 Environmentalists and Democrats often cite a “97 percent” consensus among climate scientists about global warming. But they never cite estimates that 95 percent of climate models predicting global temperature rises have been wrong. Former NASA scientist Dr. Roy Spencer says that climate models used by government agencies to create policies “have failed miserably.” Spencer analyzed 90 climate models against surface temperature and satellite temperature data, and found that more than 95 percent of the models “have over-forecast the warming trend since 1979, whether we use their own surface temperature dataset (HadCRUT4), or our satellite dataset of lower tropospheric temperatures (UAH).” “I am growing weary of the variety of emotional, misleading, and policy-useless statements like ‘most warming since the 1950s is human caused’ or ‘97% of climate scientists agree humans are contributing to warming’, neither of which leads to the conclusion we need to substantially increase energy prices and freeze and starve more poor people to death for the greater good. Yet, that is the direction we are heading,” Spencer wrote on his blog.  http://dailycaller.com/2014/02/11/report-95-percent-of-global-warming-models-are-wrong/ Well you could never post that or say that on Reddit. Infidel! |
|
|
|
I actually do lean in this direction quite a bit. And why isn't it reasonable to presume that if you have x number of people "doing a job", then if you have 3x or 4x number of people "doing that job" it will be that much more objectionable and intrusive?
So you presume that if it takes a man a minute to dig a post-hole, that 60 men can dig a post-hole in one second? If the US Gov is on the job.... and it takes one man one minute... then with 60 men each working one minute... they'd have produced a decision to form a committee to write a report on the environmental consequences of digging that post hole... I guess what I think is that you can't hardly go wrong arguing for an abstraction such as "small government"... |
|
|
|
....
But if you actually care about the environment, you've just created an entire generation of people who hate your guts, and think you're a bunch of fascists, and actually, they're right.
Extremists serve no purpose but their own. Beware whoever claims to love humanity. Because they don't like YOU.
I see the causative factors of rule making like this quite differently. There is no need to ascribe it to extremists, who are yes, quite interesting, but rare. Suppose we envision two possible futures. (1) 100,00 people getting college degrees that serve no purpose in the open society and free market, but who find that with those degrees, they can get jobs with the EPA. (2) 50,000 people getting similar degrees and similarly getting jobs with the EPA. (2) will yield twice as many rules and regulations, won't it? It's all pretty simple, really. Only if you assume there's some constant that correlates number of people getting degrees with pages of regulations. That isn't actually the case, nor is it even the case that rules and regulations themselves directly correlate to evil, assuming evil is some measurable value..... I actually do lean in this direction quite a bit. And why isn't it reasonable to presume that if you have x number of people "doing a job", then if you have 3x or 4x number of people "doing that job" it will be that much more objectionable and intrusive? |
|
|
|
....
But if you actually care about the environment, you've just created an entire generation of people who hate your guts, and think you're a bunch of fascists, and actually, they're right.
Extremists serve no purpose but their own. Beware whoever claims to love humanity. Because they don't like YOU.
I see the causative factors of rule making like this quite differently. There is no need to ascribe it to extremists, who are yes, quite interesting, but rare. Suppose we envision two possible futures. (1) 100,00 people getting college degrees that serve no purpose in the open society and free market, but who find that with those degrees, they can get jobs with the EPA. (2) 50,000 people getting similar degrees and similarly getting jobs with the EPA. (2) will yield twice as many rules and regulations, won't it? It's all pretty simple, really. Assume there was a floor of some building in the District of Criminals where "particular emission specialists" slithered around. Budget grew, they got two floors and staffed the cubicles. What the hell would you expect? Personally I believe it is no simplification of reality to assert that cutting staff and budget of an agency such as the EPA by 75-90% will do no harm and will do considerable good. Might need to tell them which areas to cut the staff in, instead of leaving it to them to decide. |
|
|
|
In order to halt global warming, people have to freeze to death... or ask their government for permission to survive?
Well, couple things wrong there. Burning wood is what greenies consider "carbon neutral". I consider myself an environmentalist, but environmentalism and the EPA are two different things. One is a general philosophy and the other is an utterly corrupt government agency..... But that illustrates nicely the point, that when well meaning individuals attempt to change government through creation of laws, agencies and regulations, they presume....wrongly...that the agency will inherit their well meaning. Quite the reverse, usually. Which is why it's often said that radical environmentalists were more socialist/communist than environmentalists. The impression is they want the rules and the controls on the populations, results be damned. |
|
|
|
Don't even bother trying to put the GOP / Libertarians together, it was well documented how often Ron Paul supporters got into fights and arguments with neo-conservatives in the last election, it's precisely because Libertarians support gay rights and are against war that they were constantly attacked and the neo-conservatives didn't like the way they were muscling into their territory.
Haven't you heard? The first rule of a despot is to keep the enemy warring against itself, inflame it into bitter factions. |
|
|
|
You know what'd be really cool? A libertarian gay female atheist as president.
Libertarian and Gay is very rare.... and Libertarian females are rarer still... Don't know why you would think so. So far I haven't run into libertarians that were homophobic, and I've ran into a few gay ones. I'm one myself even (though I'm more an anarchist) because it's a question of chained percentages, say... ... .05 x .05 = 0.0025% or, whatever |
|
|
|
Now there's a good question who was the last streetsmart candidate ?
As far as palin give her the EPA and we would end nuking Malta for some unknown reason
Hmm safe jobs for palin ...
I'd say soccer mom but there crazy
Postal service .... Ya not gonna work
Here we go underwater basket weaver
No, actually, the postal service is one of those weird US "independant companies" like the Federal Reserve. But yeah, put Palin in charge of it and tell her to get it shut down, we don't need it anymore. In fact, she could shut down one agency per year. Or per month, maybe. "Another agency in the cross hairs of moose gun..." Now there's a good question who was the last streetsmart candidate ?It'd have to be someone that held an actual JOB or two....lawyering doesn't count, neither does campaigning or something called community organizing.
"But I ask you the question - which is the smarter of the two elephants, the one which is having to find ways to feed itself out in the wilderness, or the one which has been taught to climb through hoops in the circus ?"Which of the elephants could negotiate a deal with the likes of Putin ain't a hoop jumper. |
|
|
|
In order to halt global warming, people have to freeze to death... or ask their government for permission to survive?
[/quote]Well, couple things wrong there. Burning wood is what greenies consider "carbon neutral". |
|
|
|
so what is evacuation plan?  Do you think where it is going to end? I guess one could look to history, at moments when disruptive tech was introduced and the decades following. Are there cases where it was "bad"? Was it a matter of cultures that had built in adaptability, versus rigid doctrinaire methods? IF Cyprus banksters are in the Zoo, I suspect they are small bugs. Being watched by big monkeys. |
|
|
|
...of ? of economy destruction  or economic liberation? or..  some people waking up to meaning of... ...disruptive technology... personal computers were disruptive, but predictions of how, why and what economic structures would be impacted were very poor. smart phones ... 3d printers... gonna be a wild ride. Peter Schiff said it was a zoo, but that wrong. That a confined little space and society watching in. It's the wild wild west with us watching society in the zoo... |
|
|
|
The bank is right, bitcoin is dangerous!!
* Vietnam was the testbed for the helicopter * Iraq 1 the testbed for the cruise missile * Iraq 2 the testbed for the armed drone Cyprus is the testbed of... |
|
|
|
Now I know a lot of people are going to just have to call the number on the dumpster and ask for it to be emptied.... |
|
|
|
The following: In undertaking such a conversion transaction, the user is not acting as an exchanger, notwithstanding the fact that the user is accepting a real currency or another convertible virtual currency and transmitting Bitcoin, so long as the user is undertaking the transaction solely for the user’s own purposes and not as a business service performed for the benefit of another. A user’s conversion of Bitcoin into a real currency or another convertible virtual currency, therefore, does not in and of itself make the user a money transmitter.
seems to make trading through LocalBitcoins OK, as long as you don't claim to make a business out of it.It does sort of that. The phrase "as a business service performed for the benefit of another" should be read exactly as worded. Defines brokerage and agent relationships. Those are not allowed, except for the money dealers. However, if they were your own bitcoins and cash, neither buying or selling would be disallowed. An interesting question would be whether an in between agent who "matched buyers and sellers" without comingling funds would be considered a money dealer. Example: You have 2.87 btc to sell in USD in state TX? Anyone want to buy 2.87 btc in USD in state TX? No, not 2.22. 2.87 exactly, and only USD, and only TX? |
|
|
|
They are afraid they would lose their jobs.
may the bits fall where they play... |
|
|
|
....I was fortunate to still continue with my noncompliant plan for another year. No matter what the news says. My plan was a good one-the ACA plan was terrible and a lot more expensive that the one I currently have.
Affirm the dictates of the would be fascist dictator when they benefit you, contrary to his constitutional powers, as do others, soon that power is firmly cemented in place. See what happens then. Much easier to read history, lol... |
|
|
|
hmm.... overstock, tiger direct on board with btc... apple bites btc apps amerika on edge of dollar crisis... russia says love thy ruple, only thy russian ruple... mtgox, goxed... cyprus, haircutters poised at attention... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjSpO2B6G4sso? pointless poiting on some issues ... Bitcoin was released 2008. Now it is 2014 and only 5 years after first bitcoin transaction! Do you know what I mean? I guess what I'm laughing about is.... of all the people to sternly lecture about the Evils of bbbbbitcoin? Cyprus? Cyprus Banksters? |
|
|
|
.....
Powell would have been destroyed, his whole family included and his wife (if that story is historically true) was 100% right NOT to let him run. Obama is a democrat, so anything you say against him is racist. This does not work for black conservatives. Quite the contrary.....
His wife repeatedly told him not to run, at various time. I am of the opinion that anyone who was completely duped by Obama (eg...POWELL) cannot be said to possibly make a good president. We need people a bit more street smart than that. Now a Powell/Palin ticket would certainly be ...ah... amusing.... But no one is street smart anymore (in the political world). "Streetsmartness" is hated by the political elites. It is mocked. It is ridiculed. Now it is a show. A TV show. Candidates have 30 sec to answer complex questions. They need to be careful of gotchas, if they touch their nose or not on live TV. If they do good then it will prove to the voters they will be able to deal with "real" crisis. They are not afraid of the "jurnolists". Sham-Wow! The one who recently told this like it was directly to the media (and I am dubious he would have made a good Prez, but that is for other reasons) was Newt Gingrich. For me, the only names worth mentioning in the US republican party are Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, and Paul Ryan. But, whoever you think is good, take the time to try to find and read some of their actual personal writings, instead of the media fakeness. Go figure out if they have half a brain. Palin, I'd put her in charge of the EPA, and tell her to fucking destroy it, lock stock and barrel. That'd be fun. |
|
|
|
http://www.centralbank.gov.cy/nqcontent.cfm?a_id=13239&lang=enSo, like I know. Everyone should LISTEN UP to these banksters who stole all their customers money over 100k. "Trust us", they say. "We're looking out for you", they say. "We want to steal from you again" they say. Cyprus banksters. Why are they talking now? Lol. Yes Bitcoin is dangerous for all Banksters They need to work harder because of it ;P they need to think more, do more and find new ways to make people like their "offers" so yes - Bitcoin is dangerous for those hmm.... overstock, tiger direct on board with btc... apple bites btc apps amerika on edge of dollar crisis... russia says love thy ruple, only thy russian ruple... mtgox, goxed... cyprus, haircutters poised at attention... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjSpO2B6G4s |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
