Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 02/17/2020 in Posts

  1. 2 points
    Very briefly, sir, do not debate the Democrat candidate. It will be "moderated" by fake news Democrats who will attack you viciously and give your opponent every privilege and honor, a trap to goad you into justifiable anger. More importantly, you should say that Democrats are despicable, unqualified to debate. People can vote for them. Fake news can praise them and promote their fitness for office. You don't have to appear on stage as an "equal." Screw them. The only debate worth considering is a Lincoln-Douglas smackdown, no moderators. Let the Democrat candidate speak first, maybe twenty minutes or so, then ignore her. Wash, rinse, repeat for two hours in a ticketed venue with good acoustics, perhaps in Florida. Tickets by lottery. Press gallery limited to camera operators, no journalists. Only one debate event. No "apple box" for Bloomberg if he's the Democrat candidate. Midget Ross Perot was dignified enough to stand on his own two feet, a head shorter than Clinton and Bush. Unfortunately, I don't think you'll be challenged by Bloomberg. Civil strife in Milwaukee will push Michelle Obama forward in a badly disrupted Democrat nominating farce. I don't think you can beat Michelle, so it behooves you to consider the numerous blessings of expat private life. You served your country at a time of historic malaise, made it possible for men to remember the meaning of liberty and justice, sadly too little too late. Not your fault. I blame Paul Ryan, a seething Deep State, felonious Obama officials, and the fake news Establishment. Screw them. You fought like hell. Now it's time to spend more time with Barron and Melania, and enjoy every day of your honorable golden years. If you get bored, build something. .
  2. 1 point
    When I was a boy, I had a disease that required me to eat dirt three times a day in order to survive. It’s a good thing my older brother told me about it. onelinefun.com
  3. 1 point
    He's a child or else a very young adult. The graphic is General Iroh from Avatar: the Last Airbender an anime series that ran from 2005-2008 and is still popular today. The hand gesture Iroh is making is likely part of a kata as he often imparted wisdom to his grandson while they trained together. My 15-year-old and I loved that series and quote from it on a semi-regular basis. The very next line after the graphic, our mystery poster says, "So here I am, trying to draw wisdom from a new source." I read him in the same way I would have read my teenage son - more mature and smarter than average, but an awkward communicator and not sure how to convey that he wants to learn something while maintaining that he knows everything. You know, like a kid would do. Your experience, MSK, led you to read him differently, and you'll get no judgment from me on that, neither in my response to the poster nor in this response to you. However, I was compelled to answer honestly his honest inquiry. No, I did not get the same impression of him as others did.
  4. 1 point
    It was a brief infatuation. I have come see that E.M. is a Crony Capitalist and his management of Tesla Motors is an abomination. It is true that his is brighter than most old line corporate capitalists, but his intellectual glitz cannot hide two things 1. He lusts and longs for government funded projects and 2. His intellectual reach exceeds his intellectual grasp. I regard Captain Bullshit as an entertainment, not the second coming of John Galt.
  5. 1 point
    So you think you can find some isolated place and escape from Agenda 21? Nope. Under Agenda 21, you have no property rights and your land will be taken from you. You think maybe you can escape to a different country? Nope. Agenda 21 is worldwide and is a UN thing. Agenda 21 is environmentalism and Stalin combined and all over the world and on steroids. Here in this video is what can happen if you try to live in some hideout, and Agenda 21 is far from being in full swing. 9:50 But you can do something about the Global Elite. In this video, the grasshoppers are the Global Elite and the ants are the general population. We outnumber them a million (or so) to 1 and if we ever figure that out, there goes their way of life. 2:24 Notice I post the length of videos and it's your choice whether you want to spend the time.
  6. 1 point
    You can find plenty of info about Agenda 21 by Googling it. It's not a secret. They are open about it. http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/agenda21/ For more information, read the rest of the document. But you don't have time for that. Then search Google Images. Maybe a picture is worth a bunch of words. But it's not just USA.
  7. 1 point
    You have several times put your finger on the problem. We do NOT have Climate Science. What we have are climate models and highly adjustable models at that. Climate is the result of weather over an extended period of time. The underlying process is chaotic dynamics for which our best mathematical techniques are not fully adequate. We have not found to this day a fully sufficient mode of determining whether a Navier Stokes equation has even a numerical solution. Only in a few cases do we know the numerical solutions actually converge to a genuine solution of the equation. And that is just the start of our problems. There are many drivers to weather and climate. Among which are secondary and tertiary cosmic rays shows which influence cloud formation. Clouds are nature's window shades. The clouds have a central role in temperature control on the ground. I am not yet convinced that even the honest climatologists he eliminated purely natural drivers as the cause of the current warm era. Yes I believe we are in a warm era, just as the world was before the Little Ice Age 1300- 1750. The world gets hot (sometimes) and it cools off (sometimes) and in the past, humans had little or nothing to do with it. Having said all that, I am no fan of excess CO2. I want to see North America paved over with breeder reactors from coast to coast from from the Yukon to the Rio Grande. Preferably thorium breeders (which we know how to build) that will not produce nasty by-products such as plutonium. I want to see us generate so much electricity by nuclear fission that we no longer have to burn oil and coal. Oil is a rich chemical feed stock for useful polymers and we have enough oil for that use to last us until Kingdom Come. Also we can put those fucking Muslim bastards out of business by not buying oil and showing the Europeans and Japanese they need not burn oil. Imagine that., Starving Islam to death instead of firing guns and dropping bombs. What a lovely thought that is. Ba'al Chatzaf All exactly right. I worked in hydrocode modeling Age 22-24, then non-linear electrical modeling in materials Age 25-30. No mystery that there can be no science like they are claiming. The chaotic and non-linear nature of the problem precludes modeling beyond a short time period and they don't have the data or models to support even that. It isn't even the beginning of a science yet much less a "settled science". The APS needs to have Nuremberg Trials for tenture and funding. Dennis
  8. 1 point
    That's the rub, innit, though? Which is the "problem">? If the problem is, as I alluded to, pure hoax or fraud, I want it out, I want it punished, I want it expunged. That is what you do with a problem like hoaxing or fraud. If the "problem" was a grievously misinformed media during the first public notice and concern about Ozone depletion, we have to look. If publicly financed bodies (NASA) alerted media to a scientific 'alarm' bell, then we should not only look to media depictions but also the actions and statements of those bodies. Any special-pleading or foot-on-gas/brake testimony in political arenas and policy-making deliberative bodies should be examined and acknowledged. If some heretofore responsible scientists made a big noise about Ozone depletion, and coerced national governments to commit to the Montreal Protocol -- while knowing that their prognostications were based on error/fudged stats/whimsy/fraud -- then I want to know their names also. The problems grow larger if we do conclude, tentatively, that humankind cannot effect climate or the atmosphere in a destructive way. If it is not scientifically possible for humans to pump catalytic agents into the atmosphere that will degrade Ozone, then something fishy indeed is going on. I think this is the null, the default, the Objectivish anti-environmental activism starting point. The problem. The problem that never was, then, is the problem remaining. Was there a problem in reality? Was there a danger in CFCs and other banned substances? Do measurements tell us anything about the course of Ozone levels over our recent history? Now, in an exchange on Atlantis II, Michael DeVault wrote argued with our Dennis May. He said, "Ozone depletion wasn't a scientific fraud." And our Dennis said, "not all of it. Graphing fraud [...]" So, does anyone see fraud in the graph presented above, or these graphs below (click through to source)? Average October ozone levels at the Halley station (in Antarctica) between 1955 and 2006. The thick line represents October values; dots represent the seasonal variation of ozone concentration for the months from August to AprilStill need to go back and find the original lab experiments, then what experiments were done, what experiments have never been done, then we can discuss what passes for science. Dennis
  9. 1 point
    Unlike many people I became aware of national authority figures lying at a very early age - 6th grade to be precise. I became aware of national science figures lying at age 17 - in person up close. Early immunization. It occured to me a while ago that William may be laboring under the mistaken conclusion that I believe that fraudulent results were presented on individual chemical experiments in support of the Ozone Hole theory. That is not the case at all. Once he looks into the original experiments we can have a discussion of what experiments are appropriate when doing science and the conclusions that can be drawn from what was done and what was omitted. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omitted-variable_bias Dennis
  10. 1 point
    I will be blogging my findings during my week away. Beyond blathering about meta-argument and blowing off the burden of proof, you are just not very interesting to discuss with at times, rather bluntly do you disregard my concerns. So I will discuss my findings with myself and see where I get to, off the main rink ... having slayed the dragon here, you may continue declaiming and expostulating without fear of contradiction.
  11. 1 point
    Hurrah! Yes, I think most of us here would get on the same page that A Claim Needs Evidence to support it. As I remarked above, and as Ellen has magnificently listed, there are some issues that lay between you and acceptance. I understand that. I understand that you yourself will be no help in pinpointing those issues. I hope I use my week well. But, again, just to say it one more time: Dennis, you charged fraud and hoax. Adam and I are asking: who should be coming up with evidence of fraud and hoax in Ozone depletion? You, me, him, Ellen, Santa? This question you will not answer .... After we have digested the basic experimental evidence and can agree on what it includes and does not include we will be in a position to discuss the validity of various conclusions. Again we cannot get the cart before the horse on basic science. Dennis
  12. 1 point
    Hurrah! Seriously, and more pointedly, a question for Ellen. I appreciate what she may be trying to do -- that each of us is trying to do -- ID particular points of contention and give them a workover. I am game. Dennis has done it all before and considers it settled, so he is probably not game at all. So, you, dear lady, are you in this game, or merely keeping score and scolding? Will you be putting forward any argument about Ozone depletion yourself? Are you on a particular side here, or part of the Neutral Observer mission? Yes, I think most of us here would get on the same page that A Claim Needs Evidence to support it. As I remarked above, and as Ellen has magnificently listed, there are some issues that lay between you and acceptance. I understand that. I understand that you yourself will be no help in pinpointing those issues. I hope I use my week well. I shall be concentrating on that which most interests me, the unremarkable observation that "Some 'critics' have charged Hoax and Fraud with regard to Ozone Depletion." I will report back on this. But, again, just to say it one more time: Dennis, you charged fraud and hoax. Adam and I are asking: who should be coming up with evidence of fraud and hoax in Ozone depletion? You, me, him, Ellen, Santa? This question you do not answer ....
  13. 1 point
    First, what is a "hidden number"? In a mathematical theory developed according to contemporary standards of rigor a mathematical theory will set forth its undefined terms and the postulates which give the undefined terms their semantics. Nothing is "hidden". The method of development is transparent, straightforward and logical. This is how the theory of (so-called) real numbers is presented nowadays. Likewise for complex numbers. A complex number is an element of the extension field over the real numbers generated by the irreducible polynomial equation x^2 + 1 = 0. The root of this equation is the (so-called) imaginary unit, usually designated by the letter i. Second, we arrive the concept of numbers by counting. Kids can do it by the age of two usually. Third, we learn mathematical ideas the same way we learn the names of things, the names of actions, the meaning of relations etc.. Kids can do this by the age of three usually. There is no magic here. Fourth. How would one define number. What kind of number? Integer, rational, real, complex, quaternion, octonian? Which? Please be specific. Use standard mathematical terms if you are going to discuss mathematics. Fifth, what is the physical meaning of the so-called complex numbers. The usual physical interpretation is that of angular phase. Complex numbers are given by an angle and a magnitude (relative to some frame of reference). This is very nifty for discussing harmonic oscillators and is this interpretation is even more nifty in formulating the concept of a quantum state. Quantum states are unit vectors in a Hilbert Space. The set of operators with quantum significance on this space are the so-called Hermite Operators. Now let me ask you something. Has your magnum opus added one substantial theorem to the theory of analysis of complex valued functions that is not already in the literature? If not, what is it you are bringing to the table? Ba'al Chatzaf