“2009: second hottest year on record, 2000's hottest decade on record. Look it up.
FYI: Phil Jones said that there hasn't been any *statistically significant* warming since 1995, because to do science properly you need data, and climate scientists are cautious about making unwarranted conclusions. Truth be told, temperatures have gone *up* since 1995, and with another few years of data, the warming since 1995 is much more than likely to prove statistically significant (i.e. to more than 95%).
Temperatures since the Little Ice Age are more than a degree and a half Celsius higher; you can't look at many of the graphs on the internet, because they tend to stop in the early 1900's, entirely leaving out the current warming trend. Still doesn't sound like much? Go back and look at historical accounts to see how different things were during the Little Ice Age. Most predictions that our temperature will rise another three degrees are based on the assumption that we will do something to slow Carbon emissions (just not enough). If we do as the denialists deem to recommend, the average predicted consequences are very much more dire (in the range of six to seven degrees) - 1/3 of the world turning to desert, plummet of human population to 1 billion, massive loss of ocean life due to increased acidity, worldwide warfare, and so on. Then again, we are not that stupid are we? . . . are we?”
sysadmin12439 on May 2, 2010 at 17:30:57
“"...climate scientists are cautious about making unwarranted conclusions"
Thank you for the best laugh I've had all week :-) According to the predictions in 1975, the glaciers should be down around Quebec by now.”
“Could someone explain this to me? Why is Mr. Robertson so desperate to explain human tragedy in terms of consequences for past action? To me, it sounds suspiciously like he believes in a peculiarly demented form of karma. Isn't the Christian message supposed to be (in part) that Jesus especially loves the poor and disenfranchised? Then again, if you follow Mr. Robertson's line of thinking, the rich deserve their riches. Sounds comfortable, though I am reminded of camels and eyes of needles.”
gschear on Jan 13, 2010 at 15:42:36
“The first and last real Christian died 200 years ago....on the cross....maybe.”
Jan 11, 2010 at 17:15:56
“While I haven't actually seen Avatar, it appears that much of the discussion here misses the point that fiction has unique demands. Namely, the importance of creating empathy with the main characters. As it is difficult to initiate this empathy with an alien character, an easy way to accomplish the end is to have at least one main character with whom the audience can initially relate. By using this character to draw the audience into the wider story, the audience is allowed to gain an understanding of the alien culture much more easily. These "white messiah" stories usually end up showing how the native culture is fundamentally superior, but in need of someone who understands the invading culture and thus achieve understanding. In the ideal, these stories value the strengths of both cultures and seek peace and harmony between them. That said, there are many potential hazards this basic meme must steer around. Having not seen the movie, I wonder if the criticism is valid, based on a poor understanding of the needs of fiction, or is some variation of grandstanding (an effort to occlude the main message of the film or to appear to have cutting edge sympathies). I suspect it's a little of all three.”
“Interesting and helpful points as ever The problem here however is to characterize abortion as a religious issue at all. The points of difference do not come from revelation at all; they come from the debate over whether or not there should be a debate at all about whose life is or is not worth protecting. If there should be a debate, of course everyone would be pro-choice. However, if we think we should uncompromisingly protect all human life, regardless of what point in development it is in, we should be pro-life.”
“Someone needs to explain something here. Is this article claiming the bonuses paid out were tax-exempt? That would be criminal. If not, how much a difference would the proposed amendment really have made?”
mick7191 on Mar 18, 2009 at 06:51:01
“Would it depend on British tax law? Didn't most the bonuses go there?”
TheDreadPirateRoberts on Mar 18, 2009 at 06:46:57
“The bonuses would have been taxable as income. Funny thing, outside of the finance business, everyone else pays taxes on bonuses as income.”
“Our President is right: every crisis is an opportunity. With more people free to work in new jobs, this is the time to start new businesses in new areas, or for government to put those people to work on public goods and services that have for too long been overlooked. The trouble is that they have to do it in the face of a serious credit crunch.
While there are many theories regarding the causes of this crunch, no sane person would blame the president for it. I would posit that an essential part of the cause was the tax cuts Bush instituted. People took that extra money and put it into their house (and not savings or traditional spending). They did so because of the myth that housing prices would perpetually rise. In the short term, it was a self-fulfilling prophesy, but in the long term, people ended up with houses that more expensive than the long term market could bear. The result is the current return of housing to more sustainable pricing. The lending was irresponsible because it was predicated on the presumption that rising housing prices is sustainable and good. The consequence is that nobody is as rich as they thought they were, and everyone is too scared to lend to anyone else.
The response should be to take a deep breath, realize that there are actually real opportunities out there, and make some responsible loans to startups in growth industries like solar power.”
KQuarksSuperKollider on Mar 7, 2009 at 15:14:15
“I really wish I had money right now believe me. There are so many good deals in the market right now if you were just patient like GE. These companies are going to come back sooner or later and you could make a ki lling.”
MetalogicToken on Mar 7, 2009 at 15:13:53
“Yuppers, tax cuts and free will are the culprits...
“It is human nature to see more clearly the harm done to those with whom we identify, but war and tragedy will never end until we learn to look through the eyes of those who hate us and see why they do it. Terrorism is a vile and despicable act of disproportionate hatred, but so is the confinement of over a million relatively defenseless people and condemning them to poverty and squalor before bombing them because some among them have used terrorism to fight back. Until we in the Western World begin to address reality in more even handed terms, we will never have the respect we think we so keenly deserve and peace will forever remain an ephemeral illusion.”
“The obvious: The details here are a bit too sketchy for a responsible journalist to report it the way Drudge does.
The sinister: This appears to be part of a concerted effort on Drudge's part to stir up feelings of racial animosity. For example, as a regular visitor of the site, I must say that I have been disturbed by his frequent attempts to juxtapose Obama with white women, whether it be by showing them in friendly embrace or showing them wearing his t-shirts. (Where have we seen this before?) What's disturbing about these images is not their innate content; they possess nothing newsworthy in themselves. But it is this very fact that is disturbing: there is no legitimate reason for posting these images that would outweigh the potentially negative effects they would have on some of the more racist elements of our society.”
“Interesting. Now calm down, and listen to the clip again. Two points. 1. The woman in question said Obama attended a Madrassa. This is untrue and based on salacious rumor. 2. It does appear that Obama was registered for a few years as a muslim by his muslim father at a Catholic school. All this shows is that his father didn't want him attending religious ed. It gives us no useful actual information about who Obama is, but nonetheless serves to provoke latent derogatory stereotypes. The only function it shows is to give haters the chance to justify their hate to themselves.”
“There are many comments here, so I don't know if someone has already pointed this out, but the logical deduction from the statistics put out by FOX "News" is that Republicans don't watch the news (assuming the ratings are not much more skewed than I think they are). If only 39% of those watching FOX say they are Republican, what are all the other people who say they are Republican watching?
On a side note, who's watching is not an indication of who thinks the show is "fair and balance", it is an indication of who is interested in "what the other guy is saying".”