tuscl

Good idea gone bad? Strip Mob for climate change (video).

http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-294403

The girl they interviewed at the end could have a future on the big stage...

84 comments

  • samsung1
    15 years ago
    I like her accent. I have yet to meet a British stripper!
  • casualguy
    15 years ago
    They are in luck. The planet is cooling off all by itself. Apparently solar radiation coming from the sun which has entered a lower output time that should last for several decades is here now (well except for the possibility of the next few years for one more active solar cycle). Anyway global temperatures are already dropping and the EPA knows it but is hiding that information due to the current political landscape.

    quote
    The day before the House was to vote on a controversial energy bill destined to be the largest tax hike in American history, it was revealed that the Environmental Protection Agency had suppressed an internal report challenging the entire global warming myth.
    link among many
    http://preview.tinyurl.com/lvs93q

    Plants grow better with more CO2. Plants and crops and our food do not grow well if there is a late freeze. New York City has yet to reach 85 degrees this year I heard a couple of days ago. It was snowing in the Middle East last year where it hadn't for over 100 years I thought I heard. I don't mind if other countries citizens are required to spend all their income for a slight decrease in CO2 gas but please inform everyone here in the US the truth.
  • casualguy
    15 years ago
    I meant to say hundreds of scientists already know the planet is cooling off with the possible exception of one more active solar cycle. Then the decreased solar radiation from the sun will cause further global cooling and there is nothing we can do about it. Temperatures will drop not rise.

    Besides in less than 50 years, over 75 percent of all humans on this planet will be dead. Of course that's too far away for most to be concerned except when it comes to Greenhouse gases. I think Armageddon will happen around 2055 or 2056. One last big battle for all those who survived until then. The environmentalists would be happier if we all died sooner I believe.
  • casualguy
    15 years ago
    I would have been more supportive of their effort if they went topless.
  • how
    15 years ago
    Climate change is natural and ever-present. It is NO crisis.

    Those trying to make the weather a crisis are actually seeking to gain more control over more fiscal resources.

    Consider the Tokyo Protocols. Why do you suppose the worst polluters on the planet (by FAR) were explicitly exempted? It's certainly not because China and Japan are such buds. Rather, China was already socialist, and therefore not a target of the climate-crisis movement.
  • MisterGuy
    15 years ago
    I'm not a big fan of global warming myself, but a "NewsBusters" Right-wing biased report really shouldn't change anyone's minds on an issue like this. One study does NOT make up the entirety of the science on climate change. The idea that the media ignored this EPA "suppression" of *one* report is silly, since I'd already heard about this issue through the real news media.

    "New York City has yet to reach 85 degrees this year I heard a couple of days ago."

    It's been in the mid 80s-lower 90s in Central Park, NY in both May & April of this year. It's been in the mid 80s-lower 90s at LGA this past April thru July. It's been in the mid 80s at JFK this past April. You don't know what you are talking about c-guy.

    It's important to note that minor changes in weather over a scale of a year or so mean nothing to climate change, which occurs on scales of 30+ years.

    "Besides in less than 50 years, over 75 percent of all humans on this planet will be dead."

    From what?? This is crazy talk...
  • txtittyfan
    15 years ago
    Hasn't the earth been warming ever since the ice age?
  • how
    15 years ago
    Actually, txtittyfan, weather patterns are cyclical. Over the past century, you could trace the cycle of change through published reports and archived data, for example. Every 20-30 years the cycle shifts from predominately warming to predominately cooling.

    Of course, the same hysterics who have been bleating about "global warming" were also warning about "the next ice age" a few decades ago when the trend was cooling. Those folks should definitely stay out of the stock market... "Oh, look! We'll be millionaires within a year at this rate!" "Oh, no! We'll be broke within a year at this rate!"
  • txtittyfan
    15 years ago
    How,

    I am fully aware of the cyclical patterns of weather. It was a rhetorical question.

    Our existence on earth is a mere speck in time. Trying to extrapolate weather info from the relatively short time we have accurately measured it seems to ignore the radical weather changes experienced in the past million or so years. I agree, the global warming hysteria is just that, unfounded hysteria.
  • casualguy
    15 years ago
    Global warming is about hysteria in my opinion. I can say I believe we face a greater threat of most humans facing death from a global war within 50 years. That seems logical to me. Instead Obama and the democrats want to enact a huge tax increase which would put people out of work in the worst recession in 100 years. Why? So that we might reduce the global temperature 2 degrees within 50 years? I think we can afford to wait another 10 years to see if global warming will continue or if global cooling will continue without putting a lot of people out of work right now.

    I heard that New York City hadn't reached 85 degrees on the weather channel. Apparently they did not know what they were talking about. I thought they actually reported factual information. If you can't trust them, can you really trust the reports about global warming coming from the government? I would like it if the temperature was 2 degrees cooler but I don't think it's going to matter that much. Do you want your electric bill to double? I guess if you don't care, then you're all in favor of Cap and Tax.
  • casualguy
    15 years ago
    I'm not sure about April or May but so far this summer according to www.weather.com, the high temperature in New York City has not exceeded 85 degrees this summer. That may be what I heard. For June and July, 2 of the typically hotter months. Hundreds of scientists have stated that the planet has been cooling the last few years. It shouldn't be if the Global warming fans have it right in my opinion. I believe the amount of radiation coming from the sun may play a bigger role in how hot it is here than in the amount of CO2 in our atmosphere. If it's not, that is actually fantastic news because that means we can stop global cooling. I think ignoring the warning from hundreds of scientists is not good. Why are so many scientists saying global cooling could be a threat? If they can't agree on the facts, I think politicians are rushing to a decision too quickly.
  • casualguy
    15 years ago
    The other planets in our solar system have experienced global warming as well in the last few decades. I'm not convinced that the amount of heat coming from the fire is not a bigger factor than how much CO2 is on the planet. If hundreds of scientists are not convinced either, we may be wasting money and jobs with a huge tax increase. If CO2 is a bigger factor than the amount of solar radiation reaching the Earth, then hopefully there won't be hundreds of scientists in disagreement about what if anything we need to do.

    We could always dump some iron ore in the oceans if we wanted to reduce CO2 cheaply.
  • how
    15 years ago
    Casualguy said, "...Obama and the democrats want to enact a huge tax increase which would put people out of work in the worst recession in 100 years. Why? So that we might reduce the global temperature 2 degrees within 50 years?"

    Your observations are right on target, casualguy, but I think the answer to the "Why?" question is different than to "reduce the global temperature." I believe the reason the liberals have been pursuing heavy taxes on things that might be blamed for climate change is simply to gain more control over more resources for central government. They are liberals/socialists first; environmentalism is just a convenient cloak to drape over their actual intentions.
  • Book Guy
    15 years ago
    I don't have an opinion on climate change. I let the qualified scientists, generally taken as a rational consensus, chime in on that point. I look to people with educations in the field, who interact in a reviewed, careful, scientific manner, for their opinions. I do my best to ferret through the partisan stuff and find out what real scientists do and don't know.

    It's not hard to find the experts, and figure out who the few screwballs are. It's just like dealing with holocaust historians, and then finding a few holocaust denyers. Somewhere in there, you get a sense that NOTHING can be "proven" beyond a shadow of a doubt; but that the normal folk who don't have their heads up their asses are all in agreement on some major, main points; that there might be subtle delineations and discrepancies among the major theories; but that in general, the minor differences don't radically alter the major conclusions, or, if they do, not to the extent that the nay-sayers would pretend they do. So, the nay-sayers base their conclusions on bad thinking, and the sensible people who are NOT experts, actually figure out who the experts are, defer to them, listen to a wide range of them, and then develop the skill of looking at the whole ongoing discourse.

    That's why I think that anyone who ascribes the notion of global warming to "hysteria" or implies there are political motivations behind such claims, are fucking idiots. It is patently, absurdly obvious, that the experts know, and have known for about 50 years, that catastrophic climate change is being caused by man's abuse of the environment, and that this change is reversible, and that it is not the same as momentary lapses upwards or downwards from the norm which form part of the usual climate's variance in short- or long-term cylces.

    I also think that anyone who takes a day's or year's personal experience as evidence, is a fucking idiot. "Hey, it was hot last June, hotter than I ever remembered June being, when I was growing up. So I believe in global warming" is just as fucking idiotic as, "Scientists don't know because nobody can predict the future."

    We don't need fucking idiots killing off humanity. Get a degree in climatology, or listen to the expert climatologists and defer to their superior skills. Or, if you think there's no global warming, then, to support it, please find a CONSENSUS among a WIDE RANGE of SKILLED AND QUALIFIED climatologists, none of whom have any political motivation, and DOCUMENT it. You'll be the first human on the planet to have succeeded in that task.

    And why didn't the strippers take all their clothes off?
  • how
    15 years ago
    The "experts" tell us that one of the principal "greenhouse gases" causing "catastrophic global climate change" is carbon dioxide.

    I therefore propose a solution to this problem:

    Anyone who believes it should do his or her part to save the planet -- Stop breathing.

    Meanwhile, feel free to believe whatever expert opinion you like. But anyone trying to take money from me to "fix" this "problem" is going to meet with my staunch resistance... And the liberals are trying to do exactly that.
  • txtittyfan
    15 years ago
    Book Guy,

    It does not appear that you got your head fully out of your ass before writing your comments.

    The are hundreds of accredited scientist/climatologists that dispute the global warming hysteria.

    You make the point that one hot day as evidence is laughable since you comment that we have known for 50 years about the man made catastrophe. The earth has been in existence for approx 4.5 billion years. Anything we measure currently and try to extrapolate over global trending is ridiculous. Our existence/impact on the earths climate has about as much credence as saying if I put a beet in Lake Michigan, anyone drinking the water will get drunk.

    The earth has experienced 4 ice ages in its history. We are currently in an ice age(they last millions of years). Scientists believe we are in the glacial retreat phase.

    Ice core samples/analysis have shown that the earth is at its coolest in over 600 million years. The core analysis also shows we have less CO2 in the atmosphere now than we did over 1 million years ago. However, studies have also shown there is no historical correlation between CO2 levels and temperature.

    As How said earlier, it wasn't that long ago that the hysteria mongers were worried about global cooling.

    The strippers did not take off all of their clothes because they were cold.
  • txtittyfan
    15 years ago
    Acutally, I meant putting a beer in lake Michigan.
  • casualguy
    15 years ago
    I find people who stay stubborn in spite of recent evidence to the contrary and dispute the new findings to the contrary by saying anyone who believes that is an idiot could be one themselves. I heard a long time ago it's no use arguing with an idiot. Hundreds of accredited scientists are reporting a message that is being ignored by the majority in my opinion. Global cooling has been going on the last few years. A reasonable person who doesn't have their head stuck in the mud might question if their data is correct rather than label anyone who disagrees to be an idiot. However if politicians really don't care whether we are having global warming or cooling (I really don't think they care that much if it's 2 degrees hotter or cooler.) but just want to push a political agenda to take over resources and increase their tax revenue, all the hot air about global warming and cooling is just the excuse.

    If Cap and Trade passes and everyone's electric rates double or triple along with high gas prices, I believe the next election will have new politicians in office. Therefore I think if enacted, the politicians may enact the new taxes in stages, so that the new taxes don't cost them their own job. I believe there is a good chance all these new taxes will become law. If enacted immediately I expect huge increases in my electric bill and in gas prices at the pump and in food prices as prices are passed along. Therefore I will need to cut way back on all my other discretionary spending. I'm hoping I don't have to do that. Others who already are having a tough time making ends meet will be going further in the hole. An economic depression I believe with factories shut down and no money for cleanups etc. will be a far worse ecological nightmare than other approaches. However I will probably be called an idiot by someone for voicing my opinion since some on here like to label everyone an idiot that does not agree with their viewpoints.
  • MisterGuy
    15 years ago
    "So that we might reduce the global temperature 2 degrees within 50 years?"

    Hey, apparently during the last Ice Age, the average global temperature was only a few degrees Centigrade cooler than it is right now.

    "Do you want your electric bill to double? I guess if you don't care, then you're all in favor of Cap and Tax."

    Well, we could not pass Cap & Trade (Cap & Trade is a concept that I'm opposed to BTW), and I bet that our electric bills would continue to go up. We need a *real*, long-term energy policy in this country that doesn't having us depending on finite sources of energy far into the future.

    "I'm not sure about April or May but so far this summer according to www.weather.com, the high temperature in New York City has not exceeded 85 degrees this summer."

    Check the actual data yourself:
    http://www.weather.gov/climate/index.php…

    Meteorological summer starts in June BTW.

    "The other planets in our solar system have experienced global warming as well in the last few decades."

    Even if that were true, who cares...we live on Earth c-guy.

    "We could always dump some iron ore in the oceans if we wanted to reduce CO2 cheaply."

    They apparently don't even know what the total CO2 storage capacity of the Earth's oceans is yet.

    "Ice core samples/analysis have shown that the earth is at its coolest in over 600 million years."

    Ice core samples really have very little to do with the modern ways that temperature has been measured.

    "Global cooling has been going on the last few years."

    Again, even if that were true, what has happened over "the last few years" has *nothing* to do with long-term global climate change.
  • casualguy
    15 years ago
    If the other planets have experienced global warming the last few decades, mankind did not do that unless we have a lot of secret bases pumping out CO2 on other planets. Why throw away good money to try to fix something that is a natural cycle? It's like trying to fix the economy so that we never have recessions. You can try but it never works. We do need an energy policy. I suggest incentives not taxes. With all the money we spent on banks, we could have had some pretty big incentives to go green instead without threatening to raise our electric rates and gas sky high. Those rates will go up as the economy improves without the government making things worse via new taxes. Support rebates or incentives for electric hybrid cars and/or hydrogen cars or fuel efficient cars for everyone, no preconditions like you have to turn in an old clunker and have owned it for at least a year.

    Go check out www.weather.com
    Check out June and July high temperatures for New York City, New York. Go contact them and tell them what a bunch of liars they are because they have been lying about greenhouse gases and global warming telling everyone the temperature has not hit 85 degrees there this summer. They must be putting incorrect data on their web site too because I did check it. By the way most places report city temperatures at the airports from what I've heard. If you go to your website you listed and look at the airport temperatures for June and July, you'll see that the temperature has not reached 85 degrees this summer. That is likely the spot the weather channel is reporting about. Reporting city temperatures based on information from a local airport is typical.
  • casualguy
    15 years ago
    Using 2003 data, there are an estimated 196 million licensed drivers in the US. If the government gave us all the 700 billion they used for TARP, all licensed drivers could have about $3600 as in incentive to get a better vehicle. Of course many won't be able to afford that right now since so many are unemployed or worried about their job. Therefore I think it's pretty safe to say at best only half that number of licensed drivers would use the money to buy a car. Therefore you could use the 700 billion fund to give a $7200 rebate or credit if you bought a hybrid or electric or highly fuel efficient car, only one per licensed driver though. If there were enough takers it would stimulate the economy, create jobs, and help everyone. If there were not enough takers, the rebate or credit could be even bigger. A $10,000 credit would inspire some people to buy a better car. We don't need huge tax increases to go green.
  • casualguy
    15 years ago
    If you had affordable electric/hydrogen/gasoline or diesel hybrids that had comparable features to existing vehicles but could run entirely on electricity or hydrogen, you just solved the transportation issue and if US companies are making the parts, you just created a lot of US jobs. Now if you also add in big incentives to have smart grids and used a combination of incentives with fuel cells, solar, etc. for a smarter electric grid less dependent on fossil fuels, you just reduced the carbon footprint and global warming without even arguing about the issue. Let OPEC raise the price of gasoline. Let market forces work their magic to raise rates when the economy recovers. Meanwhile our government could be seen as giving us a big tax break by letting us go green with half off solar rooftop equipment or a number of other incentives. I read it can take over 16 years to locate new transmission lines across Federal lands. Someone wants to go green with wind power but no can do anytime soon thanks to all the Federal red tape.
  • casualguy
    15 years ago
    I heard the government cut funding for hydrogen research (at least in our state). I would prefer efforts be put back on developing transportaton abilities using a combination of electric and hydrogen/gasoline or hydrogen/diesel as a backup fuel source. I can't imagine a big rig traveling hundreds of miles on an electric charge. I've read reports that algae is very promising as a potential biofuel to create oil potentially yielding more oil per liter than any other biocrop. Algae can use wastewater instead of tying up food crop lands. I believe incentives through government funding would help in these areas too. I'm all in favor of turning this planet back into an icebox. At least during the summertime. :)

    I think we should also spread some iron ore into the ocean as an experiment to observe how the ocean reacts. Not too concentrated in one area or you could create an oxygen dead spot unless it doesn't matter because it's already a dead spot like near New Orleans. However the area may need to be clear for shipping reasons.
  • how
    15 years ago
    casualguy asked, "Why throw away good money to try to fix something that is a natural cycle?"

    Because it is not intended to fix anything. The folks who want to confiscate more of your money via increased taxes are very interested in controlling more of individuals' resources, and thus increasing dependency on the central government. They are statists, liberals, socialists. All leftists are explicitly anti-american, by definition. They are the enemies of liberty.

    And we've given them total control of our federal government...
  • MisterGuy
    15 years ago
    "If the other planets have experienced global warming the last few decades, mankind did not do that unless we have a lot of secret bases pumping out CO2 on other planets."

    You don't know what you are talking about when it comes to THIS planet, let alone other planets (which are at different distances from the Sun, have different atmospheric compositions, are of different sizes, etc., etc.).

    "I suggest incentives not taxes."

    I agree, but we already have a system in place that incentivizes SUVs more than it does for hybrids, which is crazy IMO.

    "Go contact them and tell them what a bunch of liars they are because they have been lying about greenhouse gases and global warming telling everyone the temperature has not hit 85 degrees there this summer."

    Screw The Weather Channel. All they do is report on the weather, and the NWS is the official source for weather observations in this country.

    "By the way most places report city temperatures at the airports from what I've heard."

    No shit Sherlock...

    "If you go to your website you listed and look at the airport temperatures for June and July, you'll see that the temperature has not reached 85 degrees this summer."

    You really are a fool c-guy. It reached 85F at LGA on July 6th & June 26th. Ramble on though...

    "I heard the government cut funding for hydrogen research (at least in our state)."

    Good, hydrogen fuel cells are a pipe dream.

    "I can't imagine a big rig traveling hundreds of miles on an electric charge"

    ...which is why they should probably be converted to natural gas...kind of like Boone Pickens wants to do.

    "All leftists are explicitly anti-american, by definition. They are the enemies of liberty."

    Sheer & utter Right-wing nonsense...give it a rest sometime "how"...
  • casualguy
    15 years ago
    I was tired yesterday. I must have looked at preliminary data for JFK instead of the other airport and still do not see any high temperatures 85 degrees or higher at JFK for June and July. Regardless if it was warm one or two days at another location, the average temperatures in the area have been cooler than normal which is something the weather channel mentioned today and the point I was trying to convey to anyone who listens. The site at www.weather.com displays as of a last week no high temperatures reaching 85 degrees for June or July for New York City. Apparently they have the cooler than average trend right but their data may appear to be slightly flawed unless they are using JFK.
  • Clubber
    15 years ago
    Below is a good link on this topic. Of course, believers in the global warming BS will immediately label it as right wing. They just can not admit the truth even when it hits them smack in the face! Of course, denying the obvious is a necessity for being liberal.

    http://townhall.com/columnists/WalterEWi…
  • MisterGuy
    15 years ago
    "Regardless if it was warm one or two days at another location, the average temperatures in the area have been cooler than normal which is something the weather channel mentioned today and the point I was trying to convey to anyone who listens."

    The *real point* though c-guy, which you apparently will *never* get, is that you have no real point. What has happened over a few months at ONE location in the USA means nothing when it comes to long-term global climate change, period. Give it up...you simply don't know what you're talking about!

    "Of course, denying the obvious is a necessity for being liberal."

    This kind of wild hyperbole from someone that doesn't even know the definition of probability...lol...what a joke...
  • casualguy
    15 years ago
    I am giving this one up. I'm adding someone to my ignore list.
  • how
    15 years ago
    Whatever consensus may be touted, I choose to think rather than shut my mind off. Knowledge is not Truth, it is just mindless agreement. And when I say "I know," then I stop thinking. So, I admit I do not know what the climate will do over the next several years.

    And I absolutely won't willingly pay money for programs devised by those who claim they DO know what the climate will do.
  • Clubber
    15 years ago
    how,

    They can't even tell us how the climate will be tomorrow, with much accuracy. One thing is certain. If tomorrow, you find the right dancer in the right club , and have the cash, the temperature will greatly increase!
  • MisterGuy
    15 years ago
    "They can't even tell us how the climate will be tomorrow, with much accuracy."

    Nonsense, and when referring to "tomorrow", it's weather, not climate you moron.
  • Clubber
    15 years ago
    how,

    Did you hear something that sounded like a stripper farting?
  • how
    15 years ago
    Clubber, I don't mind MG believing whatever he chooses, nor the many others who believe as he does.

    MG, I hope you also don't mind me believing what I choose. In your case, I perceive you are convinced by evidence presented by various learned scientists. In my case, I am convinced by scientific evidence/observation as well, at least in part. Neither of us are wacky for our vastly-different beliefs on climatological patterns and trends.

    But my guard goes up when anyone suggests to me that we KNOW what we only suspect. And my ire is raised when anyone suggests I pay for a solution to a problem I am convinced does not exist, particularly when the clear motivation for their suggestion is to gain more control over individuals and thus further erode liberty. Yes, I truly see that as the motivation behind certain lawmakers' quest for "climate legislation."

    Peace.
  • txtittyfan
    15 years ago
    MisterGuy,

    Your calling Clubber a moron for using climate instead of weather shows how narrow minded you have become. When I read the comments by Clubber, I fully understood his message. Meteorologists have a common saying, climate is what you expect, weather is what you get.

    The discussion was about climate change/global warming, and no one can predict with accuracy the climate or weather tomorrow.
  • MisterGuy
    15 years ago
    "I don't mind MG believing whatever he chooses, nor the many others who believe as he does."

    LOL...how exactly do I "believe"?? I have stated very clearly that I am no fan of Cap & Trade OR the idea that global warming is an actual problem. I feel that labeling CO2 as a "pollutant" is counter-productive. What I dislike is pseudo-science masquerading as real science & people that obviously don't know what they are talking about rambling on & on.

    "MG, I hope you also don't mind me believing what I choose."

    Sure, this is America. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, even if it isn't based on any actual facts.

    "And my ire is raised when anyone suggests I pay for a solution to a problem I am convinced does not exist, particularly when the clear motivation for their suggestion is to gain more control over individuals and thus further erode liberty."

    Look, this is just more of your constant barrage of nonsense against "liberals". Don't expect me to take any of that nonsense seriously. You, as usual, are letting your obvious Right-wing bias cloud your better judgment...and so be it.
    -----------------------------------

    "Your calling Clubber a moron for using climate instead of weather shows how narrow minded you have become. When I read the comments by Clubber, I fully understood his message"

    ...because you were able to see through his obvious stupidity, which is what I pointed out in the first place.

    "no one can predict with accuracy the climate or weather tomorrow."

    Once again, this is sheer nonsense. The general accuracy rate for weather forecasts has drastically improved in recent decades. Is it perfect? Of course not, especially since the science of meteorology is still relatively young. But to state broadly what you & clubber have tried to state is simple hyperbolic nonsense, period.
  • txtittyfan
    15 years ago
    MG,

    The nonsense is in your comment. A common definition of tomorrow is "in the future". As in, Detroit is now designing the cars for tomorrow. And accuracy of future forecasts is limited at best. They still can not predict tornadoes, hurricanes etc., and if I am not mistaken, I believe they are considered weather.
  • Clubber
    15 years ago
    txtittyfan,

    Sorry, but I guess I have to agree with mg. He is a PRO at nonsense! Plus, being considered stupid by mg is a compliment, since I am certain he does not consider himself stupid, therefore I would be the opposite of him. Makes me a fucking EINSTEIN!!!
  • MisterGuy
    15 years ago
    "They still can not predict tornadoes, hurricanes etc., and if I am not mistaken, I believe they are considered weather."

    Sheesh...talking with ignorants on here gets very tiresome..."they" can indeed predict tornadoes & hurricanes waaaay better than just 25 years ago. Wake up smell the coffee...
    ------------------------

    "Plus, being considered stupid by mg is a compliment, since I am certain he does not consider himself stupid, therefore I would be the opposite of him. Makes me a fucking EINSTEIN"

    ...in your dreams moron...
  • how
    15 years ago
    My proposal is sounding better all the time: Anyone who believes in man-made catastrophic climate change caused by "greenhouse gases" such as carbon dioxide should do their part to save the planet...Stop breathing. The world will truly be a better place.
  • txtittyfan
    15 years ago
    Except that scientists have found no correlation between CO2 and temperature.

    MG, the only improved forecasting of any significance is in the short term path of the storm, not the frequency, strength etc. The current forecast for my area this year is 50% chance it will not be a normal year. Big prediction, it is either going to be normal or not normal. There isn't even a consensus on what normal is other than a wide range based upon historical frequencies. Scientist are still try to figure out the causal relationships that make up forecasting models. I think your east coast liberalism is really beginning to affect your judgement.
  • MisterGuy
    15 years ago
    "the only improved forecasting of any significance is in the short term path of the storm, not the frequency, strength etc."

    You are expecting quite a lot from a science that's basically only been around for about 150 years.

    "The current forecast for my area this year is 50% chance it will not be a normal year."

    If you are talking about a seasonal hurricane forecast or a long-term (seasonal or greater) forecast, then I agree that those forecasts aren't even worth the paper that they are printed on. However, that's a looong way away from making such a broad statement like:
    "no one can predict with accuracy the climate or weather tomorrow."

    "There isn't even a consensus on what normal is other than a wide range based upon historical frequencies."

    Once again, you don't know what it is that you are talking about. Climatic "normals" are usually only the average of what has occurred over the last 30 years, and they are updated every ten years (by dropping the oldest ten years worth of data & adding the latest ten years worth of data).

    "Scientist are still try to figure out the causal relationships that make up forecasting models."

    LOL...are the numerical models that meteorologists use every day to help predict the weather perfect? No way, but they are waaaay better than the numerical models that were in use not more than 20 years ago. Get a clue...
  • txtittyfan
    15 years ago
    Yes MG, the "normal" changes constantly, as such, there is no normal. And without a normal, you really can not have a consensus. The scientific community tries to pass off averages that change as normal.
  • Dougster
    15 years ago
    There a logic fallacy in this whole predicting the weather tomorrow debate. Even if you can't predict the outcome of a next event in a series with very great probability it does not follow that longer range predictions are not possible. Suppose you a particle which move up or down one unit every second with a 55% chance to move up and 45% chance to move down. If try and guess what it's going to do every second you aren't going to get much accuracy. But if you make a forecast over a day that it will be up from where it started, you will almost always be right.
  • MisterGuy
    15 years ago
    "And without a normal, you really can not have a consensus. The scientific community tries to pass off averages that change as normal."

    You're confusing what the general public thinks of as "normal" with what the meteorological community thinks of as normal. People wonder all the time if they are or aren't "normal", when really all there is objectively is an average & deviations from that average.
  • Clubber
    15 years ago
    I find it a quirk of ignorance that when someone is confronted with scientific truth that does not "fit" their ideals, rather than inquire and gather knowledge, they, as is said, "shoot the messenger".
  • MisterGuy
    15 years ago
    I find it odd that old men make rambling statements that have no relevance to the thread in question and then expect to be taken seriously, especially when they happen to agree with proven racist statements.
  • Dougster
    15 years ago
    There goes MisterGay charging his windmills again. Sorry, MisterGay, there are no racists who post regularly on this board. Sorry but you don't get to be the hero by protecting the world from them.
  • Clubber
    15 years ago
    Funny how he mg thinks everything is about him! Some kind of complex there, it seems.
  • Dougster
    15 years ago
    As I've pointed out before in reality MisterGay is nothing more than a complete loser, and idiot, whose life revolves around paying whores for sex. His method of coping with this fact about himself is denial: On TUSCL he imagines himself a white knight hero who valiantly defends the honor of whores, and who tirelessly does battle with all the racist/homophobic/misogynistic/holocaust denying klansmen who overrun this board. Without MisterGay, or so he imagines, the board just would not be safe for decent people (include those decent people who happen to be whores).
  • MisterGuy
    15 years ago
    "Funny how he mg thinks everything is about him! Some kind of complex there, it seems."

    Please, who were you talking about exactly then moron?? Give us all a break. Do something "constructive" with your life, like go to a George Wallace retrospective & cheer about "the good ole days".
  • Clubber
    15 years ago
    Simple, ignorant, liberal, fools. Oops, I guess it was about you! Assuming you are calling me the "moron", but of course you don't stoop to name calling, or so you said. I guess just another of your liberal lies.
  • Dougster
    15 years ago
    MISTERGAY LOSES AGAIN!
  • MisterGuy
    15 years ago
    "Assuming you are calling me the 'moron', but of course you don't stoop to name calling"

    When did I ever say that?? Oh yea, it was never...

    BTW, I'm sorry...what do you think "Simple, ignorant, liberal, fools" is?? Not name calling?? Please, you're so stupid clubber that it should be illegal to make fun of you...it's oh so easy...

    "I guess just another of your liberal lies."

    Sure, sure...you never agreed with the likes George Wallace on the issue of race...in your dreams that is...LOL!
  • txtittyfan
    15 years ago
    MG,

    Your east coast liberalism is now affecting your memory. You clearly called clubber a moron in this thread.
  • Dougster
    15 years ago
    tx: I won't blame "east coast liberalism" for MisterGay's problems. His real problems are:

    a) His IQ is just plain low
    b) He is a loser with nothing more to his life than paying whores for sex. But he won't admit this to himself. To escape the cognitive dissonance he attempts to portray himself as an heroic battler against (imagined) racism, misogyny, homophobia, and holocaust denial.
    c) MisterGay is just plain... well gay.
  • Clubber
    15 years ago
    txtityfan,

    Not a problem. Just like his racist comments. I mention something George Wallace predicted over 40 years ago, and he thinks that makes me a racist.
    One need only look at the source to understand that what is said is of no concern to me.

    One major difference between liberals and conservatives...

    Conservatives will readily admit they are conservative.

    Liberals won't admit they are liberal, but rather use "progessive" as their code word.

    Such is life!
  • txtittyfan
    15 years ago
    Clubber, maybe you could change your picture to clubbing liberals.
  • Clubber
    15 years ago
    txtittyfan,

    That is one of the reasons I use this picture, as most liberals are also animal "rights" wacko's.
  • MisterGuy
    15 years ago
    "Your east coast liberalism is now affecting your memory. You clearly called clubber a moron in this thread."

    Did I ever say that I didn't?? Nope.

    "I mention something George Wallace predicted over 40 years ago, and he thinks that makes me a racist."

    No, you agree with a blatantly racist statement made by Wallace, and you got called out on that by numerous people...including me, period. Don't bother lying or back-peddling from it either.

    "Conservatives will readily admit they are conservative.

    Liberals won't admit they are liberal, but rather use 'progessive' as their code word."

    What an insane, delusional world you must live in clubber...my goodness...
  • Clubber
    15 years ago
    mg,

    I agreed that what he said came true, the same as I will admit what Galileo said about the earth being round. That doesn't make me an astronomer! What flawed "logic" you try to foist on others!

    Yes, it is an "insane, delusional world" I live in. And the liberals are making it more so, minute by minute, hour by hour, and day by day.

    At least you've admitted that!

    Score sheet
    Inning 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
    mg 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
    Clubber 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 X

    Give him the ninth since he admitted that liberals have created an "insane" and "delusional" world!

    GAME OVER! mg looses AGAIN!
  • Dougster
    15 years ago
    That MisterGay is always claiming people said things they didn't. Especially if it means he gets to be the liberal hero doing battle against homophobes, misogynists, racists, and Holocaust deniers.

    Notice MisterGay's reference to George Wallace. Does MisterGay think this is still the 60's? He does seem to be charging alot of the windmills on the past.

    In conclusion, not only is MisterGay a complete loser and a short bus rider, but he is also a liar.
  • MisterGuy
    15 years ago
    "I agreed that what he said came true"

    This is what you said:
    "You can't raise the black man to the level of the white man, but you can lower the white man to the level of the black man.

    I can say that at the time I did not agree with him, but history has proved him correct to this point in time."

    http://www.tuscl.net/dt.php?DID=73651

    You agreed with a *blatantly racist statement*, which makes YOU a racist clubber. You also tried, unsuccessfully of course, to back-pedal from that statement, but it was VERY clear what you meant by it, period.

    "At least you've admitted that!"

    Nope, try again liar.

    "GAME OVER! mg looses AGAIN!"

    Now you're going to try & emulate a proven troll?! What a pathetic old, racist fool you really are clubber...
  • Clubber
    15 years ago
    mg,

    You make this so simple! You even posted a link to direct others to your lies!!! The statement you attribute to me, well a LIE! Saying I agreed with the statement, a LIE!

    The ENTIRE post with nothing out of context:

    "Reminds me of a politician in the late 60's that said, and I paraphrase, You can't raise the black man to the level of the white man, but you can lower the white man to the level of the black man.

    I can say that at the time I did not agree with him, but history has proved him correct to this point in time."

    So, mg, what LIE are you going to come up with to try and cover your LYING ignorant ass this time?

    Imagine, someone so stupid they point out their own LIE. What a laugh you have given me, and I am sure, others.


  • Dougster
    15 years ago
    I don't like either MisterGay or Clubber so I think that qualifies me to give my interpretation on the thread starting from a fairly neutral POV.

    The original statement was:

    "Reminds me of a politician in the late 60's that said, and I paraphrase, You can't raise the black man to the level of the white man, but you can lower the white man to the level of the black man.

    I can say that at the time I did not agree with him, but history has proved him correct to this point in time."

    This is already pretty indicative of racism because it quotes George Wallace on a race issue. Nevertheless, I suppose there were statements made by Hitler on race that, in isolation, one could agree with, and, in strictly in a logical sense, not prove that Hitler was a racist (although the strange choice of whom to quote would make one very weary about the quoter and his motivations).

    Clubber then goes on to say "history has proved him correct to this point in time". Again this is not complete agreement since Clubber could be thinking some future event will prove Wallace wrong but it hasn't happened yet. In fact, Clubber might even think Wallace probably will be proven wrong.

    Logically, the analogy would be a mathematician saying "Goldbach said [Goldbach Conjecture]. I didn't agree when I first heard it, but so far history has shown no examples that he was wrong". From this you can't conclude that stater's current stance on the Goldbach Conjecture.

    Ok, so Clubber was on a bit shaky ground right from the initial quote but I think it was going a bit too far to conclude he was a racist at that point. Unfortunately, later on in the thread Clubber goes on to say:

    "All one need do is compare kids of today to those from his time. Only an idiot would not see HE was correct"

    This time Clubber did not qualify it with "to this point in time", meaning the status of black today had proven Wallace correct. I don't think this is something anyone could agree with. Blacks have definitely made great progress in the last 40 years. Yes there is still some ways to go, but it is not even close to proven how much further they can go, and there is absolutely no proof their progress has stopped. IMO, hip hop and its glorification of ghetto life is a huge set back, but it will pass. As MisterGay says having a black man as a very good president is proof Wallace was wrong.

    Finally, perhaps, Clubber merely mis-worded his second quote "Only an idiot would not see HE was correct" and meant "to this point in time"... I guess that is his out. OTOH, most sensible people will carefully word their statements on race because they know how sensitive an issue it is and won't want to be perceived as being on the racist side. The fact that Clubber doesn't do that is further proof that he may be a racist.

    In conclusion, my analysis of the thread leads me think it is probable (>50%) that Clubber is a racist but it is not certain (100%).

    Now might be a good time for Clubber to make some statement unambiguously distancing himself from racism.
  • Clubber
    15 years ago
    Dougster,

    Nice try, but your logic is tragically flawed by one statement.

    "This time Clubber did not qualify it with "to this point in time", meaning the status of black today had proven Wallace correct."

    The entire premise of his statement had nothing to do with the status of blacks, other then there was a difference between the two races. Yes, as you stated, blacks have made great progress. Also, as he predicted, white have narrowed the gap by going backwards. Of these two trends, I do not believe anyone can prove them incorrect.

    Now, as to who is a PROVEN racist, mg has himself stated that he is. He has stated he supports Affirmative Action. Affirmative action is nothing but institutional racism, where certain racial groups are given rights or benefits, or get preferential treatment. And as this occurs, he is supporting reverse racism since members of a historically disadvantaged group are given these right or benefits at the expense of those of a historically advantaged group.

  • MisterGuy
    15 years ago
    "The statement you attribute to me, well a LIE! Saying I agreed with the statement, a LIE!"

    You know what you said & what you agreed with you moron. The record is very, very clear!

    "Imagine, someone so stupid they point out their own LIE."

    Nice try at projection there old man...

    "The entire premise of his statement had nothing to do with the status of blacks, other then there was a difference between the two races."

    Yea, in that one (whites) was superior to the other (blacks)...sheesh...

    "Also, as he predicted, white have narrowed the gap by going backwards."

    Nonsense.

    "Now, as to who is a PROVEN racist, mg has himself stated that he is."

    No, I never have. I am quite open to people of other races & diversity, I have dated a few black women in the past, I have had many black friends when I was growing up in a very diverse community, and I have no problem at all with black dancers.

    "He has stated he supports Affirmative Action. Affirmative action is nothing but institutional racism, where certain racial groups are given rights or benefits, or get preferential treatment. And as this occurs, he is supporting reverse racism since members of a historically disadvantaged group are given these right or benefits at the expense of those of a historically advantaged group."

    IMHO, there is no such thing as "reverse racism". True racism involves the use of power, and it's kind of hard to believe that whites in the USA are at the "mercy" of non-whites in the year 2009.

    All affirmative action is is a group of policies that take gender, race, or ethnicity into account (among *many* other aspects) in an attempt to promote equal opportunity & increase ethnic diversity in workplaces & schools. The focus of such policies ranges from employment & public contracting goals, to educational outreach & health programs. The purpose of affirmative action is basically to maximize diversity and its benefits in all levels of society and to redress perceived disadvantages due to overt, institutional, or involuntary discrimination, which, in the USA, is well-documented.

    The "problem" with this, from the Right-wing's point of view, is that they basically don't believe in the concept of equal opportunity or diversity.
  • Dougster
    15 years ago
    MisterGay: " I have dated a few black women in the past"

    I think MisterGay means 'dated', as in paid them for sex, since that is the only interaction a loser like him has with women.
  • how
    15 years ago
    MG claimed, "... from the Right-wing's point of view, is that they basically don't believe in the concept of equal opportunity or diversity."

    Nonsense. This is a damn lie, told by damned liars. I am confident you would consider me "right-wing," and I can tell you I'm 100% for equal opportunity, as are all my "right-wing" acquaintances and friends. And diversity is a matter of course...being against diversity would be as nonsensical as being against the height of Pikes Peak, for example.

    Affirmative action is explicitly in opposition to equal opportunity. Instead, it aims at some perceived equal outcome. Huge difference, and wrong for any government to try to impose.
  • Clubber
    15 years ago
    Took the quotes right from YOUR posts mg, er LIAR!

    Until you establish a semblance of credibility, I shall ignore you.
  • how
    15 years ago
    MG said, "IMHO, there is no such thing as 'reverse racism'. True racism involves the use of power, and it's kind of hard to believe that whites in the USA are at the 'mercy' of non-whites in the year 2009."

    If that's your humble opinion, then your humble opinion is ridiculous. You do not get to redefine terms in hopes of winning a point in a discussion. Words mean what they mean.

    Since 1933, the word "racism" has meant "a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race; racial prejudice or discrimination"

    Anyone can hold such beliefs. To suggest otherwise to "immunize" some people from such universally-loathsome attitudes is a pitiful attempt to shut down meaningful discussion on the matter.
  • MisterGuy
    15 years ago
    "Affirmative action is explicitly in opposition to equal opportunity."

    No, it isn't...it is merely a means to the end of equal opportunity. Someday, it will be unnecessary, but that day has not yet come IMHO.
    ------------------------------------------

    "Took the quotes right from YOUR posts mg"

    No, I took YOUR quotes right from YOUR posts, liar.

    "Until you establish a semblance of credibility, I shall ignore you."

    No, you really won't...just like always. You'll just run away when it's blatantly apparent that you've lost, period.
    --------------------------------------

    "You do not get to redefine terms in hopes of winning a point in a discussion."

    Too bad that's NOT what I've tried to do.

    "Since 1933, the word 'racism' has meant 'a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race; racial prejudice or discrimination'

    Anyone can hold such beliefs."

    Of course anyone can hold such beliefs, but that really, practically speaking of course, is just a prejudice that's occurs in one's mind. Actions (and there are all different types of actions that one or a group of people can take) against another are what truly hurt when it comes to racism, which is why I feel that true racism involves one group using their power (which can come from all sorts of different places) against another group of people that are of a different race.

    BTW, calm the fuck down "how", no one has called you a racist, because you simply haven't shown any such traits here, unlike clubber...
  • how
    15 years ago
    how: "Affirmative action is explicitly in opposition to equal opportunity."

    MG: "No, it isn't...it is merely a means to the end of equal opportunity. Someday, it will be unnecessary, but that day has not yet come IMHO."
    _____________

    how: Equal opportunity is the Beginning. Equal outcome is the End. (Relative to your expression "means to the end...") Trying to create equal outcome is chasing the wind, and is wrong for the government to be involved in, regardless. Ensuring equal opportunity is important and I can acknowledge the government's role in that. Affirmative Action in no way limits itself to ensuring equal opportunity, and in fact destroys equal opportunity--explicitly and deliberately.
  • MisterGuy
    15 years ago
    "Equal opportunity is the Beginning. Equal outcome is the End"

    ...in your Right-wing opinion that is. You see, this is what I mean about some "conservatives" not being in favor of equal opportunity. Thanks for proving my point!

    "Ensuring equal opportunity is important and I can acknowledge the government's role in that"

    ...which is what Affirmative Action is all about. Look, I wish it wasn't necessary, but to say the USA has moved past it's blatantly racist past is a real, cruel joke. As long as there are people around like clubber, we're going to need some AA.
  • Dougster
    15 years ago
    So let's see if you had a WASP kid and a black kid both equally qualified for a college but the college was low on its "black quota" should you:

    a) flip a coin since race shouldn't be a factor
    b) give it to the black kid as dictated by affirmative action

    I think the right answer is clearly a), but since MisterGay thinks b) he is clearly a racist.

    MISTEGAY LOSES AGAIN!
  • Clubber
    15 years ago
    Dougster,

    Don't you know that racists can only be white?
  • how
    15 years ago
    MG, my "Equal Opportunity" v "Equal Outcome" explanation proved my point, and destroyed yours. Your reply indicates that you lack the basic understanding necessary to communicate on this topic. Peace.
  • MisterGuy
    15 years ago
    "MG, my 'Equal Opportunity' v 'Equal Outcome' explanation proved my point, and destroyed yours"

    ...in your Right-wing dreams that is. I accept your surrender as well "how"...
  • Clubber
    15 years ago
    how,

    Interesting how someone is so functionally illiterate that they can't even grasp when they have been proven wrong. Yet when one quits wasting valuable time with them, they think they proved their point.

    Sad, very truly sad.
  • MisterGuy
    15 years ago
    "Interesting how someone is so functionally illiterate that they can't even grasp when they have been proven wrong."

    It's also interesting how some old men on here can't seem to grasp the extreme irony when they make statements like this that fit them to a tee...lol...
  • Dougster
    15 years ago
    MisterGay is definitely so dumb that he doesn't realize when he is wrong. In his mind he is always right. I still remember the time when claimed AIG was worth $1 trillion and would not back down on it. LOL!
  • Clubber
    15 years ago
    Sad, very sad.
  • how
    15 years ago
    Careful what y'all say here (me, too) -- MG or one like him will report us to [email protected] to the POTUS who tells us "I don't want to hear a lot of talkin' [from anyone who disagrees with me]!"
  • Clubber
    15 years ago
    how,

    I already reported myself. I figure if everyone does that, they will be overwhelmed and just give the whole thing up. Worse case, they get in my face, I know many good lawyers that would love to take a case like this to the Supreme Court, if need be.
You must be a member to leave a comment.Join Now
Got something to say?
Start your own discussion