Rob's House

I don't think so. I know he's the consensus guy, but is Aaron Rogers really better than Brees, Brady, and Manning (assuming Manning's struggles last year were injury related)? Maybe, but not necessarily. LeBron has separation from the pack.

I'd go even further and say none. I don't think there's a QB right now who's nearly universally recognized as the greatest in the league by a good margin.

Percy Harvin will lead the team in yards from scrimmage.

So basically, McCoy suffered from a strong case of confirmation bias and was as wrong as he could be about the racial thing, but he was right then and he's right now?

When was that?

I doubt I'd enjoy the conversation. This strikes me as ironic.

That's the one I was looking for. Not that the others don't have their place, but if they're serious about making a significant reduction in global fossil fuel consumption that's really the only realistic option I see. Interestingly, most "green" types are opposed to that too.

When I first read that I thought it was an amateur site where anyone could create a profile and write. It's not even that his points and information were bad as much as it is the way he expressed such strong feelings and certainty that's grossly disproportionate to the nature and weight of the evidence and strength of the logic he's using to get there. And he tries way too hard to be too cute, clever, and witty, which ultimately comes off as immature and annoying.

I'm having some now. It's not bad.

Are there any proposals for what will replace fossil fuels?

If you spent half as much time trying to understand the point as you did actively trying to misunderstand it you'd be utterly humiliated by your contributions to this thread. Although you did make it very entertaining for the rest of us.

Bernard Hopkins has something you can put in your mouth and smoke on.

Just because his strategy is not immediately apparent to you does not mean he doesn't have one, and it would be both irresponsible and idiotic for anyone in power to assume as much. He's a calculating and dominating man which should be concerning to us. Especially since the guy we're sending to deal with him is a gutless talk show host playing the part of president.

I've never subscribed to this line of thought, especially in team sports. Too much is up to chance. If Joseph Addai had fumbled away the SB win would Manning not be great? Put differently, Using this argument you could claim Scotty Pippen was great and Barkley was not, when in reality Pippen wasn't fit to shine Barkley's shoes. And is Barry Switzer a great NFL football coach? He won a SB. Andy Reid never won a SB but I consider him a great coach for consistently having his team in the mix for years despite having generally inferior talent.

It's about the fact that "phobia" is used to characterize anything in any way disapproving or, or in many cases simply not celebratory of, homosexuality regardless of whether it has anything to do with fear. (phobia means fear of). It's a semantic issue. not a philosophical one.

Ha! Don't I feel like a bit of a dumbass for posting that "IN" ****.

Oh, an observation. Who the !@#$ are you, man; Isaac Newton?

We're still waiting to find out if his outie has been converted to an innie.

No, I got it. You were either being dishonest or you got caught with your pants down. My money's on the latter.

So you were just throwing out an irrelevant non sequitur in response to a comment about the Feds violating equal protection?

I don't think it's a winning argument, but I wouldn't call it dumb. Far greater stretches of law and logic have carried the day before the Supreme Court.

Does anyone know if he's had his package hacked off?

Nice try, dipshit. You said the Equal Protection clause only applies to the states. You stand by that?

Are you a strict textualist now? Because IIRC you view the SC as the sole arbiter of constitutionality. Have you changed your tune on that?