brenthutch

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content

    11,005

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    37

  • Feedback

    0%

Everything posted by brenthutch

  1. brenthutch
    "NOAA’s 2015 ‘Pausebuster’ paper was based on two new temperature sets of data – one containing measurements of temperatures at the planet’s surface on land, the other at the surface of the seas. Both datasets were flawed. This newspaper has learnt that NOAA has now decided that the sea dataset will have to be replaced and substantially revised just 18 months after it was issued, because it used unreliable methods which overstated the speed of warming. The revised data will show both lower temperatures and a slower rate in the recent warming trend." You must have missed the part about "unreliable" and "overstated".
  2. brenthutch
    It appears he has been! The only duped and manipulated folks here are the middle and working class people who believed that Trump has their best interests at heart. How about addressing the substance of the article. Your inability to respond in a meaningful manner speaks to the weakness of your position. If you best retort is "trump sucks and smoking is bad for you" we can all agreed that you concede the point.
  3. brenthutch
    https://science.house.gov/news/press-releases/former-noaa-scientist-confirms-colleagues-manipulated-climate-records How about this source? It came from the government so it must be trustworthy.
  4. brenthutch
    "Dr Bates revealed that the failure to archive and make available fully documented data not only violated NOAA rules, but also those set down by Science. Before he retired last year, he continued to raise the issue internally. Then came the final bombshell. Dr Bates said: ‘I learned that the computer used to process the software had suffered a complete failure.’ The reason for the failure is unknown, but it means the Pausebuster paper can never be replicated or verified by other scientists." Wow, first the IRS and now NOAA? A new twist to "My dog ate my homework"
  5. brenthutch
    +1 on the big pot. I use a big stainless steel pot from my beer brewing days. Cover the top with cling wrap then wrap a few towels around it to keep the heat in, especially for the long cooks (brisket and lamb shanks).
  6. brenthutch
    You say that like it's a bad thing. How about, "O'Leary is still a rock-ribbed, freedom and liberty loving entrepreneur?" It has a much better ring to it.
  7. brenthutch
    That is perhaps going a bit too far. If this is an actual soldier with PTSD or whatever making him lash out, he's probably already paid a pretty hefty price regardless of what we might think of his writing. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BJa_s_2QX_c SHE must have done 50 tours with SEAL team six. BTW members of the military especially those in combat arms use salty language. It is not uncommon for entire sentences to be comprised entirely of the F word. "F*ck! This f*cking f*cker is f*ching well f*cked. = Damn! This stupid thing is pretty well messed up. No PTSD required.
  8. brenthutch
    Or https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWgsdexkv18
  9. brenthutch
    Government regulators had very lax capital requirements for mortgage backed securities and sovereign debt. That turned out to be a mistake. Lending money to anyone with a pulse was a government initiative. I am not saying the banks did not take advantage, they did but they are not the evil boogie man. On NPR the other day they had an interview with a person who lived in their home for fourty years and now the evil bank was going to foreclose on them just because they stopped paying their mortgage. They tapped the equity in their paid-off house to have a money party and now they can't/won't pay it back. I'm sorry but stupid should hurt. "If you can't be a good example, be a cautionary tale"
  10. brenthutch
    Iron Mike is a name for statues of service members.
  11. brenthutch
    The main villain in the Great Recession was the greedy American people. Banks just found ways meet that demand. Clinton and Bush can take some blame for policies which pushed home ownership on folks who had neither the financial nor social wearwithal to handle it. Barney Frank said he had no problem rolling the dice with the banks money, if it ment more home ownership for the poor. This created an artificial demand spike which effected the whole housing market. I do nothing think Obama helped the matter when he told tens of thousands of small business owners that he was going to spread their wealth around.
  12. brenthutch
    Agreed, there few things more loathsome than an angry feminist.
  13. brenthutch
    Not to be out done by the west coast, the peace and diversity loving tolerance monkeys (AKA democrats) of NYU show how they roll. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BJa_s_2QX_c
  14. brenthutch
    No actually, just like science. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OL6-x0modwY
  15. brenthutch
    At least he is channeling his anger into something productive unlike these guys http://reason.com/blog/2017/02/03/nyu-prof-screams-at-the-nypd-because-the
  16. brenthutch
    https://muddywatermacro.wustl.edu/node/92 Key Points During the “Consumer Age” period from the early 1980s through 2007, much of U.S. demand growth was generated by the rapid growth of consumer spending financed by unprecedented increases in household debt. The unsustainable rise in debt set the stage for the Great Recession. The unprecedented borrowing of American households was facilitated by innovations in mortgage lending that fueled a bubble in home prices. Rising home prices generated more home equity which allowed even more borrowing. The housing bubble burst when interest rates rose and refinancing stalled, forcing more homeowners to try to sell. Home prices began to fall. Lenders began to fear default and cut off credit. With refinancing greatly curtailed and home prices declining, over-extended homeowners began to default on their mortgages. The resulting financial panic caused demand for consumption and new houses to collapse, the trigger of the Great Recession.
  17. brenthutch
    "Post hoc ergo propter hoc" is a common fallacy. Just like CO2 and global warming. Got it.
  18. brenthutch
    Did you read the whole article?
  19. brenthutch
    https://www.gruntworks11b.com/war-room/a-message-to-the-angry-leftists-from-an-american-infantryman/ "I know you don’t know me. I know you don’t even think about me and when you do, it’s probably not anything nice. I’m the evil hegemonically masculine patriarchal oppressor to you feminists. I’m the jackbooted statist thug to you dope smokin’ long-haired hippies. I’m “The Man” to you racial activists. I’m the idiot who joined the military because I “wasn’t smart enough” to go get a liberal arts degree like you know-it-all 20-year-old college dipshits; and for some reason you hate me for that. I’m that guy with the rifle who signed on the dotted line for $24K a year so that you budding Marxist fucksticks could have the freedom to complain about me and the manner in which I provide it. I have a little message for you...." ***the view expressed in article are not necessarily the views of Brenthutch***
  20. brenthutch
    "Politics is the art of the possible" Otto Von Bismarck
  21. brenthutch
    I'm not claiming I am right, I just don't understand the socio/political calculus. I'm not trying to be a jerk, I really don't get it. Why the seemingly futile kamikaze charges?
  22. brenthutch
    I got off work and went to a bar I worked at when I was in college, with our head of security. I noticed a girl at the bar and told him "she is not the best looking girl in the bar, but she is the best looking girl in the bar to me". At the same time she told her friend, "see that guy in the suit? I'm going to marry him." Twenty years and two kids later and we are still going strong.
  23. brenthutch
    They can reject his philosophy all day long but to what end? Any Democratic obstruction, at this point, is self defeating.
  24. brenthutch
    Are you suggesting Scalia was fine on all of those issues?
  25. brenthutch
    What everyone is fighting over is NOT a particular nominee but the balance of the court. Replacing Scalia, a conservative, with Garland, a left-leaning moderate, would have shifted the balance. That is why I disagree with the Dems' tactics. Trading a conservative for another conservative changes nothing. There is no way they are going to get a Republican president and a Republican Senate to nominate a liberal justice. They could be reasonable and collegial and approve a conservative to replace Scalia. The next go around, when it comes time to replace a liberal justice, they could justifiably claim the moral high ground and have some leverage. The problem is that their base will punish them. The axiom that comes to mind is cutting your nose off to spite your face.