We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Saturday, April 21. 2018
How long will the human species survive on Earth?
15 Stats That Show Americans Are Drowning in 'Stuff'
Though he was no inventor, Rube Goldberg’s ‘machines’ made him a household name
The Man Who Brought Down Lance Armstrong - Floyd Landis, a former teammate of the cyclist’s, just won more than $1 million in a legal case against Armstrong. Here are his thoughts on the suit, cycling, and his onetime rival.
Facts about Tesla from a hedge fund manager who’s short the stock
Renn poscast: The (sad) fate of America's small towns
Professor tells conservative student to 'shut up, f--k your life'
I guess he quit teaching tolerance
Judge rejects Oberlin College request to move town-gown lawsuit to another county
Students criticize 'Mikado' play for 'cultural appropriation'
California School District Says Parents Can’t Pull Kids Out Of New LGBT Sex Ed Class
Should We Give Socialism Another Try?
Searching for New Yorkers with Republican Friends
IS WIND ENERGY A GOOD IDEA?
Cuomo’s about to crush New York restaurants
Idiot wants to be president. Ain't gonna happen
Idiot Governor Cuomo Lectures NYC Crowd on What “Wop” Means — Pushes Disproven Folklore
GOODLATTE, GOWDY, AND NUNES ON THE COMEY MEMOS
Barone: Collusion, Anyone?
How many times has Muller screwed up cases?
Prosecutor or persecutor?
Bolton on Russia, from 2008
Israel’s Success Has Surprised Everyone
Tracked: Apr 22, 09:28
Tracked: Apr 22, 09:42
Tracked: Apr 22, 10:18
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
I hope everyone enjoys their Brooklyn walking tour today. Good luck, the weather should be wonderful. Wish I were able to join, perhaps next year.
Drowning in stuff. It's the American disease. It is swamping homes, landfills, and the oceans.
What Lance Armstrong accomplished was amazing. So of course may will say it is because he used various techniques that are not allowed. Fair enough but that is a statement that needs context. Almost all of the racers were using the same techniques. The only ones who didn't were those with insufficient backing, knowledge and funding to do it. So when Lance beat the French and Italian cyclists, just understand that the French and Italian cyclist were cheating too, doing the same things Lance was doing. They just weren't outed.
After the Armstrong scandal, I couldn’t watch the Tour anymore. For years, as a kid I followed it the only way I knew how, the two or three paragraphs in the local news paper. While serving in the Navy, I remember reading with great interest about Greg LeMond winning three tours! The three or four paragraphs not doing any justice to the infighting between LeMond and Hinault. Then LeMond became one of the lonely voices against Armstrong. Who should I believe? LeMond was right, Lance was a dopper. Turns out the whole damn Tour is full of doppers. Still is to this day. Always has been, probably always will be.
In some ways it is like watching the NBA and the star players consistently "walk". They make their signature dunk shot but they break the rules to do it. The refs look the other way because it is a star player and a dramatic two pointer. Or the football player who makes a dirty hit because the only way they can win is to take out the QB or runner. Professional sports is full of cheating but some is ignored for the greater good.
"[i](2) It seems that we will take enough action on human-induced climate change to forestall disastrous consequences, but the possibility remains that we will trigger a tipping point hidden in our complex climate system that will plunge us into the abyss.[i]".
So far, the only action that I've seen is one side trying to coerce the other side into believing that H.I.C.C. actually exists, usually by declaring that their conclusions are protected the sanctity of unimpeachable truth.
These are achieved by twisting the data sets into pretzels and then refusing to disclose the manipulation, all while claiming that lofty scientific principles don't apply and debate or reproducibility is for chumps.
Aggie: These are achieved by twisting the data sets into pretzels and then refusing to disclose the manipulation
Methods and data for climate science research are easily available, and the basic findings concerning anthropogenic global warming have been verified by independent methodologies and data.
Aggie: My thanks to you all for reliably proving my point!
Actually, we directly contradicted your claim concerning disclosure of methods. We'd be happy to provide specifics, but you should be able to easily find methods and data in just about any research paper.
Man made global warming?
One would think somewhere a scientific study would exist that shows CO2 causes warming in a convective atmosphere like one we enjoy here on Earth..
It doesn't exist..
He doesn't understand he is proving your point. He thinks citing the cheaters and liars is "proof" and has no sense of irony. It is like the two year old with chocolate around his mouth and you ask if they were eating your chocolates. With pure innocent sincerity they exclaim convincingly "no!". That's why we keep the Z around. He is so cute when he is lying.
OneGuy: He thinks citing the cheaters and liars is "proof" and has no sense of irony.
Actually, in this case, citing the original papers is entirely appropriate.
Claim: refusing to disclose the 'manipulation'
Refutation: 1) methodology published in nearly every research paper concerning how data is analyzed; 2) research papers just on the subject of how data is being analyzed; 3) an entire research project that used independent means to re-analyze the raw, unadjusted data.
The Zachbot is back! Did you get a software update during your absence? A humor algorithm? Cause what you wrote is pretty funny. That part about independent methodology; nice punch line. All true independent persons are derided and or sued. You can’t watch a thing on PBS without hearing about the crisis that we face, and those evil deniers trying to throw facts into the mind control process. Trying to lead people astray with the none approved analysis. How dare the deniers treat this as actual science!
B. Hammer: All true independent persons are derided and or sued.
One case of contrarian science is the funding of the Berkeley Earth project. They used independent statistical analysis of the raw, unadjusted data, and discovered that it supported the findings of other researchers of a warming trend inconsistent with natural warming, but consistent with greenhouse warming.
BEST have also, very commendably, put together a much larger set of temperature measurements than is used by other organisations.
What is less good is their mindset, which needs changing. They are using their own notions of temperature trends and consistency to fill in missing temperature measurements, and to adjust temperature measurements, which are subsequently used as if they were real temperature measurements. This is a very dangerous approach, because of its circular nature: if they adjust measured temperatures to match their pre-conceived notions of how temperatures work, then their final results are very likely to match their pre-conceived notions.
Zeliar has a history of citing Berkeley Earth Project in support of assertions that cannot be sustained by BEP's actual work (once you read BEP's own qualifiers about their data set, it's obvious that their work is not really as strong as our favorite chatbot would like us to believe).
Of course, whenever you point that out, his programming just loops back and repeats the same nonsense you just refuted. Accomplishing nothing besides wasting your time.
Thos: Zeliar has a history of citing Berkeley Earth Project in support of assertions that cannot be sustained by BEP's actual work (once you read BEP's own qualifiers about their data set, it's obvious that their work is not really as strong
This is a great place for you to be specific. Please refer to the actual scientific paper you are disputing, or cite a published study that calls into question their findings.
Funny, kiddiez, when y'all espouse glib generalities you ask for specifics in return.
More pedantic bullshit.
Back to your sandbox, kiddiez.
Re: The folklore about "wop," and about a hundred other words.
Immediately reject explanations of word origins before WWII that rely on pronouncing the initials of something - what we call an acronym. They ain't so. We made up those stories recently.
Israel's success. For openers, an average IQ of 112-115 for Ashkenazi Jews. That's an entire standard deviation higher than the rest of us.
That's an entire standard deviation higher than the rest of us. Do you mean "us" Caucasians? I'd wager the East Asians are close to 112-115.
Northeast Asians are 105. I think the general numbers for China will drop as the interior is tested as well.
@JJM - having their own country has given them the opportunity. But Ashkenazi Jews overachieved well before WWII and the founding of Israel. Intense selection from the 13th C on seems to be the cause. I predict you will like this article.
I suspect the greatest part of Israel's success lies simply in a certain bloody-minded determination and sense of self-reliance arising out of the tide of events in Europe from 1933 until 1945.
That, and then seven decades of coping with hostile neighbours committed to its destruction.
These sorts of things do tend to focus the mind.
" socialism has not “failed”. It has just never been done properly:"
Frédéric Bastiat pointed out that Socialism is theft. It is based on plunder your neighbor. How do you do theft properly?
Ray: Frédéric Bastiat pointed out that Socialism is theft.
Agreed. U.S. "capitalism" is also theft.
Now that surprises me. You aren't a troll I have read to many of your posts to believe that. Your comment needs explaining.
I don't use the word capitalism anymore, as it describes an economic explanation based on 19th C ideas that does not match up with anything happening today. "Crony capitalism" or "hybrid system" describes us now. I prefer the phrase "free market" for the ideal we are hoping to draw closer to. Thinking of markets as free or less free in various nations is clearly than assigning them into either-or categories. Sad but true.
The free market works even when everyone is abusing it and screwing it up. Yet it is fair to dream - and work for - of something more fair than what we have now.
I've always been surprised that even economists don't seem to have a set definition of capitalism. They swing from the 11th grad econ def of private ownership of the means of production to corporations to anytime someone makes a profit by hook or crook.
I went looking for a decent definition. It led me to read of lot of Mises. Better explanations were to be had by those of the late 19th century. The real confusion seems to start around the time of the Russian Revolution. Hmm.
I came up with the following:
[quote]A continuum of capitalism. If we define capitalism as the liberty to retain and accumulate earnings in excess of subsistence and use this "capital" to generate wealth for ones self through participation and creation in markets and enterprises, then we see the real difference, beyond all the naming conventions is who is afforded this liberty.
Laissez faire capitalism grants this liberty to the most people. Regulation and licensing seeks to limit who has the liberty, for social good or naught. Crony capitalism is when friends of office holders are afforded more of the liberty compared to others. Interventionism is the increasing governmental interference in who may exercise this liberty. Then we have full blown socialism, or state capitalism, where only officeholders and bureaucrats can exercise the liberty and they make wealth for themselves by controlling the markets and enterprises. Fascism (national socialism) and communism (international socialism) are just variants of socialism.
You can even apply this to feudal lords, who were granted this liberty to accumulate and use productive capital to generate wealth for themselves, with appropriate tribute to their king. For most of history, the grant of the liberty (capitalism) was restricted to the "high born". Even the grants to the Church of lands for monasteries, nunneries, etc. came with the grant of the liberty to retain and use that which was in excess of subsistence to generate wealth for the order.[quote]
It may not be correct to use the word capitalism. But I do wonder if not capitalism, what would we call the liberty to retain and accumulate excess, of subsistence, earnings and use them to generate wealth for oneself.
Why do we not have an overt name for this liberty, one that should be a natural right.
Birddog this might be something you will like. Dylan performed by First Aid Kit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pyPly62Ad9M
Capital consists of anything a person uses to perform economically useful work. Capital is any asset used to produce goods or services. In other words, capital is tools and capitalism is the use of tools to produce goods and services. In reality, everybody is a capitalist.
Exactly right. Capitalism isn't a governing philosophy like Socialism for example (which it is often compared with). Capitalism simply "IS" like weather and laws of nature. Socialism is a philosophy where the government can be capitalist and the citizens are mostly banned from being capitalist. Even some animals practice capitalism.
"And this is the great truth that socialists lose sight of -- Capital is nothing but old labor. Capital is nothing but the fruits of the earth which have been already gathered, preserved, or transformed; that is, manufactured by past labor.”
Socialism; a speech delivered in Faneuil hall, February 7th, 1903, by Frederic J. Stimson