UConn James

Don't you have some sled dogs to feed?!?

Says the guy gettin' rich off of Alaska oil checks! [/...lybob voice] BTW, I'm a Wonka fan for the candy.

Well, the thing here isn't that they're trying to prove something is, they're saying that data used by various and sundry groups was wrong. If I have a problem with your cross-pollination experiment, and it's obvious to me that you used the savoy cabbage pollination stick rather than the Brussels sprout stick, then really, what can I do to disprove your findings by doing it properly myself? You'll be able to say that you got a different result rather than that you totally ed the goose with sloppy, inaccurate work. I must've missed the part where they claimed that this op-ed was a scientific paper. What they're charging is that the data set and predictions for GW studies were inaccurate by a statistically significant %. Then they offered a reason why this might've happened with the generally very reliable "follow the money trail." They're also saying that the conditions in the scientific community are such that anyone with differing opinion or who doesn't "Harumph!" loudly enough is committing career suicide, and so the result is that climate science as we know and love it is more about peer pressure than peer review. I don't think the WSJ is an especially bad forum for voicing these concerns to the general public.

Well, I did write "or such".... Gotta be careful in getting the model that qualifies. And just to note, I'm not doing this myself. Just saying that it could be done. I'm rockin' a cheapo 4GB Emerson MP3 player I got for X-mas. (Hey, at least it's not a Zune! )

For the inventive, one could go on ebay, amazon or such and buy one for ~$40-$50 and get one a new one with a $129 msrp. Just sayin'.

Yeah. I'm not really high on the whole CBS reality-show cross-pollination thing.

"Answers are easy. It's asking the right questions that is hard!" --- The Fourth Doctor I mean, between the Cassandra Complex / 'We're All Gonna Die!!' set and the ones who shrug and say 'Meh!...' (both of which have their own agenda and funding conflicts) there had to be something. I have to admit I'm something of a fence-sitter on this issue. We don't know what we don't know. Hell, we don't even know what we think we know. All I know is, making predictions, nevermind policy proposals, under these these conditions can play the devil.

Probably someone who glanced at the headline of that and ran with it. The team will have him take a physical probably sometime in March before OTAs. If it looks good then, they'll start talking seriously. But for right now, you don't blindly commit to a 30-year-old RB --- in a league where RBs have an average career of under 2 seasons (a full year less than the career-length average for all players) b/c of the pounding they take --- coming off of a leg injury.

WSJ | Will Buffett Avoid the Buffett Rule? : The sage of Omaha is already positioned to shield most of his rising wealth from such a tax.

Lie Free or Pie Hard!

Bribes, Chinese Mob Ties Alleged at Casino of Gingrich's Money Man

Captain Foresight kicks your ass every time. I mean... he knows when he's going to win.

I like Gov. Susana Martinez in New Mexico. Good chance that locks up Florida AND NM, and it puts Colorado in play. There's no way Obama wins NC, Virginia or Indiana again. Michigan has a lot of ties with the Romney family. He would then only need to win one of the traditional swing states --- Penn. or Ohio. And Ohio is looking pretty red. Also, people are forgetting the electoral vote changes from the census that favor Republicans.

Why not? All he has to do is say "States' Rights! We did in Massachusetts what we thought would work for Massachusetts. Not North Dakota, not Florida, not Wyoming! I never said this model would work for every state or for the entire country. With a repeal and replace action --- with freeing up health insurance across state lines, tort reform and measures that will reduce costs first rather than simply have people line up to sign up --- each state should be able to decide what it wants to do, given their specific situations." Win.

I think he's the dude who played Chandler on "Friends."

IIRC, we need to have ~3% growth in GDP each year to stay flat, to account for the population increase. This is like the number of people at a party going from 10 to 15 and bringing a 10-inch pie instead of a 9-inch pie. Sure, there's more pie, but there's more people.

You can't make this up. Newt hasn't gotten much support from elected Republicans who served with him in Congress and know him personally. Probably most of all because they know his nomination would make for a sinking tide among moderates and independents. But Gingrich did pick up the support of a former Congressional colleague last month: Duke Cunningham. Yes, that Duke Cunningham. Link

Too amusing not to share... Newt Gingrich Pointing At Things Condescendingly: The Fifteen Fingers Of Newt

On the whole, exploring the cosmos with unmanned vehicles and satellites is probably the most efficient use of $ at this point in time, combined with more research on technology that would make extra-planetary living easier (i.e. travel/transport of materials by supermagnet 'elevator,' artificial gravity, etc. We're still at a stage where a spacewalk and changing a camera on a satellite is a Big Deal, cost a ton of money and which almost went awry because of one stuck bolt. What does it profit to colonize the moon for what everyone knows would cost many times that estimate? What would we do there? What's the purpose? I don't mind the boldness of it so much, but especially considering that we don't have a commissioned shuttle to do manned travel into space at present, the timeframe is in no way realistic. And then again, there's the $ thing where we're already $1.2T in the hole annually. We have a hard enough time with life on earth.... (BTW, when moon statehood occurs, would we get to rename Congress the "Intergalactic Council"?)

I'm not saying this to gloat.... But the look on Newt's face and the awkward pause after Romney said, "Have you checked your own finances? You have investments in Fannie and Freddie." (To go along with the prior statement that Romney's finances are in a blind trust (I believe it's been in this since he became governor), meaning he exerts no control over how the trustee invests them. Newt can't say the same.) Newt didn't know whether to stevestojan or go blind, so he split the difference, closed one eye and cut a fart. Regardless, Santorum made a great point that this source/amount of personal income stuff is a total distraction to the real issues that are before us. I get that when a candidate gets attacked on something like this, s/he pretty much has to respond; Romney has said that he was successful in business, lives off the dividends, pays all the taxes he owes on all of these monies, gives a sizable portion to charities, and it's the height of stupidity for a fellow Republican to ask him to apologize for any of this. We've established these facts. Everyone knows them, just like everyone knows Newt cheats on and divorces his wives. It's time to drop this as a main discussion point. BTW --- What's everyone doing in 2020? Who wants to live on Newt's Moon Colony / the 51st state? Really, dude? Really? Bribe (with public money) for votes much?

Yeah. You know. Especially after the dude admits that he's no expert on it. --- Good job, DiN! You put a post about taxes in the thread marked "Taxes and Charity" rather than starting another thread titled "Taxes." Next, you can work on putting your Legos back in the blue bin.

Oh come on. You know he'll be right back under a different name. He's probably created the profile already, just so when the inevitable happens he can sidle up a couple of days later and say, "Whhaaaa? I've been on this site for 6 months. I have no knowledge of this Dave guy of whom you speak!!!"

Captain Kirk > Captain Picard > Captain Hindsight

UConn James is so heartless that no one has the guts to insult him.

I wonder what happens when it gets up to the P spot....