Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:Please... (Score 1) 205

You're thinking of the phone they gave Barry. He used to think he was posting directly to twitter. It actually went to a staff of people that took what he said, messaged it so it was whacko crazy left, passed it by a focus group, took a poll on it, rewrote it accordingly, then posted it after it was well polished.

Sometimes they just gave him an etch-a-sketch.

Comment Re: News for Nazis (Score 1) 1501

Citations please? Yea, I didn't think so. You just didn't like him so you're grabbing onto anything to support your view. Even if it's total BS.
You held onto Hillary even though she's a traitor (The e-mail server problem is a violation of the Espionage act, so she's a traitor), she's saw to it when she was secretary of state to sell uranium to the Russians - . She's corrupt as hell with her "foundation" that's reminiscent of Evita Perone, the fascist dictator's wife.... and so on and so on and so on. You'll overlook everything just as people overlooked Hitler's flaws. Very few differences between Hitler and Hillary when you get right down to it.

So racism? Example?
Sexism? Example?
Cruelty? Example?

There are none, even though Hillary's campaign tried even to buy people to say he was sexist. One by one we showed they were simply paid actors. Good actors. They fooled you. Soros had a lot to lose after all. He lost billions when she lost. He spent billions on her winning so he could make a trillion. You're what he calls - "a useful idiot." Not being a troll here, they actually think that.

Comment Re:White Power Rangers...ASSEMBLE! (Score 1) 310

Trump's popularity with white males was in no small part because he appealed to their sense of victimhood. Jobs stolen by immigrants, minorities given priority at their expense, constantly accused of being racist and sexist. It's standard alt-right doctrine, and the narrative running through everything of Breitbart which we know is Trump's favourite source of news (being a prolific tweeter has some benefits).

Take your head out of your ass. Look around. Trump won because of minorities including women, blacks, hispanics and so on. People that realized Hillary is just a despot puppet of Soros. She lost Bigly in this election. As for victimhood, did you check out the BS with the woman march for Saturday? It was started by white women, quickly degraded as black women and others claimed they were even more victims and of course no other victim can understand this. What a joke. Even the Washington Post made a joke by featuring the march with pink, and a male symbol. Alt-right? What a joke as well. Fascism is leftist, not right. Obviously you have no idea about the difference between a fascist, socialist and a communist. They hate each other by the way.

That's the right's creed now. White men are oppressed, so should vote for a white male bigot like Trump who will look out for them. All progressive policies, all attempts to eliminate racism and sexism are just schemes to oppress white people and silence free speech, and the vast SJW army must be defeated by electing someone like Trump who doesn't give a shit about imitating disabled reporters or grabbing women by the genitals. The establishment itself is reverse-racist! Quick, appoint some white supremacists to his staff!

Ok, first of all you realize he never actually grabbed a woman's crotch, nor has he appointed any white supremacists, right? The Democrats had an actual KKK Grand Dragon named Senator Byrd. Served for years. That was OK because he was a Democrat, somehow. This was recently, Hillary was giving him tongue kiss. Democrats keep minorities on their government plantation and that's the problem. Eventually they run out of other people's money. That's where we are today, about 21T in debt thanks to Obama and the Democrats.

Comment Re:His reserve chute was a dummy. (Score 1) 139

There is one theory out there that it wasn't a guy in the first place. It was a chick dressed up as a man. Another one I think says that it was a guy, later had SRS to become a woman.

Didn't know about the dummy chute. As Toyota used to say - "oh what a feeling."... if you go to pull a rip cord and nothing happens.

Comment Re:" it was even a Boeing aircraft" (Score 1) 139

Not the point. He knew how to lower the stairs.

Not impressed. I know how to lower the stairs. It's not hard. After watching someone, you'll know too. It's not that hard.
As for being familiar with a 727, they're a dime a dozen. Very few differences between the one DB Cooper hijacked and the last one I flew, probably back in the 1990s.

Comment Re:NOT FAIR! (Score 1) 205 []

That's an odd report for so many reasons. NC really brought themselves into the future, done by the Republicans. Research triangle, etc. They rival sunnyvale. Now all kinds of foreigners are being brought in, it's shifting the demographics so it'll probably go blue soon. Funny how they belly ache. Maryland is an example of a blue state and they have all those things. Gerrymandering, spending the state into bankruptcy,etc. Then elect a Republican governor to bail them out, like right now. Very cut throat in that state, like NY state. They even put my MD lawyer in jail, even though he's very much for the Democrats and it was over BS. One line in a ledger. He deposited money into the wrong account by mistake. That is all they could find. All this because he disagreed with them, once. Man, they stripped him like piranha after a cow. Even though he helped them a great deal over the years. Nothing I or anyone else could do about it. He even had former governors testifying on his behalf. None of that mattered. NC isn't really an example as the report says. They're trying to stop the new governor from trashing the state. Just like you'd probably want to keep a thief out of your house. They don't know it's a losing battle. The report is like I said - very odd. Like a petulant child that didn't get their way or something? Could be I suppose.

The Republicans have been gunning for her (Hillary) for decades and have yet to make a single thing stick. There's hardly another politician who has had such intense scrutiny. And yet, still nothing. Mr Trump on the other hand isn't even trying to hide his corruption, but for some reason a lot of people don't care nearly so much if he does it.

Gunning for? More like they've got. They took both of their law licenses years ago. They've had all kinds of trouble over the years. If the Justice Dept would have issued paperwork like they were supposed to, she'd be in jail right now. I have a friend that studied her. Man, study her for a while. You'd never believe it if I told you here. As for Trump, NY State has been "gunning" after him for decades. Democrats don't like success. They've even tried to set him up. No, he's not corrupt. If he were there is no doubt they would have got him. I understand NY State may get Hillary. She's violated state law it seems. Stay tuned, could get interesting.

Oldest what? Democracy? Nope. Republic? Nope. Country? Nope. Government? Nope. The US may be many things, but oldest anything it is not.

Why don't you think the US is the oldest? Lefty propaganda maybe?
Oldest Democracy, Republic and Government (YES) -

(being called a liberal) It's more of a compliment than an accusation.

You're kidding. It's like being called a thief, liar, bigot, despot. Good case in point right now - you must make our gay cake or we'll sue you out of business because your religion, anything you say - fuck you. Yet people who want to go to Washington for Trump's inauguration - now they're bullying people into not participating. Even after a 16 year old singer named Jackie Evancho, who even has a trans sister. That's what libs are all about, controlling everyone else into their warped world. Screw everything else - my point on murdering civil discourse. Entertainers, artists, sports people - stay out of politics. (Republicans,Democrats) buy (theater tickets, shoes, art, etc) too. It's a gig. STFU. If they don't want to do it, fine. The Republicans aren't like Democrats and won't make them do what they don't want to do.

The crazy left has hijacked the Democratic party and murdered civil discourse.

That sounds much more like a description of the right and Republicans than the left. What with the gerrymandering, fillibustering and playing chicken with a default.
But you're sound very much like the model of a modern right winger. Figure out all the stuff you're doing wrong then yell really loudly that the other side is doing it and hope no one notices. For some reason this often works pretty well. However, eventually reality will collide with your politics (it is already colliding) and then your tactics will seem a little hollow since reality doesn't care what you say.

Ok. You're trying to yank my chain or you've had your head firmly in the ground. Obama does exactly that. They scream about the Republicans doing exactly what they are doing. The Republicans have been AWOL for the past 8 years. I mean they were there but they weren't there. They didn't do their job. Even so, the Democrats control the fewest elected posts since any time since reconstruction. You know, when the Democrats were all for slavery and the Republicans put them down.

Not that I'm defending the Republicans. I don't want to do that. They need a lot better leadership. What they have sucks. Especially that MF named McConnell in the Senate. We managed to get rid of the other MF named Harry Reid (replaced with a new crazy MF named Schumer). The republicans are just incompetent. The Democrats are corrupt, sometimes incompetent. Just about all of them need to be flushed.

No, I'm not a "right winger". I'm right in the middle, almost exactly in the middle. I'd feel like captain obvious saying you're left wingnut. I could go on to discuss things, however it seems you're simply missing way too much history and knowledge about this stuff. I don't know every state, however I know how the vast majority of them work, and the country.

Comment Re:NOT FAIR! (Score 1) 205

Hi. When you make a statement like " it's not a Democrat governed state (NC) which has been declared no longer a democracy by the Independent Electoral Commisson.", it would be really nice if you could put a link to what it is your talking about. I googled it and it seems to be talking about election fraud, however both sides aren't even claiming that. Hillary was though Jill, however recounts showed us that Hillary actually lost more when they recounted so they STFU about that. It exposed her fraud. Hillary is probably as corrupt of a politician as we've ever had to try to run for Pres. No doubt, if you or I did anything like she did nobody would probably hear from us again. At least outside of a jail.

Probably worth pointing out that we're not a Democracy. Never claimed to be. We're a Republic. The US has the very best form of Government the world has ever seen. We're also the oldest.

You seem to be a typical Democrat. You're projecting your shortcomings on others. I put blame where it belongs. I was accused of being a liberal when GW was in office. I'd still be blaming the Republicans. No, they both have plenty of blame to go around. I think GW did what he thought was right and he did it to the best of his ability. Obama if you read his book "Dreams from my Father", he tells us he's going to try to destroy the US. Don't believe me? He'll read it to you himself. Make the US just another country. Withdraw us from our friends, really take it down and he has. The crazy left has hijacked the Democratic party and murdered civil discourse. That's why if you don't believe what they do totally, then all the terrible accusations come out. Racist, homophobic, and so on and so on, anything to get you to shut up. That's just what the Nazis did. All leftist.

Comment Re: we saw that the science was falsified by the C (Score 1) 371

Wow. Just wow. Where do I start? How about the MIT paper - written in 2005, so before Al Gore and other's claim that GW is causing them. Never the less, we have a lot more CO2 in the atmosphere and we have fewer. You like NOAA's stuff - . Look towards the bottom for a bar graph. If I were to take 2000-today by year and mix it up the years by that decade with say the 1950s randomized in the 1950s (so it's not obvious which one is which, however with correct data for that decade) and see if you can tell which one is which, I bet you'd lose that one. Unless you really studied the data carefully. I honestly don't understand how you can say there are more and they are worse. The NOAA graph just doesn't show that, at least not yet. Maybe next month it will after they "adjust" it so it's not a problem anymore like they're doing with the other stuff.

(previous stuff I showed you) You looked at the graphs, saw the data was different and that didn't concern you? The "adjustments" are always in favor of GW. If you're a TA or a Professor going over someone's scientific work, that is one of the things you look out for. Faked or wrong data. The fact NASA has been caught red handed changing this stuff REALLY should bother you.

Here are some references, but look below
You like the telegraph?

Here's one for you and you can see it with your own (as the Eagles would say - lying) eyes - Hansen's page (He no longer works for nasa BTW)- . Not as I remembered it. That's because they keep changing it -*/h... Check out the 2007/2/24 version to today. Wow, same page where he admits in 2007 that the 1930s was the hottest decade on record. Now 1930s looks a lot colder. I don't think anyone would say the 1930s was the hottest on record as Hansen had to admit to in the early 2000s looking at the new graph. He claimed 1990s were until he was shown to be wrong. He claimed it was a Y2K bug. I don't think anyone believed that one.

Greenland - what about Venice Italy? It wasn't just Greenland, it was global.

To me this captain obvious moment (shown by the documented change in web page above) really should concern you, and make you mad that you've been lied to all of this time. Could go on and show you page after page or as that other site did, he overlaid them for you. Not that you seem to care, or perhaps you don't understand the material. I'm reminded a lot that other people aren't like me. Things that are painfully obvious to me aren't obvious to others.

Now, about concensus? Yea, not so much.

Well I've enjoyed going down memory lane a bit here if you're not persuaded by the very definitive evidence I've shown you, you probably never will be. I understand I'm asking a lot because a great deal of money has been spent to make you believe, change data, and so on. MMGW is all about making a bunch of money and control.

The comparison to tobacco is disingenuous BTW. I was a scientist back in those days, in the 1970s. I felt it was clear. Again, I could find where the tobacco industry had faked data and weren't being honest. It wasn't hard even without something like the Internet. This in a time when science wasn't so good, calling a lot of things cancer causing that weren't. Showing other people without something like the Internet was just about impossible.

I'll leave you with a final thought. Say it is. Say CO2 really is causing MMGW (You have no idea all the problems I could give you on this one). How does paying Al Gore (among others) a bunch of money fix that? It won't even begin to change things. Explain how we can change what we're doing to get back to say 1920s levels of CO2, they're really asking for pre-industrial so more like 1870s levels. I'll be very generous and say even to the 1990s levels. If you look into this, you have a few volumes of information to understand. You'll quickly understand why this is a fallacy. One way might be to eliminate around 5/6 of the worlds population. 6-7 Billion give or take. 100 years, even 200 years from now, I don't think it would even make a difference. We will warm up either way.

Comment Re: we saw that the science was falsified by the C (Score 1) 371

I listened and looked. Trouble is, I don't think you do. The second one with the news reporter is just damning if you bothered to watch it. So I'm disappointed, however not surprised.

Let's look at your link to hurricanes. To preface it, have you ever read the book "how to lie with statistics." I still own the copy I bought when I was in college in the 1980s. Lend it out from time to time, however I see it's online as a PDF now. You should read it. You really should read it so you know when you're being lied to. So what does the article say? Really not a whole lot, it also begins in the 1970s. Ok, this is your first major indication you're being lied to. Why just the 1970s? If they go further back, it disproves what they're trying to indoctrinate you with. They'd have you believe that bad storms never happened before. Hogg wash. In fact HOGG Island, NYC. 1890. Yes, 1890. I can cite plenty of other storms past that. So no, they are not stronger and they are not more frequent, and they know it. If they really were, oh boy - you'd really hear about it I'm sure. They would be in our face.

Your first citation about rising global temperatures. Here's a spot that I think you don't realize or understand. Things are warming up. We're not denying that. In fact, if you go back to Venice, you'll see water was rising up in the 1300s when they were trying to keep the Adriatic out way back then. Then we hit a little ice age - which we're coming out of right now. We are in fact going back to where we used to be before the little ice age. Please consider this article - . So this is showing you that Greenland was MUCH warmer than it is right now, and not that long ago (geologically speaking). At this point you should understand that this Man Man GW is almost certainly just a scam.

As for the fuel companies, do you really think that? You think that they won't adapt? Those guys will make a bunch of money either way. It's a red herring argument to fool people. What I can show you is Al Gore makes a boatload . I think it's been well documented on /. that in "science" you want to show MMGW - lots of funds. Want to show MMGW is a scam - you'd get tarred and feathered. You won't get a dime. It clearly isn't what a Democratic administration wants. It's all about control and money.

However plenty of real scientists throughout the world are speaking up. That's why they are having such a hard time. There just is no legitimate science behind it. Again, my citations and you can look up what they're saying like I did.

So just because I showed you in an easy to understand video you don't believe it? ok.
1) Algore was a D student in science at Harvard -
2) Teacher was Roger Reville, who told him he was wrong - Yea, I know, a youtube video, it's actually a transcript from a chemical film based motion picture back in 1980. The citation also goes into Mr. Armstrong, and so on.

There are plenty of other citations about the same thing if for some reason you don't like cnsnews or the youtube transcript.

Could go on. However one thing is very clear to me - if Prof Reville where here today, he's say it's not a factor. That's what the real numbers show. The numbers before they are "adjusted". That other citation I gave you shows that graphically.

So where am I wrong? Algore didn't really have Reville for a professor at Harvard? He didn't really get a D? He hasn't systematically set up conditions to make himself *FILTHY* rich? With the rise in CO2 for the past 30 years the temperature we see today really is on track? The little ice age didn't really happen? Vikings really weren't in Greenland before the little ice age when it was much warmer? Could go on and on with this... This is just for the past 1000 years, if I go back further it's a LOT more problematic.

Comment Re: we saw that the science was falsified by the C (Score 1) 371

I have a feeling you didn't listen to the presentation. He IS a scientist. He explains his credentials in the beginning if you listened, or maybe you don't recognize them? He founded the weather channel. He explains how we've all been lied to. There is no mountain of evidence. There is no scientific consensus. He explains how they came up with the 97% of scientist claim - they are anonymous "scientists" by the way and there weren't even 100 of them. So we have no idea if it was just a number pulled out of someone's mind or not. Probably is just a made up number.

Here's a reporter that looked into this as well. He shows you the game they're playing so no matter what happens, they "predicted" it. -

Here is a site where a guy has methodically documented the fraud -

To quote you - "Sorry, I can't help anyone so doggedly determined to ignore all the inconvenient parts of reality." - such as the models not working time and time and time again. Einstein put it well - you don't need hundreds of scientists to prove him wrong, you just need one. It only takes one counter example to prove your theory wrong. We've proven Man made GW is wrong, many times and you know it if you've been paying attention. Do I need to send you links to Al Gore's hurricane/weater predictions of 10 years ago? Pull up the laughable predictions from the 1990s? We've had fewer and weaker hurricanes.

You need to know when you're being lied to. That guy lying to you is Al Gore. He's made about 500 million off this lie so far. Not bad for a guy that got this idea from a science class at Harvard that he only earned a D in the class.

Slashdot Top Deals

"The algorithm to do that is extremely nasty. You might want to mug someone with it." -- M. Devine, Computer Science 340