Recent content by squealiox

I have heard many broadcasters, including the BBC and even the Evil Satanic Baby-Eating CBC, use our pronunciation for our troops, the other for US troops. A simple courtesy, and technically correct. So I am a nitpicker. But "bigoted"? Gimme a f'n break ...

What a bunch of ingorant a**holes. Idiotboy can't even pronounce LGen Leslie's rank properly either.

A word to the wise. you might want to be careful about citing that particular person in a forum like this. she has some rather "interesting" opinions about some of our nation's fallen soldiers. rather reminiscent of toobis, in fact. here's a link to what she had to say about some troops killed...

trivia quiz. anyone recognise this OP? (spotted last year. number changed by new management)

did someone say libertarians are not utopians? if that's the case, you should have no trouble naming a few libertarian countries then. you know, ones where the government does law enforcement and defence, and nothing else whatsoever. just one? anybody? ps -- the republic of sealand is out of...

i wish mark steyn would just come right out and admit that he did a little dance of joy on sept. 11. he's been using it to showcase his cluelessness ever since. in fact, you can almost hear the little twerp drooling in this article he wrote in the national post two days after 911: isn't there a...

so i guess that means all these other corrections on that NYT page must also be proof of an MSM conspiracy, then? ::)

Yup, reuters sure dropped the ball on this one (and yes, they HAVE apologised). but as probably the only person here who actually worked at reuters once upon a time, i gotta laugh at this whole idea that the company has some sort of ideological bias. their editors have a wide variety of opinions...

a sad day for the eddies. RIP mcpl. fears no foe.

like i said already, every single point made on those (rather old) links you provide has been demolished long ago. the "hockey stick" graph has long since been superseded by numerous other (and far more important) models, studies and datasets that show the same results anyway. solar radiation...

no argument there. although i think that nuclear power will probably have to play a key role in any sensible approach (to both problems). how could you possibly know this? and despite the mountain of evidence and a clear theoretical mechanism already pointing pretty conclusively to manmade...

since we are on the topic of "math illiteracy", could someone please explain to me how: 22 BILLION tonnes (yearly average manmade co2 emissions)  is a smaller number than 200 MILLION tonnes (yearly average co2 emitted by volcanoes)? (figures courtesy of the u.s. govt...

what "American goods and services" would those be? so far the asians have parked a net $700 billion plus in low-yield us govt debt, and counting, simply to keep forex rates where they want them. that's not a free market at work, and i don't see how it can go on forever.

GO, i didn't mean to derail this thread about your essay, so ... you might want to clarify just how the emissions trading scheme is intended to work, and focus on why you think it won't work. as a derivatives market (something i take a semi-professional interest in), the carbon markets are...

not in any peer-reviewed scientific journals, it wasn't. the USGS says humans produce 22 billion tons of co2 a year, volcanoes only 230 million, at most. volcanoes also produce particles that should have a cooling effect. http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/Hazards/What/VolGas/volgas.html no...