Comments Posted By SShiell
Displaying 121 To 130 Of 223 Comments
You can say what you will about the good and bad in this country. And it is your Constitutional freedom to do so. But as Obama himself earlier in this campaign stated: "Words Matter!" And he was not only supportive of the words that came from Reverend Wright, he further supported them with his tithe.
I’ll say this one more time for the reading impaired: Obama didn’t just attend this church. He supported it with his tithe. You don’t put $20,000 in the offering plate just to attend. There is no ticket being sold at the door - your tithe is your voluntary support of that church and its ministry. And he supported this congregation and its ministry with his attendance and tithe for 23 years!
I have been a regular church member all of my life. I began with my parents as a Southern Baptist and most of my adult life has been in the Presbyterian Church. You don’t get much more "Hell and Damnation" sermons than you do from a Baptist ministry. I had no choice as a child but my preference as an adult is my choice, for myself and my family. Yes, I have heard sermons about ungodly actions and the evils of various sins but I have never heard a sermon preached against homosexuality or pornography in my life. To see a minister saying the things Reverend Wright said from the pulpit left me aghast. As a member of that church, nothing Reverend Wright could have said to me afterwards could undo his statements. No amount of rationalization could have been sufficient. I did not just disagree with those statements, they were horrible enough I would have quit such a congregation the very moment they were said. And the fact that Obama continues to support that church and its message with his attendance and tithe tells me volumns that all of his eloquence cannot.
Comment Posted By SShiell On 20.03.2008 @ 12:44
REZKO-OBAMA: BEYOND "GUILT BY ASSOCIATION"
When do we get beyond “guilt by association†of these people with Obama and start to wonder about just who this man is who is marching toward the nomination and a better than even shot at the White House?
Careful, Rick. You don't want to be accused of racism!
Comment Posted By SShiell On 13.03.2008 @ 13:35
CLIMATE CHANGE? OR JUST A STRETCH OF BAD WEATHER?
Comment #31 continued:
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was established by the World meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) and was tasked to evaluate the risk of climate change caused by human activity. Their 2001 report stated:
In Climate Research and modelling, we should recognize that we are dealing with a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore the ong-term prediction of future climate states is not possible." (IPCC-TAR, 2001, page 774)
This finding has not changed in the intervening years. And yet these very same climate models are used to this day for long term predictions.
Some of the major problems inherent in these models are:
They do not consider observed solar dimming and post-1985 brightening
They do not take account the existance of water vapor dimmers
They do not accurately model the role of cloudsIn fact they do not deal with the one single major factor in climate change, water vapor, at all. And yet these models are cited with feverish regularity their predictions of the gloom and doom of climate change.
Comment Posted By SShiell On 4.03.2008 @ 16:51
Oleo - You state "There’s voluminous evidence in support of the overall utility of climatological models." I did not state there wasn't utility in these models - as an example, the National Weather Service uses them to good effect with Hurricane forecasting and such. But even these only provide the percentages, possible alternatives, trend and risk analysis - not answers.
There has been some progress made in Regional and Short-term Climatological Models but even they still have nagging issues associated with them, such as predicting radical events such as droughts (UK Regional Model recently validated but with exceptions) and extreme inclement weather cycles (some of the National Weather Service models). But the major long term models used for projecting 50 and 100 year world wide cycles have yet to be validated.
When faced with this same issue within our legal system, the courts require validation. On more than one occasion I have had to defend the analysis I had performed for an Environmental Impact Statement to a court, the rationale for using the specific model(s) and the model's validation information.
I only ask the same of you. I am not being a contrarian here. It is a standard that I have to live by in my own world and only ask you the same. You say there is evidence to the contrary, Good. Show me the validation of a single long-term global model.
Comment Posted By SShiell On 3.03.2008 @ 18:27
There has been mention of models being used to predict the effects of climate change and to predict the levels the AGW adherents would have us believe. I am an Environmental Analyst and I work in areas that require the use of analytical models (Noise, Air Quality and Transportation Analysis). I use these models on a daily basis to predict the result of various actions within the environment. Before a model can be used for predictive analysis, that model must first be validated. That process requires a series of demonstrable simulations, running the model, and then verifying the results as consistent with the real situation. In fact, that very process is used to build the models. Correcting the algorythms within the model as you go. Simulation, runtime, assessment - compare and revise the basic algorythm, then do it again. And you do it until it is reliably efficient regardless of the situation. The models currently in use for the prupose of predicting future climate assessments have yet to pass a single validation.
How can they, you ask. We can't know the future to see if they are right or wrong. You are right - but we do know the past. For example: Take all the data we have for 1900-1950. Plug that into the model and see what you can predict for the year 1970, 1980, 2000. Not one single climatoloical model has been able to do that. Not one. Why? I don't know. But it seems to me that if CO2 and other "greenhouse" gases are the culprits the validation of these models should be easy. But they aren't and they have yet to be validated, verified, certified or anything else 'ied.
Now don't get me wrong - I am not a climate change "Denier" in any way. In fact, just the opposite - I know that the climate changes. Period. I just don't see the evidence as reliable that Man alone is the culprit. Has man injected harmful crap into the atmosphere - yes and I am all for "clean air" but to take it to the extreme that Man is the causation of Climate Change and all we gotta do is "fix man" has not been proven to my satisfaction in any way.
Comment Posted By SShiell On 3.03.2008 @ 15:49
WHY WHAT MICHELLE OBAMA FEELS ABOUT AMERICA MATTERS
The "hall of shame" provided by Rick's blog entry and other commentors would be high on any list. What is not listed is how America reacted to some of them:
The individuals responsible for "Watergate" served time in prison and the President responsible was forced to resign in shame for his actions. What other country can you point to where this would have been the outcome.
Carter's bumbling foreign policy resulted in the rise of Reagan and the resultant fall of the Soviet scourge.
The men responsbile for the gay man's death face a future bent over and takeing the one thing they fear most - for the rest of their lives. And also true of the Olympics bomber.
Clinton's sins came to roost with the one thing that will be remembered over anything else associated with his legacy - Impeachment.
Yes there are instances where, for a moment, one can feel shame about the actions of our fellow Americans. But I ask you - is there a better country in the world? Is there a country in the world that wears it's problems so prominently on its sleeves for all to see? Is there a country in the world that is so caring that we are the first on the scene with aid for virtually any disaster that the prople of the world may ever face? For every one of the items listed in anyone's "hall of shame", I can provide dozens of items that one can be proud of - per year.
Comment Posted By SShiell On 22.02.2008 @ 11:00
ATTACK ON PETREAUS A SURE SIGN OF DESPERATION
"The public has been down this road for a while now, and we can see the BS coming from a mile away."
Really? Then why is it that even more folks believe Patreaus will report truthfully (39%) than not (35%) - as seen from your own source. Jeez, people. If your are going to claim something - at least point to a source that supports your frigging claim.
Moron!
Comment Posted By SShiell On 10.09.2007 @ 16:25
Yo, Larry in LA. What color is the sky in your world?
Comment Posted By SShiell On 30.08.2007 @ 11:18
IS THE UNITED STATES AN IMPERIALIST POWER AND DOES IT MATTER?
Rick:
The only thing that disapoints me in this posting of yours is that you have to answer a hack like "Sock Puppet" Greenwald. Greenwald and the rest of the "Liberal Narrative" left believes a weak America empowers the rest of the world, a poor America enriches the rest of the world, and a compliant America makes for a good neighbor.Well, they have never lived in the neighborhoods I grew up in. If you are weak, you will be taken advantage of, if you are poor you have no say when you are stepped on, and if you are compliant then sheep will step all over you.
For what it is worth, if that makes us an empire - good! But someone who claims we are an empire has no real understanding of the world or of history.
Comment Posted By SShiell On 21.08.2007 @ 09:47
A RESPONSE TO CRITICS OF MY LAST POST
Jesse McBeth
Micah Wright
Jimmy Massey
Amorita Randall
and now Scott Thomas BeauchampHow many more times are we going to have to relearn the lessons of the individuals listed above. Even our leaders (Kerry, Durbin, and Murtha just to name a few) offer their own versions of the atrocities our troops commit in combat. And MSM falls on its sword every time on the "fake but accurate" meme.
Some question TNRs fact-checking and then their steadfast, even stubborn, adherence to the author when holes in his story appeared. Some question the left gleefully grabbing onto the stories initially and the deafening silence that is now heard from that venue. Some question the right fighting the validity of the stories and now question their vindication as piling on. And some question this episode as much ado about nothing. All of these questions are worthy of discussion and debate because I think they reflect the condition of our society today.
I’ll even add a question to the mix. I question the MSM acceptance of the Beauchamp tales as gospel from TNR without so much as a blink as to their authenticity. Are the newsrooms of America void of common sense? Are they that devoid of military experience? Are they that gullible? It is one thing for a leftist rag to accept the versions presented to it because it fits their world view. But the entirety of the rest of the media? And the tale is the same, although somewhat different, for all of the individuals listed above. Each had their 15 minutes of Media fame before each was shot down as frauds. Their stories were front page news but their comeuppance was little more than a footnote. Of the footnote, I am not surprised. But it surprises and galls me they were so readily accepted in the first place.
Comment Posted By SShiell On 7.08.2007 @ 22:39
