Conspiracies Everywhere!

A man with a watch knows what time it is. A man with two is never sure. — Anonymous

I’m surrounded by conspiracies. There was an excellent Tank Riot podcast the other day: Conspiracies, Part 6, which was mostly about the JFK assassination and the Zapruder film in particular. One point that Viktor made (loosely paraphrased): In the olden days, when some public figure was assassinated we all read the news reports, which were mediated by a professional class of interpreters, and we more or less knew (or thought we knew) what time it was. With the Kennedy assassination, though, where we had a source of objective truth (the Zapruder film), it didn’t make things better; instead, it made things much, much worse, serving as the raw material for an endless parade of conspiracy theories.

Or Climategate (of course), which Kevin Drum had a nice item on today (Quote of the Day: Climate Denialism), where the eponymous quotation was of Al Gore (as interviewed by John Dickerson in Slate): “What in the Hell Do They Think Is Causing It?”

If the people that believed the moon landing was staged on a movie lot had access to unlimited money from large carbon polluters or some other special interest who wanted to confuse people into thinking that the moon landing didn’t take place, I’m sure we’d have a robust debate about it right now.

Or there were all those beautiful shots of what surely was an upper stage of a (Russian, presumably) rocket venting propellant over Norway:


…of which Phil Plait in his excellent Bad Astronomy blog had many interesting things to say (Awesomely bizarre light show freaks out Norway), but which prompted a set of blog comments the most memorable of which was this one by user Billy:

Sweden, Norway, Finland and Russia all denny [sic] having launched a rocket at that time. Also, for it to be a rocket the spiral is too symmetric. To me this looks like a vortex of a very strong energy force. Perhaps a temporary black hole because of some thing happening to the earth’s magnetic field? I’m 99.9% sure this was not man made; at least not with anything that I know of…

To the above: NO WAY is that a rocket.

See? He’s 99.9% sure. He’s quantified his level of certainty. He’s being scientific.

Sigh. What began with the JFK assassination has picked up steam since we got the Internet. If you’re willing to ignore conflicting data and focus only on finding confirmation for your a priori opinions, Google is perfectly happy to let you enclose yourself in a snuggie of comforting factoids. Meanwhile, real engineers and scientists, people who have to make rockets go up and governments recognize the catastrophe that climate denialists would inflict on our descendants, people who measure their ideas not against what they want to believe, but against what actually is, labor on.

Update: Russia comes clean: Yeah, it was an upper-stage failure of a submarine-launched missile. So, what do you think the chances are that Billy is hard at work recalibrating his estimates in light of this anomalous data? Yup, I agree: Somewhere around 0.1%.

132 Responses to “Conspiracies Everywhere!”

  1. knarlyknight Says:

    Exactly. Or almost. You want real engineers and scientists? Then look at these ten facts and ten myths provided by an esteemed scientist: , I’m sure shcb will even verify that that at least 90% of them are true.

    Now quit making such these silly posts about conspiracies and let me get back to my tv show, it’s far more entertaining…

  2. shcb Says:

    The only problem is that while this may or may not be a conspiracy, it isn’t a theory. We have evidence, and no one is disputing that that evidence is legitimate. Typical liberals, don’t put the bad guys away, outlaw the gun, don’t counter the point, villainize your opponent or just say they are stupid, ugly, unsophisticated, whatever, but don’t counter the point. So we have evidence of what we have thought for years, now for those years you could say this is a conspiracy theory of sorts, but now that we have proof it has moved past that, but you have to do what you are doing, it’s all you have left. They are all kooks! Hey, it’s all liberals know.

  3. Smith Says:

    This evidence consists of the word “trick” and the decision not to publish in a journal that tended to be hostile to global warming papers. Going from that to “he has been controlled. You don’t have to kill your enemy, just control him.” seems like a stretch.

    There is evidence that Kennedy was killed, you can see him get shot, it is on video. The problem/paranoia comes from moving from that to “the CIA killed him because he was dismantling the FED/knew the truth/was not a lizard person/etc.”

  4. shcb Says:

    …and getting the editor fired …computer code …programmer notes

    You are trying to minimalaze this, wasn’t it you that recently lectured me about the sanctity of the scientific journal? Of all people I would think this would upset you to no end.

  5. NorthernLite Says:

    “Google is perfectly happy to let you enclose yourself in a snuggie of comforting factoids.”


  6. shcb Says:

    They lost the original data! How is this possible? No one made a backup, they didn’t print out a copy and put it in a file cabinet somewhere? They were telling each other to delete files, and which files to delete. You can only minimalize this to a certain degree.

  7. Smith Says:

    I assume you are referring to this: “If they ever hear there is a Freedom of Information Act now in the UK, I think I’ll delete the file rather than send to anyone.” and “Kevin and I will keep them out somehow — even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!”

    Extra! Extra! Read all about it! Scientists use hyperbole in casual conversations when they are frustrated!

  8. NorthernLite Says:

    Gravity is a big scam, too.

  9. enkidu Says:

    Math is evidently a big librl! scam as well

  10. enkidu Says:

    btw the video footage of that… that… Thing over Finland was awesome.

    I for one welcome our mysteriously glowing evanescent yet completely counterfactual overlords. They left this book “To Serve Man”. Whew!

  11. shcb Says:

    Smith, except that editors were fired because they published papers that contradicted AGW, so pressure was applied. Legitimate debate was squelched because of these guys, legitimate papers were rejected. Is this the peer review process you advocate? Is this looking at all sides of the evidence? Is this following through the scientific process?

    They broke laws, documents that are under FOI request have been “lost” the emails you cite just shows premeditation. If they didn’t mean what they are saying in your example show us the data, show us the documents they have been stonewalling in the FOI requests for years.

  12. Smith Says:

    I’ll prove they didn’t deliberately destroy anything when you prove they didn’t lose it.

  13. NorthernLite Says:

    shcb, do you truly believe that there’s a giant conspiracy throughout the entire global scientific community to hide evidence that manmade CO2 is not causing our planet to warm at a much faster rate than ever before?

  14. Smith Says:


    Are there any people who you feel have been “fired because they published papers that contradicted the 9/11 commission”? Do you believe there are important papers that have been “lost” or that are being withheld? I feel like I have heard shcb’s claims before only in regards to 9/11 instead of global warming. I’m not criticizing you, but rather, I am trying to see just how close your claims are to those of shcb.

  15. shcb Says:


    Jones and the boys have said they lost information, information that has been requested by FOI, information they are using to justify their findings. When I file my taxes the IRS assumes I have a receipt for the deduction I am claiming. If they feel I am not being truthful it is my responsibility to show them the documentation. That is what is happening here, Jones et al have a program that spits out a conclusion based on data that was fed into the front end. If the data on the front is wrong, the conclusion will be wrong, they have “lost” the initial data. You wouldn’t accept that from a ninth grader.


    No I don’t think there is a global conspiracy, just a bunch of people that have been using the same data for years thinking it was pure. You also have to understand that most of the scientists are working on their own projects, if a guy is doing research on a certain tree or animal, they consider their work important, they don’t want to lose funding for what they are doing or lose the ability to get published because they don’t agree with AGW, they probably haven’t looked into it that much anyway, they are busy working on their own project. They also have been taught to handle evidence with care and trust others do as well. They believe in the sanctity of the peer review process. They don’t pressure journals to exclude dissenting views because they understand they may have a dissenting view someday they want published, after all aren’t all revolutionary discoveries a dissenting view in the beginning. So no, in large part it is just something that evolved.

  16. shcb Says:


    Oddly enough here is a good article discussing this issue of a global conspiracy.

    Just look at the mission statements of these climate research institutes – they don’t seek to investigate the scientific validity or soundness of AGW-theory, they assume that it is true, and seek to research the implications or consequences of it.

    And honestly, if you know anything about my generation, we will do or say whatever it is we think we’re supposed to do or say. There is no conspiracy, just a slightly cozy, unthinking myopia. Don’t rock the boat.

    The former editor of the New Scientist, Nigel Calder, said it best – if you want funding to study the feeding habits of squirrels, you won’t get it. If you wants to study the effects of climate change on the feeding habits of squirrels, you will. And so in these subtle ways, there is a gravitational pull towards the AGW monolith

    What we have to be careful of now is that the science isn’t pulled the other way, that no funding is given to global temperature change because a few bad apples botched the experiment.

  17. knarlyknight Says:


    Don’t get me going. I’m serious. Don’t. Damn, too late…

    Absolutely people have been fired. Prof. Stephen Jones lost his teaching post because he would not cease and desist from examining evidence and publishing his findings that supported the hypothesis that significant quantities of high explosives (i.e. super-thermite) was present in World Trade Center dust. He’d be the poster boy of those who spoke out and were fired. Kevin Ryan pursued issues relating to the strength testing of WTC steel, refused to cease and desist when ordered to do so and was fired. There are many more. Most people who don’t side with the official story are ridiculed or warned to shut up. Cops, firemen, Rodriguez, there are literally hundreds of people who say they were told to keep quiet by the FBI or “mysterious phone calls” or other means. My second link in the first post above has new material (end of segment #2 start of #3) on the people who were driving atv’s over the site with radio receivers to locate the black boxes and saw three of the “black boxes” (actually bright orange) found and taken into custody by the FBI. Official report says that NONE were ever found, which defies credulity because black boxes are always found (that’s in 99.9% of the crashes, jbc) and they were literally combing the WTC wreckage to recover body parts the size of fingernails. To say nothing of the (anti) disclosure agreements that had to be signed by victims families before any of the government’s 911 emergency compensation funds would be provided (about 5-10% refused to sign in order to pursue litigation and get questions answered in court, I beleive that is still on-going.)

    Personalities who raise questions (based on what skeptical scientist saying) are faced with an onslaught of venom to destroy them (e.g. Rosie Odonnel, Charlie Sheen).

    Important papers “lost” or “withheld”? There’s several aspects to that, I’ll address two. One: witness testimony before the 911 commission was in many cases held behind closed doors, and then never made public (e.g. William Rodriguez, maybe Barry Jennings, which is quite different but in the same ballpark as the Bush Cheney collaboration in providing a secret interview with certain members of the commission.) Two: Scientific papers… No, there are plenty of good papers at However, they are normally ignored, perhaps for the reasons you site on another thread about uneducated journalists assigned to dumb-down their stories: when there is reporting on these papers it is turned into a grade 6 level “he said she said” and the authority figure (government backed) is always (again 99.9% of the time jbc) given the final comment (usually a mocking comment in an outraged tone that does not directly address the fact under discussion) before the commercial break.

    As for evidence destroyed or withheld, air traffic controller voice tapes of the event and post event voice interviews were destroyed on 911. Governemnt never tested for explosives at WTC, and destroyed much of the evidence and do not provide access to evidence (e.g. segment about Hanger 7 on the truTV link mentioned before) Basic readily available administrative evidence like the flight history of each airplane prior to 911 are exceeedingly, excruciating difficult to come by (e.g. Aiden Montagne’s FOI requests) and when they are finally released often rasie eyebrows, to say the least.

    So yes, the irony of shcb’s complaints about his imagined AGW conspiracy and the treatment of people and evidence that contradicts the government fairy tale about 911 is enormous.

    There I’m done. Damnit.

  18. Smith Says:


    Looks like all you need to do now is steal some snarky personal emails, and and shcb will join your side.

  19. Smith Says:

    Please excuse the duplicate “and”.

  20. knarlyknight Says:

    ;-) I’m sure all the 911 emails were erased along with every primary source piece of climate data ever in existance.

  21. knarlyknight Says:

    Would you agree that the truth is somewhere between (a) shcb’s position (it’s a conspiracy damint we’ve got emails to prove it!) and (z) those who think the science is pure and that’s what’s been communicated? I mean, something like (n) the science is conclusive and has not been tampered with but the link between the science and the managed messaging to the public has been mildly compromised, or (f) the science is fairly conclusive but more details are being worked out but the link between the science and the managed messaging to the public has been wildly compromised?

  22. Smith Says:

    Perhaps (k), the science is fairly conclusive but more details are being worked out, but the link between the science and the messaging to the public has been somewhat compromised by a combination of miscommunication by scientists and inadequate science coverage by the media. I don’t think the scientific community is capable of “managed” messaging. Scientists aren’t really a monolithic group that can manage a message in any meaningful way. That, combined with poor media coverage and insufficient scientific literacy in the general public all but guarantees that the message will be distorted, but not in any deliberate, controlled manner. It is closer to a game of telephone/Chinese whispers/whatever you call it than to any sort of Rovian message control.

  23. Smith Says:

    I just woke up, so I hope the previous post is coherent.

  24. knarlyknight Says:

    Perfectly coherent, & I agree. Some would argue the whispers/whatever (e.g. Palin parrots the rumours in WSJ column) is healthy for the marketplace of ideas. From such a vigorous public debate the best ideas – i.e. the most compelling and accurate portrayal of the facts/science – will prevail. Yeah right. Either that or the mob will burn down City Hall. If all depends on the intelligence of and quality of information received by the public, then I’m not optimistic. That’s why my position is to err on the side of caution and modify human outputs that produce AGM.

    However, that is also shcb’s position – to err on the side of caution I mean – the difference is that he thinks the bigger risk/danger is harming the economy/public welfare/wealth by emission reduction actions. Where I disagree is that economic impacts would be a lesser harm (i.e. more of a re-allocation of resources than a loss of resources) than the potential disaster resulting from global climate change (strange that I agree with the Pentagon on that.)

    Time to sleep for me.

  25. knarlyknight Says:

    “AGM” was a typo, I meant “anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions”

  26. enkidu Says:

    Not to crib Paul Krugman, but we already have an exchange for reducing a pollutant from coal fired power plants. Sulphur dioxide makes acid rain. In a recent article PK argues that the cap n trade on SO2 is less expensive than projected and did the job effectively. You could also point to the worldwide action to reduce/replace CFCs that were destroying the ozone layer.

    Collective action isn’t ‘socialism’. It is what it will take to have the human race survive and thrive. Burning rocks is no way to power a 21st century civilization.

  27. jbc Says:

    I agree with Smith’s truth(k), though I’d expand the frame to include the active manipulation of public opinion by the fossil fuel industry, with the support of politicians sympathetic to their views (or at least to their campaign contributions), and the 20% crowd that watches Fox News and believes what it sees even when the poll numbers add up to 120%, for various reasons rooted in their own personal histories.

  28. shcb Says:

    Just a few of the page after page of programming notes from just one file. If this weren’t so serious it would funny.

    Now looking at the dates.. something bad has happened, hasn’t it. COBAR AIRPORT AWS cannot start in 1962, it didn’t open until 1993!

    Had a think. Phil advised averaging the bands either side to fill the gap, but yuk! And also the band to the North (ie, 5S to equator) is noticeably lower (extreme, even). So after some investigation I found that, well, here’s the email:

    MAIL QUOTE Phil, I’ve looked at why we’re getting low counts for valid cloud cells in certain 5-degree latitude bands.

    The filtering algorithm omits any cell values where the station count is zero, for either CLD or DTR. In general, it’s the CLD counts that are zero and losing us the data. However, in many cases, the cloud value in that cell on that month is not equal to the climatology. And there is plenty of DTR data. So I’m wondering how accurate the station counts are for secondary variables, given that they have to reflect observed and synthetic inputs. Here’s a brief example: (all values are x10)

    This whole project is SUCH A MESS.

    OH F*** THIS. … I’m hitting yet another problem that’s based on the hopeless state of our databases. There is no uniform data integrity, it’s just a catalogue of issues that continues to grow as they’re found

  29. knarlyknight Says:

    One has to make a number of assumptions for that to be “serious”

    1. the data being discussed is significant
    2. the discussion is a near final statement and no acceptable solution was found (e.g. there was a simple misalignment of imported data that was re-aligned easily to the correct dates based on commencment of the weather station, or the data set was discarded)
    3. the database being discussed as “hopeless” is a wide ranging database of climate data, and not just a programmers’ log of bugs or future enhancements
    4. etc. etc. etc.

    None of those are demonstrated to be true, so I can only conclude this is another cherry picked discussion thrown around without appropriate context or significance related to the specific matter at hand. In short, I’m extremely skeptical that this excerpt proves anything other than that dealing with enormous and varied data sets can be difficult at times.

    Where I work (unrelated to climate change) I could find messages and programmer notes suggesting information coming from our (enormous) databases are garbage, but while there are problems the fact is that they work great, overall the accuracy is in the 99.9% range (I siad it so it is so, jbc) and our customer satisfaction is way, way up there.
    In short, big deal shcb.

  30. Smith Says:

    That reminds me of some of the comments embedded in Microsoft’s code.

  31. shcb Says:

    That’s you story and you’re sticking with it by golly. I mean really what else can you do at this point? I think what this is showing is the divide of the people that are interested in getting the science right and those that only have a political agenda, and that agenda is settled so the science is settled. As this quote from Colorado’s own Tim Wirth said

    “We’ve got to ride this global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic and environmental policy.” – Timothy Wirth, President of the UN Foundation

    In one section of these code remarks he says he just made up some of the data sets because, well, the data was so screwed up by this time how much harm could he do? He says he really had no other choice if he were to ever finish the project.

  32. knarlyknight Says:

    Well gee, one guy claims he made up a data set?

    Okay, so what was the data set used for? Maybe it was used by the Illuminati to establish a global consensus on climate change, but more likely it was used to undertake testing of a simulation model to be used by one group of researchers (among hundreds or thousands of other computer models around the world.)

    And you should note that Timothy Wirth clearly states: “Even if” , so you can not say that he is close-minded or forcing an incorrect proof upon the hypothesis of global warmign, all he’s saying is that even if in the unlikely event that the hypothesis (on which we have a consensus) is ultimately found to be wrong, the policy solutions to address the problems identified by the incorrect hypothesis are ultimately good for people in terms of environmental policy and economic outcomes.

  33. knarlyknight Says:

    Wirth’s comment are obviously an opinion of the impact of policy outcomes outside of the science arena, and should be taken as such. The comment is in no way an indictment of the sicence.

  34. shcb Says:

    Yeah… you’re starting to catch on but you’re missing the point, after struggling with this program for three years he realized there was nothing he could do to screw it up any worse than it was, even if he was screwing it up intentionally

  35. shcb Says:

    I meant you’re cathing on to Wirth’s point, or your assesment of his point. I should have made that two paragraphs.

  36. shcb Says:

    and actually he was saying everyone that touched this thing made data up, he specifically kept mentioning two or three guys.

  37. knarlyknight Says:

    Wow, that cinches it then. If he specifically kept mentioning two or three guys then there is no doubt that it was a conspiracy. Thanks telling us.

  38. knarlyknight Says:

    shcb, you might enjoy this:

  39. shcb Says:

    When we were talking conspiracies, you and NL were asking me if I thought there were a global conspiracy, I don’t. A couple guys sure, thousands of scientists all over the world, na. You probably didn’t read the Richard Fernandez piece since it had a Pajamas tag, do, also read the link to Megan’s article in Fernandez’ piece, it is short.

    Now to your clip. It makes more logical sense to me that the Co2 is caused by a rise in temperature than it causes it although there is probably a point at the end of the cycle that the Co2 is keeping the temperature high for a brief period of time. A sinking effect until the natural forces that are starting to cool can overcome the insulating properties. But I don’t know, that is just my common sense approach. I know I’ve been bitten by the cause being the effect and vice versa bug before, especially when I’ve stuck my neck out on something.

    From the 7 minute mark on it was a little creepy.

  40. shcb Says:

    Well, at least socialized health care seems to be on its last leg.

    And AlGore got snookered with his prediction of an ice free Arctic.

    Record cold temps at a global warming conference. Now I know that is weather and not climate, but it seems fitting to the ways things are going right now.

    Obama calls Wall Street on the carpet and they don’t show up.

    Poll numbers the lowest in history for the man who was a Messiah less than a year ago, congress not much better.

    We might have a chance after all.

  41. NorthernLite Says:

    Your country is completely dysfunctional and you’re unable to address any of your problems. And that makes you feel good?!

  42. shcb Says:

    I’m at a loss of words on that remark, we’re dysfunctional? maybe from your European perspective, but not from ours, we’re not built that way.

  43. NorthernLite Says:

    Well, you’ve been talking about fixing your health-care system for half a century, it was a major plank in both parties’ platforms last year. You’re debt is getting into a scary place, and the amount you spend on hc is a big reason for that. The only thing you guys seem to agree on is the escalation of an unwinnable war that you can’t even afford. It that’s not dysfunctional I don’t know what is.

    Barack Obama’s leadership has been a complete disaster. The Democratic Party is being run by the weakest bunch of tools I’ve ever seen. The Republican Party is being taken over by right-wing lunatics.

    I seriously fear I’m witnessing the fall of the great American empire.

  44. enkidu Says:

    NL – we are a big loud diverse country. Should Alabama be the same as California? Is Alberta the same as Quebec? Are the First Peoples who live at the Arctic Circle the same as my inlaws in Toronto? We are (like most democracies) somewhat dysfunctional, yes. But completely dysfunctional, no.

    wwnj – maybe they didn’t stress geography in your edumakashun, but if memory serves, NL and knarls are Americans. North Americans. They are also our neighbors and largest oil pusher (hey i know, mb Obama should invade! pull a bush and invade the wrong country, screw it up and then leave it for the next gov). Europe is across one of these big things called oceans. Ah but why allow facts to get in the way, eh?

    By European perspective do you mean reality based?

    Obama calls the street on the carpet and they don’t show up? You are aware that mild financial reforms (shoulda done more much sooner, while they still had leverage) are in the works, banks are paying back the rescue money and we may be stumbling our way out of a deep recession (past the yawning pit of a double dip) and on toward job growth in the spring? DOW is at 10500. Hello? Reality on line 1 for you…

    As to poll numbers. Yes Obama’s numbers are down. They closely match saint Ronnie’s btw. I read a analysis that said something like half of his negative numbers are coming from people like me: disappointed that he isn’t doing more. Unhappy with a R aborted healthcare bill (thanks Joe Lieberman!) We don’t want the Great Compromiser. Now is the time for bold changes and a renewal of the American vision of peace and prosperity. Justice and freedom. Not rethuggle/useless war, tax cuts for the wealthiest, the enron econ, trillion dollar bailouts and catastrophe.

    At this point they should just pass the main hcr bill with all the Rethuggle-compromised crap taken out. Get 60 or 61 if President Olympia votes for it (unlikely). Then ram thru a Public Option using reconciliation. Right now it looks like a gov mandate to give the insurance companies new customers subsidized by the taxpayer with a few watered down cost ‘savings’ tricks ;) and some vague promises from The Industry to hopefully do something unspecific about possibly containing cost growth maybe.

    But just keep telling yourself that no one remembers that Obama et al are trying to dig us out of one of the biggest holes ever dug. In 2010 and 2012 we’ll just point out who brought us to this low estate and point out we are indeed working for change. I encourage you wwnjs to just keep betting against America. Double down. Run a Cheney/Palin ticket. Or put Super Sarah out in front, yup there’s a winner! The quittah from wassilah and the-evil-turd-that-ran-the-show-for-8-of-the-worst-years-ever (who should be in jail).

  45. NorthernLite Says:

    Points taken enk, and sorry if that sounded a little too harsh. Sure there are regional differences, but that’s why you have state/provincial autonomy. Then there’s what’s good for the country as a whole. For cying out loud we’re in a minority government position up here and the parties are still working together to pass legislation that the country needs.

    I just can’t understand how the Dems won both Houses and the White House and really haven’t accomplished anything. Zero. Nada. Zilch.

    I am simply astounded at how weak they are. Republicans must be laughing all the way to the bank to pick up their campaign donation cheques. Here they are in the complete minority, yet they’re still dictating the agenda. Unbelievable!

    I think a big reason Obama’s numbers are dropping so fast is because he’s not taking charge like people expected he would. I can totally see him being defeated in 2012 if he doesn’t start leading and taking charge of things.

  46. knarlyknight Says:

    Also NL, Obama hasn’t started a third war (yet), unless you count the bombing of Pakistan with drones, so you can give him a little bit of credit for showing a restraint that seemed lacking in the prior administration.

  47. knarlyknight Says:

    We’ll see …

  48. shcb Says:

    The problem here is you guys think Americans wanted socialism, they didn’t and don’t. They knee jerked the most liberal president since LBJ into office and now they are having buyer’s remorse, he is trying to salvage his presidency buy being someone he isn’t, Bush lite, and now you are having buyer’s remorse because he is. He is kind of caught in the middle. Middle of the road Democrats in congress don’t want to get drug down by those on the far left of congress so they are trying to salvage their careers which weaken him even further. Republicans are just doing a haphazard job of being opportunistic. Let’s face it, no one but Palin is really saying anything positive on the R side, they have stood firm on a couple items in the health care bill, but they will cave to a watered down version of the bill. Everyone is trying to find the pulse of Americans right now. The R’s can’t get anything done that would help the economy, lower taxes and regulations ( and probably wouldn’t if they could,) they have their hands full stopping the Ds from making things worse, and the Ds are, well just being Ds.

  49. Smith Says:


  50. shcb Says:


    “Obama calls the street on the carpet and they don’t show up You are aware that mild financial reforms (shoulda done more much sooner, while they still had leverage)”

    No, I mean they physically didn’t show up, well, a couple of them anyway, said the weather was too bad. They just happened to be the “fat cats” as you guys like to call them that will more than likely be administering cap and trade, I guess they didn’t see any need to be lectured about ethics and getting this country on the right track when they are going to be party to the lecturer’s unethical boondoggle.

  51. shcb Says:

    When I watched the prez berate the Wall Street types (those that showed up) I wanted that one smart ass that is always in the back of the room to stand up and tell him that he owns the company, he’s the boss, he bought the company, hell, the industry, for pennies, and then slashed the wages of the very people he is chastising and asking for help. Piss on you, you wanted it so bad, it’s yours, you’re the smartest guy in any room, you fix it.

  52. Smith Says:

    Republicans: Turning sour grapes into whine since November 2008.

  53. NorthernLite Says:

    shcb I think you forgot that the clause-free handouts began when Bush was still in charge.

  54. enkidu Says:

    Funny thing. The ‘European perspective’ across the pond is to pass a windfall profit tax on taxpayer funded ‘bonuses’ to bankers. Something like 90% in Socialist old England? Jolly good show!

    Obama ran on doing something to ‘reform’ healthcare, fixing the economy and ending our useless wars overseas. I would have added “thrown most of the bush regime in jail” to his ‘to-do list’ but I am not A Very Serious Person.

  55. Smith Says:

    “ending our useless wars overseas”

    I am not so sure about this one. If memory serves, I believe he made it clear that he would escalate the conflict in Afghanistan. In fact, I think that is one of the few big promises he has actually kept.

  56. enkidu Says:

    Agreed, but I would characterize the Afghanistan war as useless at this point. The fight has moved on to Pakistan. In a way I was just using shorthand for the neglect of the last 7 years (ok 6, more shorthand).

    We gotta get in to get out (to paraphrase Genesis and their magnum bloatus The Lamb Lies Down on Broadway – The Carpet Crawlers – congrats on your induction into the rock n roll hall of fame lads!)

  57. shcb Says:

    Sounds like they are having trouble figuring out how to divvy up our money in Copenhagen.

  58. knarlyknight Says:

    “Republicans: Turning sour grapes into whine since November 2008.”

    That was so good I felt it needed repeating. Thanks Smith.

    re: Copenhagen, would you say that’s “mission accomplished”, shbc?

    re: Aghanistan. The biggest irony yet: NATO has requested that Putin support the war with more helicopters. Now, I wonder what Charlie Wilson would say!

  59. knarlyknight Says:

    NL – did you read Colvin’s recent written statement? I’m impressed, he’s a good public servant!

    Mackay’s feet keep getting closer to the fire.

  60. NorthernLite Says:

    It’s ok, you don’t have any money to divvy up anyways.

    So now millions of your fellow citizens will go without hc coverage, millions more will delcare bankruptcy, thousands will die, the planet will keep warming but you just keep right on fighting them pesky arabs! No problem putting THAT on the credit card eh!

    Didn’t OBL state that his goal was to bankrupt the US?

  61. NorthernLite Says:

    Yes, knarly, I did. I totally trust Colvin more than anyone else in the government, or the military for that matter. Like I told my friend today, when the government and military try to hide things from us we should all get very nervous.

    They seem to think we don’t care about being complicit in torture and they are very wrong.

  62. knarlyknight Says:

    Yes, they are very wrong.

  63. Smith Says:

    shcb’s last comment reminded me of this:

    Although the comic specifically targets political cartoons, I feel it is more broadly applicable to political discourse in general.

  64. shcb Says:

    It seems the Chinese are pissed, they thought they were going to show up, get some cash, screw the US and the EU in the process (that includes Canada) and go home, that’s what they were promised. Then they get there and the UN boys want them to pony up, so they said sure we’ll chip in using some formula that all but excepts us. Then we can take our (your) cash, screw you all and go home, now the UN is trying to screw them and the Chinese don’t like it. And absolutely none of this is about the environment. I love being right.

  65. enkidu Says:

    Reading this gibberish from wwnj is like having a telegraph duct-taped up to a epileptic madman over in the wingnutoverse.

    Frog blast the vent core!

  66. knarlyknight Says:

    I agree, but from a more balanced source:

    Negotiating documents published on the website of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change show entire paragraphs, even pages, of text “bracketed,” the term used by negotiators to determine areas where no consensus exists. They include the maximum temperature-increase goal (1 C, 1.5 C and 2 C were the options), the rich countries’ emissions-reduction target by 2050 (the range was 75 to 95 per cent) and, crucially, almost all areas of funding to fight climate change.

  67. shcb Says:

    looks like your balanced source agrees with me.

  68. shcb Says:

    BTW 75 to 95% is ridiculously impossible, but most of the players will be out of power or dead by then.

  69. Smith Says:

    For his ground-breaking theory that a convention comprised of many varied nations is unlikely to quickly achieve a consensus, the committee hereby honors shcb with the Nobel Prize in Stating the Obvious.

  70. shcb Says:

    At least I earned it.

  71. shcb Says:

    What is going to be interesting now is what Obama will do. He has committed to this 75% nonsense but of course he can’t do anything more than a perfunctory signing without a two thirds vote of the Senate. So anything he promises at these meetings is just hot air (pun intended) unless he does it through the EPA, which he has set himself up to do. The question is will he do it with a wink and a nod to the third world beggars or will he announce it to the world. Then all that could be done to stop him would be to defund the EPA, at least until the next president overturns him. In either case he is putting his Senate on the spot, the ROW will say we aren’t holding up our end of the bargain (even though they have no intention of holding up theirs) and really nothing gets done except we send a bunch of money to folks that don’t like us with no possibility to ever get it back.

    One thing to watch for in these negotiations is new money, I know early on that was a point of contention, we and the EU were going to use the money we were already giving to developing countries as foreign aid to pay this new tax and they screamed bloody murder, they want more money.

    This is all just jibber jabber now, the fun part comes when Obama sticks his foot in the pile of Co2 emitting excrement.

  72. NorthernLite Says:

    lol, jibber jabber, nice one. Mr. T!

    “More immediately, the conference has been discussing a short-term climate fund to help developing countries – a $10-billion-a-year, three-year program. European Union leaders last week committed to supplying $3.6 billion a year through 2012. On Wednesday, Japan, seeking to “contribute to the success” of Copenhagen, announced it would kick in $5 billion a year for three years.”

    Many countries are really stepping up to the plate, big-time. Ours, unfortunately, are not. One is broke (you), and one is being lead by a climate change denier who’s sole interest is in protecting the unbridled development of Alberta’s Tar Sands (us).

    Sigh. At least there are still some true leaders in this world, too bad we don’t have any them on this side of the pond.–u-s-100b-plan-may-give-life-to-climate-deal?bn=1

  73. shcb Says:

    What is this money going to be used for?

    One story I read said the beggar nations (read China) were balking because there were restrictions being placed on what they could use the money for. Of course we all know money is fungible but it sounds like places like China weren’t even going to make an attempt to give the illusion the money was going to be used to cut emissions. In fact the best they are willing to do is tie future expansion of emissions to GDP growth. So as more and more manufacturing is moved to China because we in the west are cutting back our production to pre 1880 levels, they will be free to increase at will. Now personally I like my old truck and air conditioning and my computers and electric lights so I guess I better put away the Dutch Rosetta Stone and get out the Mandarin. Of course they speak Cantonese in Guangzhou, the problems Obama is causing me are just staggering.

  74. NorthernLite Says:

    It’s for poor countries that have done absolutely NOTHING to contribute to this problem to help them cope with it and develop in a more sustainable way.

  75. enkidu Says:

    China is a beggar nation? (forgive me for pointing this out but they hold almost a trillion dollars of our debt, we are broke and declining thanks to morans like wwnj, while China is growing rapidly)

    I know I’ll be accused of being Not Very Serious, or a bigot, or a sh!t or a f!cker or have a few more death threats hurled by dear ol avuncular wwnj, but I really do listen to and value decent input from reasonable conservatives. For example, Bill Frist was on the Bill Maher show (I think Bill is ok funny, not Stewart/Colbert funny, but his New Rules are often chuckle-worthy). Well ol wwnj here would expect me to blindly believe Bill M cuz he’s a dang lefty socialist commie pinko fag. But here in Reality, I find myself shaking my head at Maher’s antiscience antivaccination bullshit. Frist is right (as in correct) Maher is wrong: vaccinations have saved many many more lives than they have ever negatively impacted.

    One of my brothers is a very religious conservative who works for a green energy company. He thinks climate change is real and that energy efficiency and green jobs are how we are going to break the back of the arab oil producer cartel and get the hell off fossil fuels. And make a ton of money in the process as well. Good for the planet, good for business.

    I also listen to this lady because I think she brings two very powerful arguments to the ‘debate’.

    NL- exactly, we and europe and now China are making most of the pollution, perhaps we should make sure we clean up our act and help developing nations develop in a cleaner, more sustainable manner. Or you could Believe the right wing bullsh!t that it is all because some dang egghead scientists want to destroy the world, by saving it, or something. Socialism, also!

  76. NorthernLite Says:


    Yeah, tell Maher not to vaccinate his children for polio, measles, mumps…

  77. knarlyknight Says:

    NL – here’s the thing about vaccination, but first let me state that I think they have an overall public health benefit. They do.

    Now the thing is that there is a risk of adverse reactions (as indicated by the vaccine manufacturers, etc.) and we can debate until we’re blue in the face about autism and less obvious related neurological damage resulting from various substances that may be in a vaccine (e.g. mercury). That risk is a constant for each specific vaccine. If you live in a society where most people are vaccinated, then the risk of any particular disease is small. So an individual may decide it is in their best interest not to get vaccinated to avoid the risk of adverse reaction from the vaccine, given that the risk of getting the diseasae is so small. But the more individuals that choose to not get vaccinated then the greater the risk of a disease outbreak in the population. That’s the paradox, and as those competing interests balance out (the rights of individuals to choose what is or is not injected into their bodies vs. the public health benefiits) it presents an ever changing landscape on which the individual decisions must be based. Add the facts that most vaccinations are for relatively minor childhood illnesses (e.g. chicken pox) that have no lasting negative consequences and that taking numerous vaccines multiplies the risk of adverse reactions from the shots… well, let’s just say that I can understand Maher not vaccinating his kids for things (e.g. polio has all but been wiped out so the chance of his kids getting polio, or a version of it, might be higher as a result of a malfunction with the vaccine manufacturing or other unpredicted complication than with the possibility of a natural exposure to polio.)

    Anyway, back to the subject. shcb and his “I told you so’s” It’s like a guy standing in the middle of a busy intersection yelling at all the cars driving by while unaware of the Mac Truck bearing down on him from behind.

  78. enkidu Says:

    I find it particularly funny that Maher is against vaccinations, yet his big recurring joke is that he is a stoner… uh, hello? btw afaik, Bill M has no offspring.

    ummm mumps or chicken pox in adolescents can cause infertility, there are other problems with other childhood diseases that I wouldn’t call minor (polio etc)

    A neighbor of ours died of the swine flu. Last time I saw him, he was riding horses with his family while we picked blackberries. My son and his daughter are in the same grade. Our kids play together. The swine flu vaccination would have saved Ronnie Lammer. You get more mercury from a can of tuna (thanks big coal! mmm mmm good!)

    Not that I think big companies are the blameless innocent paragons of virtue that wwnj always makes them out to be. But still…

  79. knarlyknight Says:


    Yes, bad things happen and I can provide lots of counter examples to what you list, but this is not the forum for that. Nor is it scientific, nor am I swayed by emotional arguments like “Our kids played together.”

    Tuna is a red herring. I won’t elaborate but will give you a reference:

    Environmental Health Perspectives, August, 2005 states: “This study demonstrates clearly and unequivocally that ethyl mercury, the kind of mercury found in vaccines, not only ends up in your brain, but leaves double the amount of inorganic mercury as methyl mercury, the kind of mercury found in fish.

    This work is groundbreaking because little is known about ethyl mercury, and many health authorities have asserted that the mercury found in vaccines is the “safe kind.”

    This study also delivers a strong rebuke of the Institute of Medicine’s recommendation in 2004 to no longer pursue the mercury-autism connection. Excerpt:

    “A recently published IOM review (IOM 2004) appears to have abandoned the earlier recommendation [of studying mercury and autism] as well as …

    You’ll find that excerpt with active links to the studies in the Comment immediately below this article:

  80. enkidu Says:

    nor am I easily swayed by bullsh!t from

    make it two cans of tuna

    the swine flu vaccine would have (ok, probably) saved my neighbor from death

  81. knarlyknight Says:

    Sorry about your neighbor, Enk, I can tell you’re really hurting about that.

    Two cans of tuna is quite safe. Health Canada recommends limits of 0.5 parts per million (ppm) for mercury in commercial fish. You can eat a can and most of the methyl mercury will not be absorbed.

    Just don’t inject those kinds of volumes into your veins. Especially in the 1:10,000 concentration of the ethyl mercury within many vaccines.

    So let’s think about this:

    The vaccines with mercury have about 100 times more concentration of mercury than in canned tuna, and the vaccine mercury is twice as bad per unit that gets into your system, and it is injected directly into your blood so you absorb almost all of it, vs. whatever you absorb through your gut let’s say half. So far, that sounds really bad and scary. But the big difference is volume, a vaccine dose is about 0.5 ml and a can of tuna, what’s that, about 200 ml? Big difference. All that’s left is the math:

    Vaccines = 0.5 ml x 100 times the concentration x 2 times as bad at least x 1/1 unit absorbed = 100 nonsensical badness units

    Tuna can = 200 ml x 1 times the concentration x 1 times as bad x 1/2 unit absorbed = 100 nonsensical badness units

    So there you go Enk, I’ve proved your point. Happy now? Anyone care to point out any errors?

  82. shcb Says:


    China is a beggar nation? (forgive me for pointing this out but they hold almost a trillion dollars of our debt, we are broke and declining thanks to morans like wwnj, while China is growing rapidly)

    All I know is they are on the receiving end of this international transfer of wealth and we’re on the paying end, that makes them beggars. This will lead to more of a decline. Who is the moron now? To compound matters more we will be forced to send more and more of our manufacturing to them, not because they are better or cheaper than us but because their limits on emissions are based on GDP while ours are absolute, this is madness. Is that too hard for you to understand? I can make up one of my long winded analogies if it is.


    It’s for poor countries that have done absolutely NOTHING to contribute to this problem to help them cope with it and develop in a more sustainable way.

    Does that really make sense to you? You are really smarter than that. So we have the mud hut countries that don’t have air conditioning or cars, they haven’t contributed to the green house gasses because they don’t have stuff, they also don’t have research labs. The solution to this problem, if it is a problem, but let’s say it is as dire as you think for argument purposes, your solution is to send billions or trillions to mud hut countries so they can develop nuclear fusion? This makes no sense if your objective is to clean the planet and stop global warming, they are going to use the money to buy cars and air conditioning.

    Now it makes perfect sense if your objective is international redistribution of wealth. This is all about politics.

  83. Smith Says:

    Damn Elbonians stealing our money and air conditioners.

  84. shcb Says:

    I’m more concerned with the money we’re sending to the Hittites than the Elbonians, at least the Elbonians export spa mud to the US.

  85. NorthernLite Says:

    shcb, if you are so concerned about about redistribution of wealth, you must really hate Bush since the largest transfer of wealth in history took place during is years at the helm. Millions of high paying manufacturing jobs to China, millions more high-tech jobs to India. Gone.

  86. Smith Says:


    You have to remember, the last eight years never happened. Anyone who mentions Bush, no matter how relevant he is to the conversation, is suffering from “Bush Derangement Syndrome”. Looking at recent history is a dirty liberal tactic. There is no such thing as Bush. Deficit spending was invented by Obama in 2009. TARP never happened. Why can’t you libs face reality? You have all been brainwashed by Obama to believe in the existence of the “Bush”.

  87. enkidu Says:

    dang smith, now you are stealing my lines!

    The developing countries – like say China, India and most of the rest of the world either gets green (we’ll sell it to em – example Germany leads the US in solar tech by a good margin) or we’ll all choke to death on their coal smoke. You see this as a Katrina hand out that should have gone to purchasing bread and butter, but in a few cases might have been used to buy some gewgaw that you can get irate about. China and India are buying cars and air conditioners with or without the things being green or not. We jst think they should buy more energy efficient, cleaner tech and are willing to tax the energy/pollution producers to help get us out of this unsustainable trajectory

    I would say your whole mud hut and beggar nation thing is just your usual borderline racism, but that doesn’t surprise anyone here.

    The reason climate change action makes no sense to wwnj is that he only wishes to see it through the distorted lens of wwnj ridiculousness.

  88. knarlyknight Says:

    This is a post about Enk’s ridicule of wwnj’s.

    It seems like Smith is realizing that ridicule is the best stopper for the absurd torrents that spill into our realm from the wingnutoverse.

    Now let’s pause to reflect that the national bird of Elbonia is the frisbee. Fitting, I’d say.

    Now, is there a similar irony that the official bird of shcb’s home state of Colorada is the “Lark Bunting” ? I would think so.

    And to top off the ironic ridicule, Bush now resides in Texas, the state that officially recognizes the “Northern Mockingbird”.

    There is definitely something subliminal going on here. Keep up the good work Enk.

  89. shcb Says:

    China and India are buying cars and air conditioners with or without the things being green or not. We jst think they should buy more energy efficient, cleaner tech and are willing to tax the energy/pollution producers to help get us out of this unsustainable trajectory

    So how would anything that is being talked about in Copenhagen lead to this end?

  90. knarlyknight Says:

    shcb, Weren’t you listening? Obama said in his speech today that the time to talk in Copenhagen was over, and now it was time to act. The only question left is whether the act will be a tragedy or comedy.

  91. shcb Says:

    That doesn’t answer my question.

  92. knarlyknight Says:

    Yes it does. What I interpreted from Obama’s words is that the world leaders are going to put on a play at the end of the conference.

    The play will not only be entertaining, but will also provide all the answers you seek. For instance, if the play is a tragedy then we all have to continue using our dirty old air conditioners; if it’s comic, then we get to buy shiny new airconditioners for the developing nations. Honestly, you’re so thick sometimes shcb.

  93. Smith Says:

    Mud conditioners.

  94. NorthernLite Says:

    Science Wins!–white-house-announces-climate-deal?bn=1

  95. knarlyknight Says:

    Smith, “mud” LOL

    NL the Elbonian’s will be rejoicing too, new mud conditioners for all!

    shcb, see, it was a comedy after all.

  96. shcb Says:

    I agree this whole Copenhagen show has been a comedy, just as the global warming nonsense is turning out to be, but alas it is still somewhat serious. So no, that doesn’t answer my question, how has anything that was discussed here persuade China to pump less Co2 into the air? Now I say discussed because it seems nothing was accomplished. As one of the fellows that has been there since the beginning said today “all they have all agreed on is to very soon all agree on something” That should be worth an SNL skit.

  97. knarlyknight Says:

    Well, that’s your opinion, I prefer to wait and see what the expert thinks (i.e. Jon Stewart.)

  98. Smith Says:

    Clearly, the answer is to bomb China.

  99. knarlyknight Says:

    Okay, after reading the Draft I strongly suspect that the parties contributing to its preparatino were served more than just alcohol while in Copenhagen.

  100. shcb Says:

    Boy I tell you what, so the latest draft is there is no deadline, they are only going to let the earth increase its temperature by 2 degrees by some magical fiat I guess, pass a resolution demanding that mother earth do what the big heads say I guess, maybe the Messiah can give a really, really good speech and convince her to cool her jets, I don’t know, all we do know is it is going to cost someone 100 billion dollars a year from now until the end of time (adjusted for inflation one would presume) and that money will go to the mud hut countries with Goldman Sachs (the folks that didn’t have to show up for the Messiah’s brow beating) skimming billions off the top. What a crock.

  101. Smith Says:

    Those mud people just have all the luck. If only we could all be as fortunate as the impoverished mud people. Damn first world problems. I know I’d much rather die from starvation and easily treatable illnesses than see MY tax dollars going to those damn poor mud folks. Why must we suffer while the Muds are living it up bathing in polluted streams and working in sweatshops?

  102. shcb Says:

    so it has nothing to do with the environment.

  103. Smith Says:

    Yes, your racist rhetoric about mud people has nothing to do with the environment. I’m glad you realize that.

  104. shcb Says:

    Ah, gotta pull out the race card, what have I said that even remotely deals with race? The beggar nations include every race on earth, whites included. I’m not even opposed to foreign aid, but call it what it is. The problem is that the socialists know they can’t get this passed without turning something into a crisis

    “Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?” – Maurice Strong, founder of the UN Environment Program

    And they really don’t want to even help these mud hut people.

    “The only hope for the world is to make sure there is not another United States. We can’t let other countries have the same number of cars, the amount of industrialization, we have in the US. We have to stop these Third World countries right where they are.” – Michael Oppenheimer, Environmental Defense Fund

    They just want to bring the industrialized nations standard of living down.

    “Global Sustainability requires the deliberate quest of poverty, reduced resource consumption and set levels of mortality control.” – Professor Maurice King

    They really don’t even want to find the magical source of energy that will replace fossil fuels

    “Complex technology of any sort is an assault on human dignity. It would be little short of disastrous for us to discover a source of clean, cheap, abundant energy, because of what we might do with it.” – Amory Lovins, Rocky Mountain Institute

    “The prospect of cheap fusion energy is the worst thing that could happen to the planet.” – Jeremy Rifkin, Greenhouse Crisis Foundation

    “Giving society cheap, abundant energy would be the equivalent of giving an idiot child a machine gun.” – Prof Paul Ehrlich, Stanford University

    This has nothing to do with the environment.

  105. Smith Says:

    “Ah, gotta pull out the race card, what have I said that even remotely deals with race?”

    “mud hut people”

    You answered your own question.

    If it walks like a racist, and it quacks about mud people, it probably is Mallard Fillmore. Are you Bruce Tinsley?

  106. shcb Says:

    If I use the words Romanians Chinese and Columbians to describe their countries political policies is that racist?

  107. enkidu Says:

    wwnj – If I bring up your blaming the entire housing crisis, global economic meltdown and econocatastrophe on blacks and hispanics (I am sure you use much more ‘colorful’ language with your militia unit), am I a bigot?

  108. shcb Says:

    No you wouldn’t be, if I had blamed Blacks and Hispanics for causing …. You wouldn’t even be a bigot for erroneously claiming I had done that.

  109. shcb Says:

    you see, I’m not saying Smith is a bigot for saying I am, he is just wrong.

  110. Smith Says:

    LOL at you pretending bitching about mud hut people is not racist. If you cannot see the difference between “Colombian” and “Mud Hut People” you really are beyond hope. You should cancel your subscription to White Man’s Burden Weekly, it is doing unpleasant things to your personality.

  111. shcb Says:

    There doesn’t always have to be a tit for tat, what one side does doesn’t have to be offset by something another side does, and even if it is that doesn’t make it right or give the second side license. I wasn’t angry at Blacks or Hispanics for the housing collapse, and I don’t blame them. If a minority had been qualified for a loan they should have gotten it. I blame politicians, liberal and Republican, I don’t say conservative because I don’t think any truly conservative Republicans were involved. What I was upset over was that preferential treatment was given to Blacks and Hispanics because they were Black or Hispanic. It’s not their fault, I harbor no ill will toward them. I harbor ill will toward the politicians that initiated this and perpetuated it, Bush Jr. included. Now I don’t harbor any ill will toward them because of who they are but for what they have done. Therefore I am not a bigot.

    Same thing applies here, I harbor no ill will toward the people that live in mud hut countries, nor do I loathe those that are in charge of their governments, at least not for this matter. I loathe the politicians at the UN for trying to steal my money and I loathe the politicians in my country that want to give it away. Is that clear enough for you two?

  112. knarlyknight Says:

    I think shcb was referring to countries like Elbonia here:

    If we’re going to increase the money we give to poor nations so they can afford cleaner tech solutions then it’d be nice to have some sort of mechanism to ensure the money actually goes where intended instead of funding more weapons purchases or fancy palaces for tin-pot dictators and their off-shore bank accounts. The Copenhagen statement is utterly inadequate other than to present statements of intent, and I don’t see anything much different now in those statements of intent than the parties had when they agreed to go to the 2-3 week boondoggle in Coppenhagen. I think if you go back and re-read shcb’s statements he had similar concerns about this world class boondoggle, except his concerns went a little further in that he wants honesty in the reasons for the proposed re-distribution of money, so the merits of doing so can be honestly debated, that’s all.

  113. shcb Says:

    Thank you, the Christmas season must be in the air.

  114. enkidu Says:
    “we had to go somewhere to kill Arabs”
    “So now I’m not only paying the taxes of some woman who didn’t pay attention in high school enough to graduate but also didn’t have the brains to realize that breeding to a lazy man would result in a kid she can’t afford.”
    “I don’t harbor any animosity for Negros or Jews.”
    “We’re all adults here, we can say the word, yes they gave loans to negros and Mexicans, simply because they were negros and Mexicans.”


    wwnj blaming the financial meltdown on negroes, jews and mexicans. I am sure you used more colorful language at first and had to backspace.

    Racist much?

    yup (plenty more examples where that came from)

    oh wait, I forgot, I’m supposed to be the bigot (lol) ;-)

  115. knarlyknight Says:

    Yes, merry Christmas shcb. Despite our myriad differences and vehement objections to each other’s politics, I sense we have more in common than any of us will ever know. Perhaps we can lighten up a little and try to be constructive here by trying to see where we all agree instead of focusing so much on where we disagree.

    Like, can we agree with the FBI and the 911 comission that Barbara Olsen made No Phone calls from the hijacked planes?

  116. Smith Says:

    Let’s summarize your claims: “I’m not racist, I just think it is ok to call people ‘mud hut people’. Furthermore, I believe these mud people get all the breaks and are stealing OUR jobs and money.”

    Yep, all clear now. Definitely nothing racist about that. After all, you clearly stated you aren’t racist, so it must be true.

  117. shcb Says:

    Sorry Knarly but I can’t do that. I don’t know if she called from a cell phone or a seat back phone or if her husband made it up, in any case there were plenty of calls from the other planes and other people that it really doesn’t matter.


    The term I use was “mud hut countries not mud hut people, this is the danger of semantic infiltration, only after your misstatement did I call them mud hut people. But whatever, we went through this same thing with the fascist statement, I was going to ask you what you wanted me to call them that wouldn’t be offensive but I just don’t care, it wouldn’t make a difference.

    Back to Knarly, yeah we probably agree on more than we think, I just wish people here would read what I say instead of reading into what I say their prejudices, call it a Christmas wish.

  118. J.A.Y.S.O.N. Says:

    Hello gentlemen. I’ve been busy for a while, but I thought I’d check in and see what the trending topic was. Little to do on this particular Sunday night.

    To throw out a couple of general comments:

    There’s a really good article in the new print edition of Wired about Thorium reactors. After reading it. I think this technology is the best chance we’ve got for changing the energy infrastructure of the world. The majority of the article is about this scientist’s blog:

    I would really like to see both political parties in the USA and other world governments get behind this. Thorium fission looks like the closest we’re going to come to a magic energy source. It also offers the chance of legitimately peaceful nuclear power.

    The comments shcb posted by Prof Paul Ehrlich & Professor Maurice King are genuinely scary to me. Really the wrong conclusions. Regardless of anyone here personally trending toward liberal or conservative views, I wonder if we could all agree on that?

    No real conservative, by my understanding, should be unhappy in the least with the growth of China’s economy and the movement of wealth from the USA to China. That is not some plot to ‘redistribute wealth’ and ‘make everyone poor’ it’s the free market in action. China has far fewer health and safety rules, fewer environmental regulations and the labor is much, much cheaper than even non-union workers in the American south. It is simply much cheaper to manufacture products in China. Come the time when China is too expensive to rely on (a natural by product of economic growth) we will see the bulk of the world’s manufacturing shift elsewhere. I believe this may already be beginning to happen.

    Merry Christmas & Happy Holidays

  119. shcb Says:

    I was equally distressed by the comments of the two professors. Thorium is a viable alternative fuel for current technology, I’m for it. Thorium isn’t the magic technology but it is better than depending on wind.

    This is one conservative that isn’t unhappy with China’s growth, I just want to play on an even field.

  120. knarlyknight Says:

    I’m told this isn’t real, but does wishing it wassreal make me a racist too?

    Rev. Al Sharpton Speaks Out On Tiger Woods Affairs

    The Rev. Al Sharpton held a press conference today to blast Tiger Woods for the lack of diversity among his mistresses. Sharpton claims that the lack of African-American women among Woods’ harem will have a negative affect on the black community, specifically young black girls.

    “Why is it that a man who calls himself black can’t bring himself to cheat on his wife with a black woman?” said Sharpton, speaking to a group of supporters in Harlem. “What does it say to young black girls everywhere when you pass them over? Shame on you, Tiger Woods. What would your daddy say?”

    Sharpton, who has long championed taking black women as mistresses, said that today’s black athletes need to stop neglecting black women when it comes to extramarital affairs, and should follow the examples of positive black role models such as Jesse Jackson and Martin Luther King, Jr., both of whom cheated on their wives with black women. Sharpton also stressed that cheating with African-American women! would help the black community financially by giving black girls the chance to sell their stories to tabloids and gossip magazines.

    Sharpton added, “I’m not asking you to not cheat on your wives, I’m just asking you to give back to your own community.”

  121. shcb Says:

    I think you can rest assured that is a joke, but like all good humor there is an ounce of truth to it. I’ve never quite figured out if Sharpton is a racist and anti Semite or just an opportunist, my money is heavy on the opportunism and light on the other two.

    We all have our prejudices, there isn’t much we can do about that, but when we take them to an unacceptable level we become racist etc. Just like anger and love are normal human emotions that can be taken to extremes, to be a productive member of society doesn’t mean we can’t have those emotions and prejudices, we just need to learn to control them. Just saying a word or laughing at a joke doesn’t make you racist because you are on the wrong side of the PC line. Both Woods and Obama are half white so if a black man makes a joke about that is he a racist? Maybe, maybe not, but if he hates those two celebrities simply because they are half white he is.

    Look, I wish my daughter had married a white man, but I am happier she is with the man she loves. I can live with it. I wish my other daughter wasn’t gay but she is still the same cool kid as she would be if she were straight. On the plus side I don’t have to worry that she will get pregnant before she gets out of school. Always the glass half full kind of guy.

  122. knarlyknight Says:

    shcb, nice reply but I should havem mentiontioned my question was rhetorical. The “I wish it were true” comment I made was that I wish it was a real statement solely as the comic effect would have been enormous.
    Learned a neat trick about that glass half full. Just pour the liquid into a smaller glass and voila!

  123. NorthernLite Says:

    I’m off for the holidays guys!

    I want to wish you all a very Merry Christmas and Happy New Year.

  124. shcb Says:

    A variation of that is

    an optimist sees the glass half full

    a pessimist sees it half empty

    an engineer sees the glass twice too large.

    Any travel plans for the holidays? All our kids are here now so we’re planning on having Christmas at our house, then Saturday my wife’s family is converging on our house for a day, going to be a long two days. Looks like we’ll have a white Christmas, we don’t have snow now but it is supposed to snow in the next couple days.

    Pray for something resembling the Christmas Truce of 1914, chivalry died after that.

  125. shcb Says:

    Merry Christmas my friend

  126. NorthernLite Says:

    And a Republican sees the glass as a socialist, god-hating, facist, tree-hugging, liberty-stealing Liberal.


    Merry Christmas

  127. shcb Says:

    Properly seasoned eggnog will do that to you.

    Have a good holiday

  128. knarlyknight Says:

    The climate change scientist will announce that based on the alarming water level increase since observing the glass yesterday, it is certain that the kitchen will be flooded by the end of the week. The climate change denier will say pshaaw. A few in the household will buy rubber boots, mops and pails. Meanwhile, the three year old tries to flush sister’s Ugly doll down the toilet and floods the bathroom.


  129. Smith Says:

    Happy Festivus

  130. enkidu Says:

    For my feats of strength this year I built a igloo 10′ wide and 6′ tall with a adjacent tower that is 8′ tall (I am hoping to hollow it out from within so the kids can stand up in it).

    I’ll air my grievances after xmas.


  131. enkidu Says:

    oh and for wwnj and his ‘why bother with solar or wind power since they don’t work at night’ (the wind doesn’t blow at night? huh?)

  132. shcb Says:

    When the technology allows us to eliminate the grid I’ll be all for it, I don’t think it will happen in my lifetime, and this certainly ain’t it.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.