Bigfatbillsfan

Yeah, that's pretty stupid. Hopefully the judge wont be on the bench for long. So I guess the judge would be willing to someone off it they attack him provided the attacker's religion says that people dressing up as judges insults his religion.

Are you going to actually post the link? Not to mention if you were to go with the last presidential election North Carolina would be a blue state.

They were both stupid as hell. One for being such an asshat as to go out dressed as something he knew was going to cause a fight. The other for giving him what he was so obviously fishing for. The judge should have hit them both with a fine, or jail, or whatever the punishment would have been.

9 blue states weren't listed. Almost half of them were red. Do you think you could post the map you're using to denote red from blue?

I know it's no use in arguing with this kind of stupidity, but it's just so fun to keep watching you make a fool out of yourself. I know you have a hard time with reading comprehension but I said "almost" all of the worlds climatologists not "all". Changing that one word changes the entire meaning of the statement. Now we're adding Obamacare and Scott Brown into the picture? And I'm still trying to figure out how Occam's razor proves you right when your "theory" keeps getting more and more complex. And no, I don't think this is a case of groupthink. There isn't even a potential for it in this political climate.

Is this board really that important to you? Are you going to get an award for the best written posts? There are times that I really like to be on here and get into the debate and other times when I have better things to do. So I guess to me this is just another text messaging "thingy".

I think it makes me look dyslexic. Which I am. What's your excuse? If your argument is dependent upon what statistics are going to be manipulated you don't have an argument to be had. And I'm having a hard time finding a map that places Nevada, Arizona, and New Hampshire as blue states. Massachusetts has two Ts by the way, I misspelled it to begin with since I have trouble recognizing double letters sometimes. But if you're going to make a point out of correcting my spelling to try and make me look stupid you might want to proofread your posts as not to make yourself look stupid in the process.

This argument is so stupid I have a hard time believing it isn't satire.

You may want to rethink your argument.Arizona, Nevada, and New Hampshire are red states. You might be able to argue Nevada and New Hampshire based on membership of their state legislatures. But I live in Arizona, and I can tell you fore sure it's a read state. As well as number 3 on the your list. And have you noticed the absence of California, New York, and Massachusetts? aren't those three of the most liberal states in the union? If your argument had and merit those three should make the list easily.

Are you serious? OK, lets see if I can get this across. An example of Occam's razor would be something like: Millions of datapoints from thousands of locations all over the world point to a warming trend. Therefore we conclude there is a warming trend. An example of something that is not Occam's Razor would be: Almost all of the world's climatologists are conspiring to dupe the public out of billions of dollars by claiming that the world is warming. Now here's an 8 step theory as to how they plan to do it. Occam's razor basically states that you need not multiply assumptions beyond necessity to explain a conclusion. Such as if you have two theories that explain the same thing, the one that is less complex would tend to be the right one. Now do you see how it doesn't work? And I'll stay away from your idea that this is somehow the result of group-think as not to embarrass you.

The above would be the exact opposite of a Occam's razor. Not to mention that this really isn't a situation where Occam's razor would apply.

That's what I was saying in my prior post. We can look at what the debt will be in 2021 based on if every thing stays exactly the same. However as the economy changes, both the world and at home, so will the CBO's models.

I think most would agree that global climate change is happening with the general tendency being toward warming. It just isn't happening as fast as it was predicted. However most of the hottest years on record are with in the past ten. It's the cause of it that is up for debate, The way I look at this however is we know it's happening. We know that CFCs and CO2 cause greenhouse effect and that the world is warming as we are pumping massive amounts of these gasses into the atmosphere. It's kind of like if I have high blood pressure. I should stop eating salt. The salt might not be what's causing my blood pressure to spike but I cut it out of my diet anyway.

Could you provide a little more context for your quote? Where did it come from and is it from an e-mail or a research paper?

I would argue, though, that the CBO projections will change also depending on the direction of the economy. If the economy gets worse, which I think it will do before it gets better, add even more to that 12 trillion. If, for some reason, it gets better I think we'll see a for less steep increase in our debt.

By your own logic, an answer like this would insinuate that you don't have an answer yourself. So can you tell us what makes Detroit such and exception?

Not me, nor the article made any suck quote. I just pointed out that your opinion, which you stated as fact, was being presented as fact without the full contingent of data. In my opinion, it was a stupid policy also. However, I am willing to concede that it is only my opinion.

And as I said before, this is nothing more than your expressed opinion. And your opinion, no matter how forcefully you stated it, does not constitute fact.

And 50 Pence is half a pound. So if you are paying 50p on the pound your are paying a 50% tax.

I don't know, why don't you go ahead and explain it to us?

Well, what you actually did tailored a thread to the fact that you are unable to comprehend what you read or did not completely read the article. It's not that the 50p tax caused total revenue to drop, but that it didn't raise the amount it was expected to. These also are numbers that come out of self assessment. Plus I think that we can all agree that a 50% tax is extreme in any case. It also goes on to explain the reason the final numbers have not been collected yet is due to the fact that they have been able to compile all the information yet. Lastly it says that roughly 20% of Britain's citizens that pay by self assessment pay within the last few hours before the deadline. Overall, the article makes a good case for the fact that a 50% tax on the upper class is too high. It does not however even attempt imply that it's case is fact.

Well, that's what you say...

No, I' m serious. PETA is so f'd up that a person who can formulate a plan to hire a contract killer are less insane. You ever see the South Park episode where the kids visit a PETA camp and the PETA people are all, like, married to the animals and having babies with them? They're really not that far off from what PEtA people are really like.

Yeah, she's way more in touch with reallity than anyone with PETA. :-)

How do you know she was a member of PETA?