Old 07-24-2011, 09:54 PM   #51
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,192
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ween View Post
Thanks, but I'll be okay. No matter what I write, what data I provide, how much "proof" I come to the table with, people are going to believe what they want to believe.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ween View Post
Charles, I'm not going to show you my transcripts, but I earned my degree from the U.S. Air Force Academy, not exactly a light-weight place for education (and other things). 154.0 credit hours for a Bachelor's is more than I'd ever want to experience again.
Your earlier post, the one I had problems with, #20, showed no evidence of the above academic work. Or to put it less politely, you sounded like a dunce. So your education didn't do much for your ability to communicate.

On global climate change, I have a view, but I have intentionally avoided that debate, mainly because just don't feel like getting into a non-RR debate here, so I haven't felt like rising to the occasion.

But I will say one thing now. It is well known that climate has fluctuated over time. IIRC, the House of Lords held sessions on the frozen Thames back in the day, one of the cool periods in the graph shown by Travis. Climate has and will continue to fluctuate. That is a separate issue from the extent that adding the many tons of CO2 to the atmosphere, transferred from subsurface deposits where it had been in a steady state, changes the climate above and beyond its natural fluctuations.

So saying that the climate has fluctuated in the past is no counterargument. It simply does not matter in terms of the logic of the issue! And I trust the scientists to separate the natural and the man-made components.

As for the graph - difficult to read, BTW, it has no vertical scale, although the center line is 57 degrees F and two other points seems to be marked, 58.3 and 54.3, hard to believe that any scientist would put out such a sloppy graph but I suppose it does happen - the max vertical in the graph appears to be + 2 degrees F. The wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPCC_Fo...essment_Report) says the "low" scenario is an increase of 2 to 5 degrees, the "high" scenario is 4-11. So the projection is an impact waaay beyond the extent of variation in the graph provided by Travis. And, of course, would be additive to whatever Mother Nature was planning on sending our way.

One caution, as I have no clue what kind of temperature is being reported in the graph (again, not a scientific graph, more of a pop-science graph), I don't know how it compares to the temperature measure given in the wiki, which is called "surface air warming".

J
__________________
My RP pix are here.
My Flickr pix are here.

My commentaries on rail pictures are in my blog.

RP Photo Albums:
Cabooses
Engine Details
Farm and Train
Plumes!
Railroad Details
Signal Details
Switchstand Shots
JRMDC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2011, 12:30 AM   #52
bigbassloyd
Senior Member
 
bigbassloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Hilldale, West Virginia
Posts: 3,441
Default

My take:

In Southern WV it's hot as hell during the Summer, cold as hell during the Winter, and in between those in Spring and Fall. That's all I'll testify to.

Loyd L.
__________________
I may not be the greatest railroad photographer ever, but I'm certainly a much nicer person.

American Rails dot com - A fantastic website with tons of information and photographs related to American railroads and locomotives.
bigbassloyd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2011, 01:23 AM   #53
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,740
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by troy12n View Post
I just find it real funny that the teabaggers and most republicans (yes, I am going to call out a specific political group) after a couple above average snowfall winters proclaim global warming and climate change as bunk science, and then are completely silent when the country is in the middle of a record setting heat wave. Coincidance? Well, mostly silent.
There have certainly been warmer summers in the past...long ago. Was that global warming then? Also, one "record setting" summer is going to prove the theory of global warming? How is that acceptable in proving it while recent record setting winters don't count to disprove it?

Quote:
One blowhard, Rush Limbaugh said on his show the other day that this heat wave is a government created conspiracy and there is no such thing as the heat index.

You cant make this stuff up...
So you listen to Rush, yet you think he's a blowhard? I'm guessing Rush said that with tongue firmly planted in cheek, as he says a LOT of things facetiously just to gut under the skin of left wing nutjobs.

I'm no republican, and I'm certainly not a conservative, but I can see and appreciate his shtick from a mile away, ever since the first time I listened to him back in 1986 when he was on local radio in Sacramento. I just think it's really funny when libs get all worked up by what he says and they don't even listen to his show to hear the context of what he said.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Freericks View Post
Here you go, Jim. If this doesn't work, it's USA Today -

http://content.usatoday.com/communit...imate-change/1
Thanks for the link, Charles. I hadn't heard that percentage figure before.
__________________
.
Rhymes with slice, rice and mice, and probably should be spelled like "Tice."

This pretty much sums it up: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Thias

Last edited by JimThias; 07-25-2011 at 01:26 AM.
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2011, 02:22 AM   #54
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,044
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimThias View Post

I'm no republican, and I'm certainly not a conservative, but I can see and appreciate his shtick from a mile away, ever since the first time I listened to him back in 1986 when he was on local radio in Sacramento. I just think it's really funny when libs get all worked up by what he says and they don't even listen to his show to hear the context of what he said.

I used to listen to him and get a laugh when he had his own TV show. He had taken a lot of his shtick from Morton Downey, Jr. and Wally George. Didn't agree with him (or them) but he was entertaining.

I think the money and the power have since convinced him that his pop-culture observations are more important than the facts. He roots against America when the party he is against is in power. This is not a baseball game in which you root against the team you don't like. He has proudly said that the reason partisanship has become so ugly and intransigent today is because he has personally shifted the way America does politics with his words.

The entertainment value is gone for me.
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2011, 04:36 AM   #55
trainboysd40
Senior Member
 
trainboysd40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Calgary, Alberta on the CP Laggan Subdivision
Posts: 2,048
Send a message via MSN to trainboysd40
Default

I am just agape at this thread.
Anyway, one thing I want to point out is that volcanoes (along with nuclear explosions and large meteorite collisions) cause a large-scale cooling due to particulates thrown into the atmosphere that block out solar radiation.
__________________
got a D5 IIi and now he doesnt afread fo 12800 iSO
Youtube (Model Railway, Vlogs, Tutorials, and prototype)
My Website
Obligatory link to shots on RP, HERE
trainboysd40 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2011, 11:57 AM   #56
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,740
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freericks View Post
I think the money and the power have since convinced him that his pop-culture observations are more important than the facts. He roots against America when the party he is against is in power. This is not a baseball game in which you root against the team you don't like. He has proudly said that the reason partisanship has become so ugly and intransigent today is because he has personally shifted the way America does politics with his words.

I've never heard him "root against America." If anything, he roots against dems/libs who are in power. That's perfectly acceptable in my book because the dems/libs do the same thing when republicans are in power. They sure can dish it out but can't take it!
__________________
.
Rhymes with slice, rice and mice, and probably should be spelled like "Tice."

This pretty much sums it up: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Thias
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2011, 05:12 PM   #57
troy12n
Senior Member
 
troy12n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 5,347
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimThias View Post
There have certainly been warmer summers in the past...long ago. Was that global warming then? Also, one "record setting" summer is going to prove the theory of global warming? How is that acceptable in proving it while recent record setting winters don't count to disprove it?
It's not one, it's a pattern of them lately. Coincidance? Maybe

Quote:
So you listen to Rush, yet you think he's a blowhard? I'm guessing Rush said that with tongue firmly planted in cheek, as he says a LOT of things facetiously just to gut under the skin of left wing nutjobs.
I dont listen too often, and it seems every time I do, he says some of the most absurd things. A lot of it does not seem to be tongue in cheek either.

Quote:
I'm no republican, and I'm certainly not a conservative, but I can see and appreciate his shtick from a mile away, ever since the first time I listened to him back in 1986 when he was on local radio in Sacramento. I just think it's really funny when libs get all worked up by what he says and they don't even listen to his show to hear the context of what he said.
I understand it's part of his shtick, I really do, but what's funny about it is his hard core audience does not see it as shtick, they think it's real, and that's kind of frightening because some of those people vote. I think that's why we ended up with 2 terms of bush. Well, at least 1 term of bush, John Kerry was an idiot.
__________________
My RP.net photos
troy12n is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2011, 06:04 PM   #58
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,044
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimThias View Post
I've never heard him "root against America." If anything, he roots against dems/libs who are in power. That's perfectly acceptable in my book because the dems/libs do the same thing when republicans are in power. They sure can dish it out but can't take it!
Rooting against the President of the United States is rooting against America.

I don't care who is President, if he is elected by the people, he is President.

It was wrong when W was attacked and it's wrong when Obama is attacked... but it started with Rush against Clinton. And he's stated that and is proud of it.
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2011, 03:40 AM   #59
Chris Z
Senior Member
 
Chris Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Libertyville, Il
Posts: 937
Send a message via Skype™ to Chris Z
Default

Would you agree that what you see here contributes to global warming?





Chris Z
Chris Z is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2011, 03:45 AM   #60
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,044
Default

I don't have the degree or knowledge to tell you - my question is what the heck happened to the short hood on the GEEP?
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2011, 03:50 AM   #61
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,740
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freericks View Post
Rooting against the President of the United States is rooting against America.

I don't care who is President, if he is elected by the people, he is President.

It was wrong when W was attacked and it's wrong when Obama is attacked... but it started with Rush against Clinton. And he's stated that and is proud of it.
Started with Rush against Clinton? Are you kidding me? People of opposing parties have been attacking presidents for years. The President shouldn't be untouchable. If he isn't performing his job, then he most certainly should be open to criticism just like everyone else in this country. That shouldn't be defined as "rooting against America."

Those same people who elected (hired) the President to do his job have all the right in the world to criticize him when he fails at it.

Plenty of libs out there were proud of attacking both Junior and Senior as well as Reagan. I've listened to a lot of left wing talk radio over the years to be well aware of that, not to mention friends (and non-friends) and family members.

I just think it's really funny that democrats are so quick to defend Obama when he's criticized, and at times sound offended, yet they were silent when their fellow libs were attacking Bush Jr. and Sr.
__________________
.
Rhymes with slice, rice and mice, and probably should be spelled like "Tice."

This pretty much sums it up: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Thias
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2011, 04:06 AM   #62
Chris Z
Senior Member
 
Chris Z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Libertyville, Il
Posts: 937
Send a message via Skype™ to Chris Z
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freericks View Post
I don't have the degree or knowledge to tell you - my question is what the heck happened to the short hood on the GEEP?
To me it doesn't matter if they have a degree or not, I just can't tell if I can trust them or believe them, regardless of how much intelligence they have. And I don't have enough intelligence to tell the difference. All I know is every time I here about going green it costs me money.

I need to find and scan that letter I got from the Illinois EPA, where they state that they want to inspect my premises (house) so they can determine how much paint I use on my model trains. Then they will decide how much of a tax to charge me based on that finding.

I came across those Geeps last Saturday. What a crazy rebuild. It looks like a Larson storm door on that cab.

Chris Z
Chris Z is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2011, 04:09 AM   #63
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,044
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimThias View Post
Started with Rush against Clinton? Are you kidding me? People of opposing parties have been attacking presidents for years. The President shouldn't be untouchable. If he isn't performing his job, then he most certainly should be open to criticism just like everyone else in this country. That shouldn't be defined as "rooting against America."

Those same people who elected (hired) the President to do his job have all the right in the world to criticize him when he fails at it.

Plenty of libs out there were proud of attacking both Junior and Senior as well as Reagan. I've listened to a lot of left wing talk radio over the years to be well aware of that, not to mention friends (and non-friends) and family members.

I just think it's really funny that democrats are so quick to defend Obama when he's criticized, and at times sound offended, yet they were silent when their fellow libs were attacking Bush Jr. and Sr.
You didn't notice the difference between the tenor of that attacks on Clinton versus against Papa Bush, Reagan, Carter, and Ford? Maybe you're too young to have lived through it. The attacks on Clinton - sending an indie prosecutor against him who was going after him for a real estate deal that he lost money on and nailing him for lying about sex (untwist that pretzel). We may just have to agree to disagree here, but the venom, vitriol, and pure hatred was nothing in the 70s and 80s like it was in the 90s.

There's a difference between criticizing he President and telling lie after horrific lie about him - claiming he doesn't love the country for example. Liberals were absolutely wrong doing it against W and Conservatives are wrong doing it against Obama. What happened to decorum? What happened to love of country? Who are these folk?

Maybe I've become the old guy in the corner yelling "get off my lawn," but I remember when folks had some respect and tried to work together. If someone had said about Reagan or Carter what Rush says today, he would be an utter failure. No one would listen.

Last edited by Freericks; 07-26-2011 at 04:11 AM.
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2011, 04:10 AM   #64
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,044
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Z View Post
I need to find and scan that letter I got from the Illinois EPA, where they state that they want to inspect my premises (house) so they can determine how much paint I use on my model trains. Then they will decide how much of a tax to charge me based on that finding.

Chris Z
Well that's just absolutely nutty. I can't believe that happened to you.
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2011, 05:04 AM   #65
trainboysd40
Senior Member
 
trainboysd40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Calgary, Alberta on the CP Laggan Subdivision
Posts: 2,048
Send a message via MSN to trainboysd40
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimThias View Post
Started with Rush against Clinton? Are you kidding me? People of opposing parties have been attacking presidents for years. The President shouldn't be untouchable. If he isn't performing his job, then he most certainly should be open to criticism just like everyone else in this country. That shouldn't be defined as "rooting against America."

Those same people who elected (hired) the President to do his job have all the right in the world to criticize him when he fails at it.

Plenty of libs out there were proud of attacking both Junior and Senior as well as Reagan. I've listened to a lot of left wing talk radio over the years to be well aware of that, not to mention friends (and non-friends) and family members.

I just think it's really funny that democrats are so quick to defend Obama when he's criticized, and at times sound offended, yet they were silent when their fellow libs were attacking Bush Jr. and Sr.
It's called bipartisan politics. Both sides hate each other beyond anything reasonable. It's tearing your country apart as well as destroying it.
__________________
got a D5 IIi and now he doesnt afread fo 12800 iSO
Youtube (Model Railway, Vlogs, Tutorials, and prototype)
My Website
Obligatory link to shots on RP, HERE

Last edited by trainboysd40; 07-26-2011 at 05:07 AM.
trainboysd40 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2011, 06:00 AM   #66
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,044
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by trainboysd40 View Post
It's called bipartisan politics. Both sides hate each other beyond anything reasonable. It's tearing your country apart as well as destroying it.
Me thinks the Canuck has it right.

Last edited by Freericks; 07-26-2011 at 06:02 AM.
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2011, 11:11 AM   #67
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,192
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by trainboysd40 View Post
It's called bipartisan politics. Both sides hate each other beyond anything reasonable. It's tearing your country apart as well as destroying it.
But its different now, much more hostile, much less willing to compromise. I think part of the answer lies here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/25/us...ef=johnharwood

Quote:
What most complicates the chances for compromise is the broad political realignment that has played out over the decades since World War II. Once, partisan differences were blurred by intraparty factions in a Democratic caucus with Southern conservatives and a Republican caucus with Northern liberals.

Now, partisan and ideological boundaries are powerfully self-reinforcing a double-layered Great Wall of Division, buttressed by fund-raising patterns and gerrymandered House districts.

A National Journal analysis of voting patterns earlier this year showed the trend essentially perfected. The 2010 record of the most liberal Senate Republican lay to the right of the most conservative Senate Democrat.
To me that last sentence is just stunning, no overlap at all, no common ground. Politics needs common ground to function well.
__________________
My RP pix are here.
My Flickr pix are here.

My commentaries on rail pictures are in my blog.

RP Photo Albums:
Cabooses
Engine Details
Farm and Train
Plumes!
Railroad Details
Signal Details
Switchstand Shots
JRMDC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2011, 11:58 AM   #68
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,740
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freericks View Post
You didn't notice the difference between the tenor of that attacks on Clinton versus against Papa Bush, Reagan, Carter, and Ford? Maybe you're too young to have lived through it.
I've been listening to and a fan of talk radio for over 25 years. I've heard it all, especially from liberals who have been less than gracious about Reagan.



Quote:
There's a difference between criticizing the President and telling lie after horrific lie about him - claiming he doesn't love the country for example. Liberals were absolutely wrong doing it against W and Conservatives are wrong doing it against Obama. What happened to decorum? What happened to love of country? Who are these folk?

Maybe I've become the old guy in the corner yelling "get off my lawn," but I remember when folks had some respect and tried to work together. If someone had said about Reagan or Carter what Rush says today, he would be an utter failure. No one would listen.
It's human nature. People have, and always will, criticize and attack those who share a different political belief.
__________________
.
Rhymes with slice, rice and mice, and probably should be spelled like "Tice."

This pretty much sums it up: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Thias

Last edited by JimThias; 07-26-2011 at 12:00 PM.
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2011, 02:50 PM   #69
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,044
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimThias View Post
I've been listening to and a fan of talk radio for over 25 years. I've heard it all, especially from liberals who have been less than gracious about Reagan.

It's human nature. People have, and always will, criticize and attack those who share a different political belief.
Less then gracious isn't an issue. As you noted before, there is nothing wrong with criticizing each other (for example, there are lots of opinions on this thread, and no one has said anything that crossed the line).

I never once heard RR described as being a worse enemy of the USA then the Soviets (who were the big USA enemy at the time). And even if I had, the Soviets were not the horrific perps of attacks on US soil (AQ) that latter Presidents have been called worse than.

I know you've been an adult for a long time - my point was the five or ten years longer that I've been one is the exact time frame that you think the internal hatred was as high. My memory is that it wasn't. There was huge amounts of criticism and people had bad things to say about the other party, yes, but that was Little League compared to what goes on today.

The shift was in 1993, when I think frankly, a certain AM radio host rose to superstar status. But I'm not the only one who thinks this. Said superstar radio host feels the same way - and is proud for what he's done.
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2011, 05:11 PM   #70
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,044
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRMDC View Post
But its different now, much more hostile, much less willing to compromise. I think part of the answer lies here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/25/us...ef=johnharwood

Quote:
What most complicates the chances for compromise is the broad political realignment that has played out over the decades since World War II. Once, partisan differences were blurred by intraparty factions in a Democratic caucus with Southern conservatives and a Republican caucus with Northern liberals.

Now, partisan and ideological boundaries are powerfully self-reinforcing — a double-layered Great Wall of Division, buttressed by fund-raising patterns and gerrymandered House districts.

A National Journal analysis of voting patterns earlier this year showed the trend essentially perfected. The 2010 record of the most liberal Senate Republican lay to the right of the most conservative Senate Democrat.

To me that last sentence is just stunning, no overlap at all, no common ground. Politics needs common ground to function well.

Ah, but political ground shifts over time. The majority of the folk who were Dixiecrats switched parties to the Republicans in the 1970s/1980s period (and were basically done, I think by the time Reagan took power).

The moderate Republicans were pretty much just allowed to whither and die (so that today's "moderate" Republicans are actually the old "conservatives"). Interestingly, when Reagan ran for President in 1976, he had chosen for his running mate Senator Richard Schweiker - one of the most liberal Republicans in the Senate. If that does not give testimony to the idea of working together to govern - rather than yelling at each other for political gain, I'm not sure what does.

If you look at much of what Thomas Jefferson stood for (the first President from today's Democratic party) you essentially have a modern Republican (state's rights, small government).

If you look at much of what Abraham Lincoln stood for (the first President from today's Republican party) you essentially have a moden Democrat (he squashed state's rights for the good of the Union - allowing Federal power to determine what could and could not be done).

Both were great man, and the above statements are easily open to argument, as they are overly simplistic - but the main point is that the ground is not stationary.
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2011, 05:20 PM   #71
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,192
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freericks View Post
Ah, but political ground shifts over time.
Agreed, but it is amazing to me that it has shifted in this particular way to this extent.
__________________
My RP pix are here.
My Flickr pix are here.

My commentaries on rail pictures are in my blog.

RP Photo Albums:
Cabooses
Engine Details
Farm and Train
Plumes!
Railroad Details
Signal Details
Switchstand Shots
JRMDC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2011, 06:08 PM   #72
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,044
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRMDC View Post
Agreed, but it is amazing to me that it has shifted in this particular way to this extent.
I believe it's a direct result of the internet and cable television. If we don't like the news, we can go find an outlet that provides us with a different version of the story that we do like.

The folks who were the fringe (on both sides) in earlier times are now the mainstream and have their beliefs both confirmed and even further radicalized by the information sources they choose.

In a weird way, the belief in compromise and governing for the good of the people that we once had was rare (unique to the USA and some other Western Democracies). Today, we are becoming more like the rest of the world where the extremes are far more powerful than those who get things done (and those extremes are more interested in maintaining power by cowtowing to their radical bases than they are in keeping the machinery oiled and operational).

Last edited by Freericks; 07-26-2011 at 06:29 PM.
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2011, 11:42 PM   #73
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,740
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRMDC View Post
Agreed, but it is amazing to me that it has shifted in this particular way to this extent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freericks View Post
I believe it's a direct result of the internet and cable television.
As I was reading your last reply to my previous post, all I could think of was things are so different these days because of the internet. Then I read J's comment and my thought was reinforced. It appears you and I agree on at least one thing by your latest post.

Internet forums, newsgroups (remember those?) and blogs have certainly increased awareness of opinion when it comes to political figures...including the President. The human nature comment I made earlier is magnified to the millionth degree (or perhaps even more!) on the internet. It's so easy to find it, as opposed to say, 20+ years ago. You can bet people still felt the same way and said the same things about political figures they opposed, but there just wasn't the outlet that there is now. Rush certainly made it easy for people to voice their opinions (including his) on a national scale, but progress in technology has taken it so far beyond what kind of impact Rush or any other talk radio host can have...IMO.

Wait, wasn't this thread about global warming?
__________________
.
Rhymes with slice, rice and mice, and probably should be spelled like "Tice."

This pretty much sums it up: http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Thias
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2011, 11:55 PM   #74
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,044
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimThias View Post
As I was reading your last reply to my previous post, all I could think of was things are so different these days because of the internet. Then I read J's comment and my thought was reinforced. It appears you and I agree on at least one thing by your latest post.

Internet forums, newsgroups (remember those?) and blogs have certainly increased awareness of opinion when it comes to political figures...including the President. The human nature comment I made earlier is magnified to the millionth degree (or perhaps even more!) on the internet. It's so easy to find it, as opposed to say, 20+ years ago. You can bet people still felt the same way and said the same things about political figures they opposed, but there just wasn't the outlet that there is now. Rush certainly made it easy for people to voice their opinions (including his) on a national scale, but progress in technology has taken it so far beyond what kind of impact Rush or any other talk radio host can have...IMO.

Wait, wasn't this thread about global warming?
In reverse order -

Yes, and that's why you and I are making so much hot air.

Yes, we have found common ground. The difference is that "established figures" are now taking part in the ugliest side of it. The internet has been the biggest part of their becoming "established" (although AM radio and cable TV have helped - and obviously in one case, been more important).

Essentially, the bar conversations have become the new mainstream media.
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:12 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.