ok but how far do you take this stance? Should I not talk to you, for
instance, if I have reason to believe you sometimes break the law?
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 11:12 PM, LRS Scout wrote:
>
> Hell I'm one of the crazy guys who has sat down with USC, and written my
> senator asking to point out
Hell I'm one of the crazy guys who has sat down with USC, and written my
senator asking to point out what law requires us to pay levied wage taxes.
I pay them to avoid jail, but I don't agree that the federal gov't even has
the right to levy taxes against wages.
-Original Message-
From: D
I didn't say tell them not to pay, I said don't help them.
-Original Message-
From: Judah McAuley [mailto:ju...@wiredotter.com]
Sent: Friday, January 29, 2010 12:38 AM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: o'keefe's latest expose
It isn't a facilitation of a crime dude. You know that most of t
Did you hear that he's a cow fucker? I saw it on a video once.
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 9:39 PM, Dana wrote:
>
> ok maybe I am not understanding your point. You think that helping someone
> to comply with the tax laws is facilitating a crime if their income comes
> from something illegal? So it w
ok maybe I am not understanding your point. You think that helping someone
to comply with the tax laws is facilitating a crime if their income comes
from something illegal? So it would be a crime to do Bill Gates' taxes, for
example? If so I suppose we are where we have been before -- I find your
It isn't a facilitation of a crime dude. You know that most of the
mobsters out there got caught on tax evasion charges, right? And you
know that gambling winnings, even in places where said gambling is
illegal, has to be reported on your taxes?
If you help people prepare taxes and they come to y
I do.
Facilitation of a crime is or at least should be a crime
-Original Message-
From: Dana [mailto:dana.tier...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2010 9:34 PM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: o'keefe's latest expose
hmm and do you extend this to any illegal activity at all, or jus
yeah, you are in spam. Why would it be a felony? I don't recall any thing of
the kind, myself
Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 4:51 PM, Sam wrote:
>
> We discussed this months ago, I think we concluded it was a felony.
>
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 3:42 PM, Jerry Johnson wrote:
> >
> > Regardless of th
gravity bong? Is *that* what happened that night? By the way, through some
magic I am not seeing Sam. Not filtering hims so, hmmm, I think Google
decided he is spam. Clever Google ;)
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 5:23 PM, denstar wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Sam wrote:
> >
> > On Thu,
hmm and do you extend this to any illegal activity at all, or just
prostitution? Because... well, I think you can finish the thought yourself.
Think about this list, for example.
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 6:34 PM, LRS Scout wrote:
>
> I'm saying you don't tell them shit one way or the other.
>
>
um so supposing that reaqlly was a prostitute, you would not say to her, yes
you have to pay taxes? Because she does, you know.
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 4:37 PM, LRS Scout wrote:
>
> As soon as prostitution was mentioned thjey should have stopped the
> meeting.
>
> Period. It's illegal. I don'
I am sure this has been addressed before but i'm getting hit up more
and more on how clients can get their data backed up off-site. They
are tired of doing the usb drive swap or making sure a tape is taken
with them. Most of them have a 3megx768 dsl or cable connection.. a
few have 7x1 but they h
I'm saying you don't tell them shit one way or the other.
-Original Message-
From: Jerry Johnson [mailto:jmi...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2010 6:42 PM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: o'keefe's latest expose
Regardless of the legality of the source of the money, they still ne
YAY!!! Awesome, you getting going is all the thanks I need.
*Feel the awesome power of information and communication!*
Bwahahahahaha! (maniacal evil scientist laughter)
:)
--
It is the emergence of mass media which makes possible the use of
propaganda techniques on a societal scale.
Jacques
My two year old just told me to "get outta here you knuckle head" when I
told her it was bed time.
Kids are a boundless wealth of giggles and yuks. If you don't have any go
make a baby right now!
~|
Want to reach the ColdFusion
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 2:46 PM, Sam wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 4:32 PM, denstar wrote:
>>
>> Personally, I'm curious about the motivation.
>>
>> Apparently it's money? At least that's what Sam keeps pushing as
>> motivation. Guess these scientists would all get raises or something?
>>
We discussed this months ago, I think we concluded it was a felony.
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 3:42 PM, Jerry Johnson wrote:
>
> Regardless of the legality of the source of the money, they still need to
> pay taxes on it.
>
> So giving tax advice of "you have to pay taxes on it" is the correct thin
It looks to have been windows firewall on the server. Thanks again for all
the help.
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 5:32 PM, Matthew Smith wrote:
> Results of telnet from windows 7 box to server:
> Microsoft Telnet> open 192.168.1.2 80
> Connecting To 192.168.1.2...Could not open connection to the hos
Regardless of the legality of the source of the money, they still need to
pay taxes on it.
So giving tax advice of "you have to pay taxes on it" is the correct thing
to do.
Telling them to NOT pay taxes on it would be wrong (and possibly illegal)
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 6:37 PM, LRS Scout wr
As soon as prostitution was mentioned thjey should have stopped the meeting.
Period. It's illegal. I don't think it should be, but it is.
-Original Message-
From: Dana [mailto:dana.tier...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2010 5:07 PM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: o'keefe's late
Results of telnet from windows 7 box to server:
Microsoft Telnet> open 192.168.1.2 80
Connecting To 192.168.1.2...Could not open connection to the host, on port
80: Connect failed
I disabled Windows firewall on both boxes. Same result for telnet.
I have avira premium on the server and avira fre
a grain, yes, but I don't think it can be characterized as a whitewash. In
other words, I think that I believe that the group did not break laws. Not
implementing reforms fast enough also sounds plausible; they seem pretty
scattered and disorganized.
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 2:59 PM, Judah McAuley
So you think tax preparers should turn away people they disapprove of? Bill
Gates, for example? Just asking. I do think the one that said "don't tell me
that" was wrong. Otherwise, if you are in the business of helping people
stay legal with the IRS, then that is what you should do.
On Thu, Jan 2
It was not an internal investigation but it was commissioned by ACORN.
It was performed by Scott Harshbarger, former Attorney General for
Massachusetts.
The report did find a number of things wrong. In particular, it faults
ACORN for not implementing reforms fast enough after an alleged 8 year
co
Too short, skinny and angry :P
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 4:49 PM, LRS Scout wrote:
>
> Dana I'm neither Sam ...
~|
Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know
on the House of Fusion mailing lis
And JD Salinger...
-Original Message-
From: Dana [mailto:dana.tier...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2010 4:48 PM
To: cf-community
Subject: Howard Zinn died
I really have way too much to do, but had to have a small moment of silence
for an original and disciplined scholar.
Wasn't that an internal investigation by ACORN? I'm o surprised they
found nothing
wrong.
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 4:37 PM, Dana wrote:
>
> I need a definition of "the ACORN stuff" but an investigation failed to find
> broken laws. I tend to believe the claim of deceptive editing, but that case
Dana I'm neither Sam nor Fox news, and you know this
ma
The only things I thought were wrong were them giving the tax advice. I
never believed that they took part in human trafficking.
-Original Message-
From: Dana [mailto:dana.tier...@gmail.c
I don't care for my beef quite that rare.
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 1:47 PM, Sam wrote:
>
> Not that there's anything wrong with that...
>
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 4:45 PM, Judah McAuley wrote:
>>
>> I heard you were a cow fucker.
>>
~
I really have way too much to do, but had to have a small moment of silence
for an original and disciplined scholar.
~|
Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know
on the House of Fusion maili
Not that there's anything wrong with that...
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 4:45 PM, Judah McAuley wrote:
>
> I heard you were a cow fucker.
>
~|
Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know
on the H
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 4:32 PM, denstar wrote:
>
> Personally, I'm curious about the motivation.
>
> Apparently it's money? At least that's what Sam keeps pushing as
> motivation. Guess these scientists would all get raises or something?
> Is that how it works, Sam?
All the skeptics deniers
I heard you were a cow fucker.
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 1:34 PM, LRS Scout wrote:
>
> Oh and I did watch the videos.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Dana [mailto:dana.tier...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2010 3:08 PM
> To: cf-community
> Subject: Re: climate scientists at East
ok. Same question I asked G.
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 2:34 PM, LRS Scout wrote:
>
> Oh and I did watch the videos.
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Dana [mailto:dana.tier...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2010 3:08 PM
> To: cf-community
> Subject: Re: climate scientists at East A
ACORN endorses human trafficking? And any number of other wild claims for
the period. Let me refer you to the archives.
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 2:36 PM, LRS Scout wrote:
>
> Editing is not invention.
>
> What did this guy make up?
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Dana [mailto:dana.tier..
Editing is invention, otherwise movies would suck even more than they
currently do.
Like when you say "I did not fuck that cow" and someone removes the
word "not" and then I get to call you a cow fucker.
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 1:36 PM, LRS Scout wrote:
>
> Editing is not invention.
>
> What
I need a definition of "the ACORN stuff" but an investigation failed to find
broken laws. I tend to believe the claim of deceptive editing, but that case
has not yet been made in court. Short answer: Probably.
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 2:33 PM, LRS Scout wrote:
>
> The Acorn stuff was made up?
>
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 11:27 AM, Matthew Smith wrote:
>
> Thanks for the help.
>
> Here are the results:
>
> On the server:
> C:\Documents and Settings\Matthew>telnet 192.168.1.2
> Connecting To 192.168.1.2...Could not open connection to the host, on port
> 23: C
> onnect failed
Awesome. Gener
Editing is not invention.
What did this guy make up?
-Original Message-
From: Dana [mailto:dana.tier...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2010 3:51 PM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: o'keefe's latest expose
ok, and now that you realize that the tape was edited, can you put your
fin
Let me ask again.
What did he make up?
About Acorn specifically, what did he make up?
-Original Message-
From: Dana [mailto:dana.tier...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2010 3:43 PM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: o'keefe's latest expose
I'll admit that there is a fair amount of
Oh and I did watch the videos.
-Original Message-
From: Dana [mailto:dana.tier...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2010 3:08 PM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: climate scientists at East Anglia are criminals!
do we know that this data is? I rather question that, actually. Actually,
The Acorn stuff was made up?
-Original Message-
From: Dana [mailto:dana.tier...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2010 2:59 PM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: o'keefe's latest expose
ACORN? I still think it is astonishing how few people actually watched that
video. Ask yourself this
Personally, I'm curious about the motivation.
Apparently it's money? At least that's what Sam keeps pushing as
motivation. Guess these scientists would all get raises or something?
Is that how it works, Sam?
Yeah, most the scientists I know are in it for the money.
Yup.
(not.)
Or maybe tha
No I'm not, he should be tried and if found guilty punished, but that
doesn't make what he found untrue.
-Original Message-
From: Larry C. Lyons [mailto:larrycly...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2010 2:56 PM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: o'keefe's latest expose
So you're OK wi
Not me...
-Original Message-
From: Sam [mailto:sammyc...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2010 4:10 PM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: climate scientists at East Anglia are criminals!
You sound like you want to take your toys and go home.
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 4:01 PM, Scott St
Did you even read the article that was linke to? If so, you need to
work on your reading comprehension:
The university at the centre of the climate change row over stolen
e-mails broke the law by refusing to hand over its raw data for public
scrutiny.
The University of East Anglia breached the F
You sound like you want to take your toys and go home.
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 4:01 PM, Scott Stewart
wrote:
>
> " When questioned about global warming, you quickly changed to pollution
> is bad. That kind of redirect tells me you either admit there's no
> real evidence of warming or you know th
" When questioned about global warming, you quickly changed to pollution
is bad. That kind of redirect tells me you either admit there's no
real evidence of warming or you know the evidence is so week you need
to focus on another reason to curb people exhaust. So I pocked fun of
you, it's what I d
Is that the Arkansas Yoga Center or the Angry Youth Comix?
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 3:51 PM, Dana wrote:
>
> you obviously don't subscribe the the AYC mailing list.
>
~|
Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they
is it data if it's outlying readings? And do you *know* this is what the
university said, or are you summarizing someone else's summary??
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 1:12 PM, Robert Munn wrote:
>
> the data in question? yes, it was covered. the university has already
> acknowledged that they violat
you obviously don't subscribe the the AYC mailing list.
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 1:48 PM, Sam wrote:
>
> Who ever called this kid a journalist? He's a student spoiled by his
> last 15 minutes and wants 15 more.
>
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 3:42 PM, Dana wrote:
> >
> > I'll admit that there is a
ok, and now that you realize that the tape was edited, can you put your
finger on what was disgusting exactly? A prostitute is required to pay
taxes. We have mention of a house. We have mention of young girls. NOWHERE
in the tapes I watched do we have mention of those girls being sex slaves.
Pros
Who ever called this kid a journalist? He's a student spoiled by his
last 15 minutes and wants 15 more.
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 3:42 PM, Dana wrote:
>
> I'll admit that there is a fair amount of induction involved, but let me
> repeat the question. If you want to demonstrate that Landrieu does n
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 3:33 PM, Scott Stewart
wrote:
>
> And now you're reading what you want to into what I said, I NEVER said
> climate change was bogus. There's a mountain of evidence just in the links
> that I posted, that says that man is influencing the climate on the planet
> and not in a
I'll admit that there is a fair amount of induction involved, but let me
repeat the question. If you want to demonstrate that Landrieu does not
answer her phone, why not simply call it? If "proving" that she does not
requires "tampering" then we are no longer in the realm of journalism, no?
On Th
And now you're reading what you want to into what I said, I NEVER said
climate change was bogus. There's a mountain of evidence just in the links
that I posted, that says that man is influencing the climate on the planet
and not in a good way.
Why are you trying to read into something that's not
He didn't say that that I read.
He said "I know he broke the law"
Then asked "What has he made up?"
Both statement and questionI agree with.
what did he make up?
(he obviously set out to stir up a story, but I don't see his tactics as
much different than Michael Moore's)
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010
the data in question? yes, it was covered. the university has already
acknowledged that they violated the law.
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 12:08 PM, Dana wrote:
>
> do we know that this data is? I rather question that, actually. Actually, I
> question whether it is data, period.
>
>
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 1:59 PM, Dana wrote:
>
> ACORN? I still think it is astonishing how few people actually watched that
> video.
UhI actually watched the video, and I saw a couple of really slimy
assholes who happened to work for ACORN.
I refuse to indict the entire organization simp
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 1:59 PM, Scott Stewart
wrote:
>
> Are you implying: because this particular data set is bad, faked, etc. That
> ALL the data from every source is bad, faked, etc.
>
> That's a mighty wide brush.
You seem to be missing that these data sets are used throughout most
of the r
do we know that this data is? I rather question that, actually. Actually, I
question whether it is data, period.
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 1:05 PM, Robert Munn wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Dana wrote:
>
> >
> > well then, you Robert are withholding information that is important to
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Dana wrote:
>
> well then, you Robert are withholding information that is important to
> public discourse. You have not divulged the last three times you misdialed,
> not what you had for breakfast today, nor when your kid last failed a
> spelling test. Enquiring
well then, you Robert are withholding information that is important to
public discourse. You have not divulged the last three times you misdialed,
not what you had for breakfast today, nor when your kid last failed a
spelling test. Enquiring minds want to know.
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 9:53 AM, Ro
ACORN? I still think it is astonishing how few people actually watched that
video. Ask yourself this. If he wanted to demonstrate that Landrieu does not
answer the phone, supposing she does not, why not just call the phone?
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 12:53 PM, LRS Scout wrote:
>
> To make stuff up
So you're OK with people breaking the law for political purposes?
if so then you should re familiarize yourself with the Watergate
Scandal and the concept that no one is above the law.
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 2:53 PM, LRS Scout wrote:
>
> To make stuff up?
> I know he broke the law but what has
To make stuff up?
I know he broke the law but what has he made up?
-Original Message-
From: Dana [mailto:dana.tier...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2010 2:47 PM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: o'keefe's latest expose
they broke the law while trying to make stuff up. Again.
On W
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 11:45 AM, Scott Stro wrote:
>
>
> > NOAA, NASA, the EPA and others, while not taking a "the sky is falling"
> > approach are warning that we need to be aware and careful about what
> we're
> > throwing into the atmosphere.
>
> And I do not think anyone will argue that poin
they broke the law while trying to make stuff up. Again.
On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 10:32 PM, Robert Munn wrote:
>
> I'm all for undercover journalism, but if they broke the law, they have to
> pay the price.
>
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 2:24 PM, Dana wrote:
>
> >
> > apparently he was going to "f
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 1:59 PM, Scott Stewart
wrote:
> NOAA, NASA, the EPA and others, while not taking a "the sky is falling"
> approach are warning that we need to be aware and careful about what we're
> throwing into the atmosphere.
And I do not think anyone will argue that point, and if th
Is it possible for you to EVER stay in topic, even for a little bit?
WTF do derivatives have to with whether or not these scientists broke
the law? I know...as with most of your analogies.NOTHING!
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 12:14 PM, Gruss Gott wrote:
>
>> Ian wrote:
>> It think the point is
http://www.apple.com/ipad/#video
If you're using chrome or safari, the video won't be delivered in Flash :)
On Jan 28, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Casey Dougall wrote:
>
> Apple below $200 on NASDAQ today
>
>
>
~|
Want to reac
Of course they're fakes. the data presented by all those government
agencies are by definition faked.
Besides since the information presented at those 3 sites disagree with
Sam's ideology based science, then they're incorrect automatically.
Didn't you read the memo?
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 1:59
Are you implying: because this particular data set is bad, faked, etc. That
ALL the data from every source is bad, faked, etc.
That's a mighty wide brush.
NOAA, NASA, the EPA and others, while not taking a "the sky is falling"
approach are warning that we need to be aware and careful about what
What? We read here? All those smiley's, I thought those were boobies or
something when I made a quick flash glance looky see...
-Original Message-
From: Erika L. Rich [mailto:elr...@ruwebby.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2010 11:55 AM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: Matt on Microsoft
T
You don't want to know.
-Original Message-
From: Vivec [mailto:gel21...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 28, 2010 11:54 AM
To: cf-community
Subject: Re: Matt on Microsoft
YYYY!!!
*shares blueberry muffins around*
WOOOT!
:-)
Butumm...what was wrong that took 3 hours to fix
Ras is right ...
But it's still a brilliant word isn't it? :) I have several favorites.
Cheers,
E
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 12:40 PM, Medic wrote:
>
> I love that you use the expression chuffed. Not many on this side of the
> pond do.
>
>
~~
Thanks for the help.
Here are the results:
On the server:
C:\Documents and Settings\Matthew>telnet 192.168.1.2
Connecting To 192.168.1.2...Could not open connection to the host, on port 23: C
onnect failed
C:\Documents and Settings\Matthew>telnet 192.168.1.2 80
(window goes blank with unflashin
she lived across de pond for a whiles
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 12:40 PM, Medic wrote:
>
> I love that you use the expression chuffed. Not many on this side of the
> pond do.
>
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 11:55 AM, Erika L. Rich
> wrote:
>
> >
> > Thanks :D
> >
> > Now I'm chuffed to know someone
Apple below $200 on NASDAQ today
~|
Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know
on the House of Fusion mailing lists
Archive:
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/
git 'r dun
btw maryland may be opening dispensaries soon, so that docs can prescribe
finally.
we have the laws about use for patients prescribed, but no docs will because
you cant
legally get it... soon enough, that will be changing!!!
ras
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 12:32 PM, Casey Dougall <
ca...
I love that you use the expression chuffed. Not many on this side of the
pond do.
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 11:55 AM, Erika L. Rich wrote:
>
> Thanks :D
>
> Now I'm chuffed to know someone actually reads that thing and finds it
> useful :)
>
> :D
>
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 11:49 AM, Jerry Johnso
Nobody really understands the ever changing peer-review process:
Phil Jones wrote "I can't see either of these papers being in the next
IPCC report. Kevin and I will keep them out somehow - even if we have
to redefine what the peer-review literature is!"
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 12:20 PM, Larry C.
I use my iPhone as a remote for my MythTV frontends.it would be a really
cool remote :)
On Jan 28, 2010, at 11:27 AM, Ras Tafari wrote:
>
> +420
>
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 12:20 PM, Gruss Gott wrote:
>
>>
>> Unless I'm missing the magic of a giant iTouch, it seems completely
>> usele
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 12:27 PM, Ras Tafari wrote:
>
> +420
>
>
Looks like that's what the doctors perscribed Jobbs during his medical
leave!
~|
Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know
their work is only a very small part of the overall data matrix. so it
doesn't really affect the whole.
Its a self correcting process. The data if shown to be faked will be
repudiated and new conclusions will be reached if need be.
Regardless the UK data does not contradict the other data, earli
+420
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 12:20 PM, Gruss Gott wrote:
>
> Unless I'm missing the magic of a giant iTouch, it seems completely
> useless.
>
>
~|
Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know
> jj wrote:
>
> I think you all totally miss what this product is.
>
> It is not a full-blown computer.
>
> It is a consumer electronics device. Like a kindle. Or cable box. Or PS3. Or
> toaster.
>
No I think we're all saying that's exactly WHAT this product is: a
useless consumer electronics dev
Sam you've demonstrated before time and time again in the past that
you have no understanding and relatively complete ignornace involving
the scientific and peer review processes.
Science is not a political game, you have to have supporting data to
back up your hypotheses. The climate change deni
> Ian wrote:
> It think the point is that *their* research is the be all and end all of
> all the research. It takes a lot more then invalidating _one_ source of
> data to over come something this large.
>
Don't worry Ian, Bush has got financial system under control. All
this data about a finan
> RoMunn wrote:
> have no idea what things will look like fifty years from now, and anyone who
> says different is blowing smoke.
>
That's true. Cause the liquid fuels crisis is going to hit in 5 years
(give or take).
~|
Want t
The emails show there was no consensus, Jones was controlling all the reviews.
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 11:57 AM, Scott Stroz wrote:
>
> I am not so sure I agree with you completely.
>
> The fact that these boneheads broke the law does not automatically
> invalidate any of their research, but it
On 1/28/2010 8:57 AM, Scott Stroz wrote:
> I am not so sure I agree with you completely.
>
> The fact that these boneheads broke the law does not automatically
> invalidate any of their research, but it sure does bring a lot of
> their work into question. If the 'scientific consensus' is based, ev
I am not so sure I agree with you completely.
The fact that these boneheads broke the law does not automatically
invalidate any of their research, but it sure does bring a lot of
their work into question. If the 'scientific consensus' is based, even
in part, on some of their work, then the consen
Thanks :D
Now I'm chuffed to know someone actually reads that thing and finds it
useful :)
:D
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 11:49 AM, Jerry Johnson wrote:
>
> Well, pat yourself on the back for that 30+ great wordpress widget blog
> post, it was worth a few muffins and some sleep.
>
>
> On Thu, Jan
YYYY!!!
*shares blueberry muffins around*
WOOOT!
:-)
Butumm...what was wrong that took 3 hours to fix? 0_0
On 28 January 2010 10:23, Scott Raley wrote:
>
> Okay Erika give Matt two muffins, he got me some help at Microsoft fix my
> exchange web mail crash. Even know I followed 5 KB
Very likely we have no idea what will be the biggest factors in our
children's quality of life. How about the collapse of the entitlement state?
Social Security and Medicare are going to implode, it's only a matter of
time. And what about overpopulation? Solar flares? Terrorism? Banking
crises? G
Well, pat yourself on the back for that 30+ great wordpress widget blog
post, it was worth a few muffins and some sleep.
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 11:45 AM, Erika L. Rich wrote:
>
> blah. I'm all outta flour this week ...
>
> /me goes back to sleep ...
>
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 9:23 AM, Scott
Yes, this is expected scientific behavior so get over it and trust in
them. They are much smarter than you and need to fake data because
you're too stupid to understand it the way they do.
Now the real issues is finding and hanging the bastard(s) that exposed
this crime. How dare he/she/they mess
blah. I'm all outta flour this week ...
/me goes back to sleep ...
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 9:23 AM, Scott Raley wrote:
>
> Okay Erika give Matt two muffins, he got me some help at Microsoft fix my
> exchange web mail crash. Even know I followed 5 KB articles and stopped on
> #6, they gave me
I don't have an iphone.
I do have a blackberry. since work bought it. But had they not, I still
wouldnt.
I don't think the iphone is for me anyway. For me, the screen is too small.
I cannot watch video, or read, or browse at that size.
And I hate phones.
So for me, the iphone was too much and
1 - 100 of 110 matches
Mail list logo
