AngryOhioan's Comments (217)

“You don't understand what they are talking about. Just how do you think scientist work? Do you think some data is gathered and then some theory (model if you prefer) is created and then they present the two and everyone goes oh yes, great, next problem. Measurements need to be analyzed, they need to be understood. Structures in the data may be real or may be artifacts. It's rare for a measurement to depend on only one variable (temperature for instance) and so it's not only legitimate to manipulate the data , it's a virtual requirement in order to make sense of it. If more than one factor contributes to a measurement it's reasonable to see what happens to the data if one factor is changed. That's not manipulation to fit data to a preconceived idea, it's simply trying to understand the data. Raw data without analysis is virtually worthless. Just how would you propose that these scientists approach understanding model results and data?”

“Global weather patterns are created by grafting together various data sets. As for the time depth used, that depends on the questions being addressed and those decisions are typically discussed in the methodology section.”

“The only flawed studies are the ones paid for by the extraction lobby. Climate science is sound and that's why big oil and coal companies are paying anyone with any type of science degree to write papers denying global climate change.

You'll note that none of those "scientists" have submitted their writings to peer review. There's a good reason for it...it's all made up.”

“Well, you might want to talk to Mr Krauthammer about that, American Pulitzer Prize-winning syndicated columnist and contributing editor to the The New Republic and Fox News contributor. He is obvously not a climatologist and neither are most of the folks on here. Most of the "healthy"c­onservativ­es and progressives that I talk to have an open mind about this debate, have learned in school about the potential greenhouse effect from CO2, CH4, N2O, and HFCs in the atmosphere, and understand the importance of being good stewarts for future generations. However, most of the left and right "wing-nuts" don't know what they are talking about.. Again, I said we "should" be talking about clean energy because it kills three nasty birds with one stone.”

“Science tests hypotheses, those which have withstood a long period of testing become theories. If you have an example of cherry-picked data with which to back your claim you should bring it forward.”

“That's ALREADY been disproven.

Don't you have anything real to add? Just already debunked talking points? Forshame.
.”

“Better yet, some of the programing code is starting to be leaked. It shows comments of altering data and the code shows the data dropping and alterations. This was not science it was political science. Science deserves the black eye it will earn much like polywater and cold fusion. Scientists need to focus on science and not PR to get grants.”

“It isn't interesting to you that the Post's only other high-profile black employee is let go the very day that a discrimination lawsuit was filed against the paper? If there were no prior pattern, the matter wouldn't come up, but we are not going to behave like infants, continually amazed that things always fall to the floor, never to the ceiling. What do they need to do to demonstrate to you that they are not exactly enlightened in matters of race, hire David Duke as section editor? Just how much evidence do you need?”

“Don't be so angry. I'm actually saying the opposite. Good for workers is good for Wall St. Banks have stopped lending to workers. We need banks to start lending again. In order for that to happen banks have to acknowledge that its ok to take on more debt. Banks have to stop saving. Securitized debt has to be able to be marked more liberally. Etc.”

“The bailouts didn't begin until Bush and Paulson said the economy would collapse "if we don't get the money tomorrow." They couldn't have begun before the money was there.”

“I don't know enough about her work (yet) to know whether you're right, but let's assume you are.

What's incredibly interesting is that you point towards the bad habit of people applying sound research of economists to a realm of conditions and circumstances where it just simply has never been checked or thought through.

If that happens at the fringes it's ok and it's the only way science can be of use. But alas, how about the mindblowing assumptions about humans as agents in the economy that classical and neoclassical theory requires you to swallow?

What about a macro-economics paradigm in which the degree of leverage and debt of firms and/or households plays no role (=cancels out) at the aggregate level?

And how do you like a chairman of the Fed who makes his monetary policy decisions on the basis of such a model. For decades.

As I said: your point is extremely well taken.”

“I have to agree. It's small businesses that get penalized for the actions of the large corps who get bailouts. Ironic and sad.”

“angry~

Yes, there is a difference between being "respected" and a "soft touch who panders"..­....so thank heavens Obama is RESPECTED in this world now. And thank heavens that GWB is gone.”

“AngryOhioan:

Do you honestly believe that Norway awarded Obama the Nobel Peace Prize because he was "appeasing our enemies?" Besides what exactly constitutes pandering "to our 'friends' in 'Europe'?"”

“I am an European, and let me tell you that America wasn't respected in Europe under George W. Bush. Not. One. Bit.
Obama is the best thing you could have hoped for. Be glad you have him and turn off Glenn Beck.”

“Who are you afraid of in Europe AngryOhioan? France? Belgium? Norway? It must be hard to be that afraid all the time.”

“Not only that, it's the small banks that loan to small businesses. Small business is what fuels job growth. As long as the small banks are allowed to fail, there will be no recovery.”

“Exactly, it is not a free market.

A free market for them is only a sales pitch, read from a script.”

“Hi AngryOhian. Thanks for your comment.

I believe you missed the point of my post. I didn't say that Obama "won minorities and young people so the midterms are a lock". Where did I write that? Nobody has a lock on anything. My point is that the Democrats have 4 things working for them, including the the young vote. And that is undeniable, no matter how cynically one chooses to look at it. And yes, Obama didn't get a majority of the white vote. But neither did Carter or Clinton. With a sizeable amount of the white vote, and a ridiculously high majority of the minority vote, the DEMS can (and I believe will) win re-election in Congress.

And as I noted in the last paragraph, these auspicious factors must be connected to all of the things that have helped the DEMS gain seats in Congress over the last two election cycles, and swept Obama in on a historic election.

As for the economy, things will continue to move a slow pace, but the economy will see growth in the 4th quarter, and is poised to be "better" next year than this one. The stimulus has worked better than its critics predicted it would. And most of the money hasn't even been give out yet. Looking at all the factor with our economy, I'd say I'm being more "realistic" than "optimistic".

But I thank you for sharing your opinions.”

“Utter rubbish. It's obvious you don't know much about history.”

“I know my history very well as a European.
But I also use my brains and come to the conclusion that the situation now is NOT COMPARABLE to that of the eras before.

Geopolitics now are tremendously different from the past. Russia will not occupy Poland for the simple reason that Germany will not allow it (can't have the heat that close) and Germany will unconditionally be supported by the rest of The European Union and most likely NATO. And I am quite certain that Russia will not opt for a total war. Come on boy!”

“rubbish...

I don't think rational people and politicians derive any country threats assesments from historical records?

Germany threatented entire continent in recent history twice, what country is currently afriad fo Germany in Europe according solely to that fact? please, point at any and all.”

“and how would you define Europe? Only former East block countries that comprise less then 25% population and produce less then 15% of GDP?

and who did not betray East Europeans?”

“A few ideas:
I wonder how much of the decision by Bush to put an American military base in Poland was a quid pro quo for that government's former support of our misguided mission in Iraq.

There are other news sources that are reporting that the majority of Czechs are glad that this bad program is being put to rest.

From the German business daily, Handelsblatt: "From the very beginning, the whole concept of having a missile defense shield in Central Europe was just a big, bad idea."

The Germans have many reasons to be leary of Russia, as some of us remember, and yet, they are against this non-functional missile shield.”

“Nope. Not one bit of "betrayal" there. It's time we stopped spending ourselves into the ground to be the world's policeman. The European countries can spend some of their money for a change. This is a major policy change in that no more will we believe in some pie-in-the-sky simply because Ronald Reagan liked it.”

“Get real...the Europeans support what our President did including the majority of Poles and Czechs. The U.S. military is also supportive.
The people of Eastern Europe while suspicious of the Russians aren't to worried about a 1968 Prague repeat. Now we scrape something that hasn't worked and save 5 billion the process, replacing it with something that works better with existing technology and creates a bigger umbrella that includes Israel and southern Europe....­win, win, win...for Europe, Israel and the U.S.”

“The cold war is OVER! Welcome to the 21st Century. Wake up!”

“It seems YOU have completely skipped over pertinent information. The Missile Defense System is a "TECHNOLOGICAL FLOP." "It's supposed protection a MIRAGE."

So you propose that the U.S. spend BILLIONS of tax payer dollars to install a system that doesn't work and won't protect our our Eastern European allies? Your a smart one.

Quote: " President Reagan described in glowing terms in 1983, an announcement that turned into a diplomatic triumph even while it was a technological flop. Ever since, missile defense has always been more about international politics than about new military technology­."

Quote: " But critics of the interceptor system say its flight tests have repeatedly fallen short, and call its supposed protection a mirage."”

“It will have cost $530,000 to pay for my kid's college and med school by the time she has finished. In France, tuition for medical school is free. There are more doctors and fewer lawyers in France.”

“From what I understand, you have room to make huge savings on the price of medication and unnecessary exams. Medical exams should be portable, they are here. Obviously, there are also incredible overheads in administrative services, from what I get, insurance corps spend a lot of bureaucrats salaries to deny claims, inquire into pre-existing conditions and such. Last, if people went to their GP's and dentists on a more regularly basis, that would bring down costs. I had a student job in a university hospital in the US in the late seventies and even then, nurses told me people got to a doctor way too late. Finally, we used to have nurses in schools that would take care of preventive medicine, unfortunately, the government cut most of these jobs, but that was a fairly cheap way of reminding families to have vaccines done, take their kids to the dentist's or talk over eating disorders. And I do believe lots of doctors would take a bit of cut in their pay if they could treat patients without having to handle all this paperwork with the insurance companies and could be proud of their jobs for not turning down patients. Ethics goes a long way towards making true professionals happy with their lives.”