarrely Claims He Was Outspent In 2008 - YouTube[/ame]

Its all politics... and Obama is a great politician.

 

[Jeff Young]

Uh, he was talking about HIllary outspending him in the primary. Get a grip dude.

 

[John Milmont]

Nice try Jeff. Show me some sources on that.

 

[Mark]

drum roll.............................................................

While we wait for Jeff to respond, I think it appropriate that I ask you all to imagine the drum roll to be played with a skiffle beat.

Please indulge this old white guy rocker type for a minute,

 

[Doug S.]

Doug and Jeff. Don't feel a need to protect me from or leave me out of your critisisms.

Don't worry, Mark, I've disagreed with you before.

I try to shy away from personal criticisms, though, unless provoked. One of the things I appreciate about your presence here on the forum is your wide range of opinions, you're not just a one trick pony....and, of course, I also appreciate the fact that (for the most part) you are not personally insulting.

I'm interested in everyone's personal opinions, MUCH more than a bunch of links to some arcane webpage that I probably will never get all the way through, nor for some of them even begin because I am already familiar with the particular website's radical political leanings...that's not to say I won't try, but am much more likely to do so when the website has some veracity by virtue of being unbiased. I seldom read links to sites that AGREE with my opinion...why would I need to do that since I already know what I think? I would rather read something from the opposition, at least that gives me some insight into their beliefs. I don't shy away from a vigorous discussion...even think that the place would be a bit boring without them, as they can be intellectually invigorating.

Personal attacks....not so much :thumbsdown: .....once those start it's easy to reach for the "Ignore" link on their profile. If only some of our resident "nutjobs" could tolerate being challenged and try to logically support their beliefs, rather than strike out personally, I can't imagine the "ignore" function would be useful at all.

No worries....as you were!

Cheers!

Doug

 

[Bob Fechter]

Have you all met dug yet? he had a career in education. He's an expert in mental disorders because a relative of his flipped out. He's got me on ignore again and is commenting about posts I wrote.

Hey, dug, which Pink floyd song would that be?

Bob can't help it, Jeff. Read between the lines in his posts....there's a history there that indicates long term "issues". Conspiratory theorists seldom come to that place in just a day or even a week or a month or a year, they most often develop those attributes because of a lifetime of difficulty adjusting to the demands of a reasonable society...everyone is always out to get them.

Happened in my family recently....a cousin became convinced that "they" were tracking her through electronics and electricity, ended up tearing the wiring out of her house and the underneath of her car's dash, and destroying every computer they had. She spent a while in a mental-health wellness center, but is now back at home...still insisting that "they" were after her all along and still are, but is less excessive about her actions now....we'll see how long she can fly under the radar, some can, some can't. Would be interesting to find out if our friend LB has a history of run-ins with the authorities.

Despite having dedicated a career to education, though, I have to admit I have always liked the Pink Floyd song! There is a growing community of home-schoolers in our country who think they can do it better, and some of them actually manage to achieve satisfactory academic growth, but the one thing the home-schoolers can't provide is a feeling of being part of the overall society, they are isolating their kids and that usually results in adjustment difficulties. When I was kayaking I was proud to offer my services as part of the PE curriculum for home-schooling groups around Houston, even welcomed them into the competitions we sponsored. It was fun watching them!!

Cheers!

Doug

 

[Mark]

Doug, peace and good will to a fair man. Agree or disagree, Respect Sir.

 

[Mark]

Mark, earlier today you commented on scientists being wrong, you said:

Now you say:

That's why it is so easy being a scientist, you are never actually wrong, you go with what you know at the time..........QUOTE]

So Mark just a few minutes ago you said scientists were wrong about alot of things, now you say scientists are never actually wrong.

You can't have it both ways, so what is it, we're you wrong a few minutes ago, or are you wrong now?

Jim, with respect Sir, you are obtuse. I am not asking for it both ways. There is clearly no point in discussing anything with you from this point. You either are stupid, or deliberately misinterpret what I am saying. I will not defend against such nonsense. poeple with intelect will understand me even if they disagree.

 

[Bob Fechter]

"Obtuse!" What a lovely, venerable old word is that?

It gives a warm feeling to know there are still gentleman out there using their mellifluous vocabulary in such a charming way. :~)

 

[Mark]

Now, now, we've been through this before. There are basically four positions you can take here:

1. I don't believe in man made warming no how, no way -- it's all some crazy world wide consipiracy of scientists and governments to steal from me and tax me (Bob)
2. I acknowledge the science exists, and the majoriy of scientists agree but i have my doubts and think the credible portion of the minority makes good points (you, I think)
3. I acknowledge the science exists, and the majority viewpoint, but understand climatology is comlicted and it is possible the majority is wrong (we)
4. It's all settled (whack job greenies).

2 and 3 are reasonable positions to take. I have my doubts too, and read the "contra" literature -- not the youtube comics or blogs or whatever -- when I can.

It's the guys in categories 1 and 4 that spook me, and there are a lot of 1s around these parts.

I have answered in some other post with regard to solar and subsidies. Forgive me though, the posts are flowing thick and fast and I am easily side-tracked. But in particular I now refer to your point 1.

Jeff, we are being taxed without proof. Certainly here in the UK at least (anfd history tells us that where we lead, others are sure to follow). Perhaps not yet in the good ole US of A? Educate me. Renewables don't work effectively without significant subsidies from the, not only government hand outs and insentives to big generators, but also from subsidies levied upon all energy users, through increased charges from the supplier to offset their tax burdens imposed by government through 'renewable obligations'.

Over here, every business pays not only an inflated unit price per kWh for energy, as explained above, but also through a climate change levy of around .5p per kWh. But to top it off, even the climate change levy portion of their bill has tax of 20% added in VAT (sales tax) So, tax on a tax! (we also suffer the same on petrol. They add the various taxes, then add VAT of 20%, therefore taxing tax!

Tell me again how we are not taxed disproportionately on something that has not yet been proven to exist. Please. It will make me feel so much happier. BUT, please don't use Venus as a reasonable reason for apply tax. Also explain how it is morally acceptable to tax a tax. Please. If you can make me feel better, I promise to love you for ever.

 

[Jim Craik]

Mark, earlier today you commented on scientists being wrong, you said:

Now you say:

That's why it is so easy being a scientist, you are never actually wrong, you go with what you know at the time..........QUOTE]

So Mark just a few minutes ago you said scientists were wrong about alot of things, now you say scientists are never actually wrong.

You can't have it both ways, so what is it, we're you wrong a few minutes ago, or are you wrong now?

Mark you can think that if you want.

But that makes me wonder why you edited out the first part of my post?

Without the first first part of my post, you can make it seem like what I said makes no sense.

So just to claify, I have added the first part of my post above the quote.

 

[Mark]

"Obtuse!" What a lovely, venerable old word is that?

It gives a warm feeling to know there are still gentleman out there using their mellifluous vocabulary in such a charming way. :~)

Thank you Bob, but please. Charming? Me? Certainly not!

 

[Mark]

Mark, earlier today you commented on scientists being wrong, you said:




Now you say:

Mark you can think that if you want.

But that makes me wonder why you edited out the first part of my post?

Without the first first part of my post, you can make it seem like what I said makes no sense.

So just to claify, I have posted my whole comment.

OK Jim, I apolgise. I did not willfully edit out any part of your post. I accept the rebuttle.

Howver, let me be clear. I try my very best to debate with you. But please. let us understand one another here and now. FUCK OFF! Clear enough?

 

[Bob Fechter]

OK Jim, I apolgise. I did not willfully edit out any part of your post. I accept the rebuttle.

Howver, let me be clear. I try my very best to debate with you. But please. let us understand one another here and now. FUCK OFF! Clear enough?

O.K. point taken.