Page 23 of 29 FirstFirst ... 13192021222324252627 ... LastLast
Results 331 to 345 of 432
  1. #331
    Joined
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Kern River Valley, CA
    Age
    71
    Posts
    21,597

    Re: What Is 2019-2020 Reality Fake OR Fact

    Insults


    M
    Last edited by Meridian; 09-08-2019 at 03:29 PM.
    Thank A Democrat... Vote DNC

    AOC... New Leader DNC ....

  2. #332
    Joined
    Mar 2002
    Location
    California
    Posts
    26,280

    Re: What Is 2019-2020 Reality Fake OR Fact

    That guy maddow over at MSDNC must be all over sharpie-gate... got their useful idiots all riled up. Meanwhile PDT shows expert lvl pwnage...


    Troll Game Strong: Trump Campaign Turns ‘Sharpiegate’ Lemons Into Lemonade With New Trump-Branded Markers


    I’ll be the first to admit I haven’t followed Sharpiegate too closely, because it just comes off as yet another tiresome example of a media-driven “scandal” of sorts that really wasn’t.

    But regardless of who said what first, or who infamously expanded the Hurricane Dorian forecast cone on the weather map with a Sharpie marker, the Trump campaign has come up with a creative way to capitalize on the controversy: With their own version of a Sharpie marker.

    . . .

    "The most dangerous myth is the demagoguery that business can be made to pay a larger share, thus relieving the individual. Politicians preaching this are either deliberately dishonest, or economically illiterate, and either one should scare us...
    Only people pay taxes, and people pay as consumers every tax that is assessed against a business."


    -The Gipper


  3. #333
    Joined
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Kern River Valley, CA
    Age
    71
    Posts
    21,597

    Re: What Is 2019-2020 Reality Fake OR Fact

    Insults


    M
    Last edited by Meridian; 09-08-2019 at 03:29 PM.
    Thank A Democrat... Vote DNC

    AOC... New Leader DNC ....

  4. #334
    Joined
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Vvardenfell
    Age
    58
    Posts
    10,924

    Re: What Is 2019-2020 Reality Fake OR Fact

    Also otoc: holy wall of text Batman. Please try to add more comment of your own.

  5. #335
    Joined
    May 2002
    Location
    Twain Harte, CA
    Posts
    20,453

    Re: What Is 2019-2020 Reality Fake OR Fact

    Quote Originally Posted by Meridian View Post
    Also otoc: holy wall of text Batman. Please try to add more comment of your own.
    At first glance l thought Putin must have been caught colluding with Trump.

    It turns out that even CNN forecast that Alabama was threatened by the hurricane and in the end, none of the forecasts were correct because it traveled up the eastern seaboard to Canada.

    This type of story is why JimZ created the "Rolleyes" thread. You might want to remake that one.

  6. #336
    Joined
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    10,812

    Re: What Is 2019-2020 Reality Fake OR Fact

    Quote Originally Posted by otoc View Post
    Fact or Fake: Trump administration politicizes science

    NOAA’s support of Trump over its own scientists provokes uproar in weather community


    On the day it was revealed a memo had been circulated warning scientists not to correct...
    NOAA Leadership Trades Scientific Integrity for Political Appeasement


    I'm amazed how trump doubles down on covering a mistake and how his corporate administration sends out marching orders.

    This is not government as we know it, nor is this Orwellian edict something I feel any US citizen should let go as precedent.
    So much for dismissing responses. An update from the past week.

    NOAA chief scientist condemns agency's "political" backing of Trump's claims about hurricane
    The chief scientist of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) said he is looking into "potential violations" of scientific integrity in the way the agency responded to President Trump's claims that Hurricane Dorian posed a threat to Alabama. Craig McLean, NOAA's acting chief scientist, wrote an email to colleagues that said the agency's statement Friday backing up Mr. Trump's claims was "political" and a "danger to public health and safety."

    "I am pursuing the potential violations of our NOAA Administrative Order on Scientific Integrity," McLean wrote in the email, which was obtained by CBS News. The letter was first reported by the Washington Post.

    At the White House last week, Mr. Trump held up a NOAA map that appeared to have been altered with a black pen to show a projection of the storm possibly striking Alabama. On Friday, NOAA backed up the president's ongoing assertions that the state appeared initially to be in the path of the hurricane — contradicting the findings of the agency's own meteorologists.

    "From Wednesday, August 28, through Monday, September 2, the information provided by NOAA and the National Hurricane Center to President Trump and the wider public demonstrated that tropical-storm-force winds from Hurricane Dorian could impact Alabama," a NOAA spokesman said in a statement Friday.

    NOAA's statement also directly refuted a tweet from the Birmingham office of the National Weather Service that had contradicted Mr. Trump. "The Birmingham National Weather Service's Sunday morning tweet spoke in absolute terms that were inconsistent with probabilities from the best forecast products available at the time," the statement read. The Birmingham tweet assured Alabama residents that the state "will NOT see any impacts from #Dorian. We repeat, no impacts from Hurricane #Dorian will be felt across Alabama. The system will remain too far east."

    McLean's letter criticized the NOAA statement, writing: "The content of this press release is very concerning as it compromises the ability of NOAA to convey life-saving information necessary to avoid substantial and specific danger to public health and safety."

    "If the public cannot trust our information, or we debase our forecaster's warnings and products, that specific danger arises," McLean wrote.

    On Monday, The Associated Press reported the head of the National Weather Service defended forecasters who contradicted Mr. Trump's claim that Hurricane Dorian posed a threat to Alabama as it approached the United States. Director Louis Uccellini spoke at a meteorology convention and offered unambiguous support for the National Weather Service when he said forecasters were in the right by disputing the president's claims that Dorian posed a threat to Alabama.
    This nonsense isn't roll eyes-for if Obama did it-the trump supporters would be all over it. It isn't the press, it isn't democrats, it is what trump's actions beget. This obvious cover up for a mistake is nasty precedence to set for future administrations.
    Thomas Jefferson to John Page Fairfeilds Dec: 25. 1762.
    ... But the old-fellows say we must read to gain knowledge; and gain knowledge to make us happy and be admired. Mere jargon! Is there any such thing as happiness in this world? No: And as for admiration I am sure the man who powders most, parfumes most, embroiders most, and talks most nonsense, is most admired.

  7. #337
    Joined
    May 2002
    Location
    Twain Harte, CA
    Posts
    20,453

    Re: What Is 2019-2020 Reality Fake OR Fact

    ^^^ Curiously, your links have anti-Trump sign-up pages. They seem to be more political than scientific. And your copy and paste screeds don't have the complete memo they discuss, or the name of its author, nor do the links l bothered to look at. There is no quoted directive from Trump, just lots of inuendo. On top of that, the predictions of where this storm would go, by the folks creating these "scientific" OrangeManBad stories, were all incorrect. So, besides this all being an old and done tale of woe, I just don't understand your great concern.

  8. #338
    Joined
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Vvardenfell
    Age
    58
    Posts
    10,924

    Re: What Is 2019-2020 Reality Fake OR Fact

    Am I missing something? His sources appear to be (in order):

    The Washington Post
    Business Insider
    Union of Concerned Scientists
    CBS

    Are they biased? Of course they are. But I'd hardly peg Business Insider as Left, even by your standards. And every news source you use is also biased. So why is it that your news sources remain correct despite their bias, but his must be wrong because of their? It Does Not Follow. Bias and accuracy are not linked. And attacking sources generally means that you can't attack the actual argument.

  9. #339
    Joined
    May 2002
    Location
    Twain Harte, CA
    Posts
    20,453

    Re: What Is 2019-2020 Reality Fake OR Fact

    Quote Originally Posted by Meridian View Post
    Am I missing something? His sources appear to be (in order):

    The Washington Post
    Business Insider
    Union of Concerned Scientists
    CBS

    Are they biased? Of course they are. But I'd hardly peg Business Insider as Left, even by your standards. And every news source you use is also biased. So why is it that your news sources remain correct despite their bias, but his must be wrong because of their? It Does Not Follow. Bias and accuracy are not linked. And attacking sources generally means that you can't attack the actual argument.
    That addresses only the first sentence in my post. Be that as it may, I'll agree that an anti-Trump petition on a science site is not very "sciencey".

    Edit: To add, your charge on my news sources, at least in this case, is very hollow. I didn't use any. In addition, your claim that bias and accuracy are not linked is a nice statement, but its not at all true. Bias is the root cause of fake news. The Washington Post is a fine example, having to retract numbers of stories for being false, and always, everytime, in the same direction. CBS? See Dan Rather, the famous father of fake news.
    Last edited by Dutchcedar; 09-13-2019 at 05:49 PM.

  10. #340
    Joined
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    10,812

    Re: What Is 2019-2020 Reality Fake OR Fact

    Quote Originally Posted by Dutchcedar View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by otoc View Post
    So much for dismissing responses. An update from the past week.

    NOAA chief scientist condemns agency's "political" backing of Trump's claims about hurricane


    This nonsense isn't roll eyes-for if Obama did it-the trump supporters would be all over it. It isn't the press, it isn't democrats, it is what trump's actions beget. This obvious cover up for a mistake is nasty precedence to set for future administrations.
    ^^^ Curiously, your links have anti-Trump sign-up pages. They seem to be more political than scientific. And your copy and paste screeds don't have the complete memo they discuss, or the name of its author, nor do the links l bothered to look at. There is no quoted directive from Trump, just lots of inuendo. On top of that, the predictions of where this storm would go, by the folks creating these "scientific" OrangeManBad stories, were all incorrect. So, besides this all being an old and done tale of woe, I just don't understand your great concern.
    "Screed". Now that's not an insulting lead into an argument. What can I say? If you find my posts tedious, then don't read them or respond.

    You'll need to show us some examples of what you consider to be "anti-Trump sign-up pages".

    I looked at my last link, and don't take cute puppies or Capt. Kangaroo (a 60s TV kids show host for Meridian's benefit) as being anti-trump.


    If you are seeing linked adds someplace, think more about the targeting done by private companies during an election cycle while showing us what "anti-trump" means in terms of those ads being targeted towards you.

    The same goes for "more political than scientific" as a way to dismiss the content I quoted. These statements from you can mean a myriad of things. I simply don't know how to respond to you seeing ads as a way to discount actual news content.




    Quote Originally Posted by Dutchcedar View Post
    And your copy and paste screeds don't have the complete memo they discuss, or the name of its author, nor do the links l bothered to look at.
    "Screed" aside, the link in my post links to the WaPo story covering McLean's Memo. But since that's behind a firewall, I googled the name and immediately got this.
    Tuesday, September 10, 2019
    A Message from Craig McLean: Hurricane Dorian and Exceptional Service

    During the course of the storm, as I am sure you are aware, there were routine and exceptional expert forecasts, the best possible, issued by the NWS Forecasters. These are remarkable colleagues of ours, who receive our products, use them well, and provide the benefit of their own experience in announcing accurate forecasts accompanied by the distinction of all credible scientists—they sign their work. As I'm sure you also know, there was a complex issue involving the President commenting on the path of the hurricane. The NWS Forecaster(s) corrected any public misunderstanding in an expert and timely way, as they should. There followed, last Friday, an unsigned press release from "NOAA" that inappropriately and incorrectly contradicted the NWS forecaster. My understanding is that this intervention to contradict the forecaster was not based on science but on external factors including reputation and appearance, or simply put, political. Our NOAA Scientific Integrity Policy and Code of Scientific Conduct make clear that all NOAA employees shall approach all scientific activities with honesty, objectively, and completely, without allegiance to individuals, organizations, or ideology. The content of this press release is very concerning as it compromises the ability of NOAA to convey life-saving information necessary to avoid substantial and specific danger to public health and safety. If the public cannot trust our information, or we debase our forecaster's warnings and products, that specific danger arises.
    The full memo. Score one for getting my facts from the internet. And showing the original news article was accurate. And I posted the link.



    Quote Originally Posted by Dutchcedar View Post
    There is no quoted directive from Trump, just lots of inuendo. On top of that, the predictions of where this storm would go, by the folks creating these "scientific" OrangeManBad stories, were all incorrect. So, besides this all being an old and done tale of woe, I just don't understand your great concern.
    There is no innuendo. The post of mine you ridiculed as being roll eyes was simply a sequence of events showing actions that we could later refer to as factual items. As we can now.

    Regarding 'all incorrect' forecasts, I have no idea what you are talking about. I looked at them as they were linked in that post you ridiculed.
    On Thursday and Friday prior, Alabama never had more than a 30% chance of seeing tropical winds. By Saturday, it was 0-10%.

    Trump posted on Sunday causing people in Alabama to call in about getting hit hard, which caused the counter tweet to say no worries for Alabama. Facts. Like when trump posted alabama was in trouble, alabama was not in trouble. Realistically, I've seen nothing to back your opinion of the 'all incorrect' weather forecasts outside of trump drawing a line with a sharpie.


    The only unnamed person in anything I posted was the NOAA representative who supported trumps position and threw the weather guys under the bus. We don't know who wrote that do we? No innuendo here other than what is coming out of the trump administration.

    You're certainly entitled to your opinion that anything critical towards trump, no matter how real, is 'Orangemanbad' to you. Or that news about the science of the weather agencies is somehow a "scientific" article. But please don't try obfuscating actions of a trump administration by setting the bar with "There is no quoted directive from Trump" and have me buy into it.

    Frankly, if I really wanted to give you innuendo, I'd say google Wilbur Ross who heads NOAA as Commerce director.
    New York Times: Mick Mulvaney instructed Wilbur Ross to pressure NOAA to disavow Alabama tweet
    Washington (CNN)President Donald Trump's acting chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney, instructed Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross to pressure the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to disavow a tweet from a National Weather Service's regional office that contradicted Trump's false claim that Hurricane Dorian was likely to hit Alabama, The New York Times reported Wednesday.

    The Times said a senior administration official told the paper that Mulvaney wanted to set the record straight because he thought the NWS' Birmingham, Alabama, office had "gone too far" when it contradicted Trump's false claim last week. According to the paper, Ross called Neil Jacobs, NOAA's acting administrator, and told him to "fix the agency's perceived contradiction of the president." The Times previously reported that Ross threatened to fire top NOAA employees if they didn't disavow the tweet.

    A White House official confirmed to CNN on Wednesday that Mulvaney spoke with Ross about NOAA's handling of the NWS tweet that contradicted Trump. The Times report did not say Trump told his acting chief of staff to tell Ross to contact NOAA about the tweet.

    Still, Trump, speaking to reporters in the Oval Office later Wednesday, denied instructing Mulvaney to speak to Ross about the issue, calling the report "a fake story." A White House official also told CNN that the President did not ask his chief of staff to tell Ross to pressure NOAA about the tweet.

    So no, dutch, never did I mean trump personally politicized science outside of personally doubling down on his mistake and this is setting a precedent for future administrations. Because the new news is his administration is certainly directly politicizing science. By their own actions and admissions. This news cycle just isn't ending, and all the media is doing is they are reporting the news. About the trump administration.

    But hey, "Orangemanbad", right?




    I see you throwing out CBS and Dan Rather for Meridian to google. Dan Rather was fired for what he did. I'd rather Meridian google FoxNews for how they simply have people like the judges and carlson go on an unannounced vacation when they skew the news. Hey, don't read into anything with that. We don't know from where you get your information.
    Thomas Jefferson to John Page Fairfeilds Dec: 25. 1762.
    ... But the old-fellows say we must read to gain knowledge; and gain knowledge to make us happy and be admired. Mere jargon! Is there any such thing as happiness in this world? No: And as for admiration I am sure the man who powders most, parfumes most, embroiders most, and talks most nonsense, is most admired.

  11. #341
    Joined
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Kern River Valley, CA
    Age
    71
    Posts
    21,597

    Re: What Is 2019-2020 Reality Fake OR Fact

    Fake or Fact

    Hmmm... Interesting look who’s paying some of the prominent folks at MSNBC... Such as Scarborough... None other than the never Trumpers Koch Brothers... Minus one... One might say the never Trumpers come in all sizes and shapes from both parties....

    Maher mocks MSNBC's 'Never Trumpers': They're 'very far left' because 'look at who's giving them their paycheck'

    https://www.foxnews.com/entertainmen...at-whos-giving
    Thank A Democrat... Vote DNC

    AOC... New Leader DNC ....

  12. #342
    Joined
    May 2002
    Location
    Twain Harte, CA
    Posts
    20,453

    Re: What Is 2019-2020 Reality Fake OR Fact

    otoc, the anti-Trump petition is at the Union of Concerned Scientists site. Very sciencey outfit.

  13. #343
    Joined
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    10,812

    Re: What Is 2019-2020 Reality Fake OR Fact

    Quote Originally Posted by Dutchcedar View Post
    otoc, the anti-Trump petition is at the Union of Concerned Scientists site. Very sciencey outfit.
    Thanks. I made a donation based on their calls this administration is anti-science. That is as science as you can get. Cause and effect and conclusion with actions.

    lol, anti-trump. I guess you are admitting trump is anti-science with that one.

    So much more refined than the trump campaign glorifying trolling while hawking product they say is for making liberals upset like sharpie pens and plastic straws. Very presidential.
    Thomas Jefferson to John Page Fairfeilds Dec: 25. 1762.
    ... But the old-fellows say we must read to gain knowledge; and gain knowledge to make us happy and be admired. Mere jargon! Is there any such thing as happiness in this world? No: And as for admiration I am sure the man who powders most, parfumes most, embroiders most, and talks most nonsense, is most admired.

  14. #344
    Joined
    May 2002
    Location
    Twain Harte, CA
    Posts
    20,453

    Re: What Is 2019-2020 Reality Fake OR Fact

    ^^^ Like the donation you made to the Wounded Warriors? Always good for a chuckle.

  15. #345
    Joined
    May 2002
    Location
    Twain Harte, CA
    Posts
    20,453

    Re: What Is 2019-2020 Reality Fake OR Fact

    Quote Originally Posted by otoc View Post
    That is as science as you can get. Cause and effect and conclusion with actions.
    That's an interesting description of science. Never heard that one before.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •