Spork Boards
Hot Spork Chat : Join us in an AIM chat room!

Granberry's Parlor

tomierna's Avatar Picture tomierna (Admin) – December 07, 2007 09:46PM Reply Quote
Politics. Don Granberry on the old Spork Boards was quite fond of talking about them, and here we continue on in that fine tradition.

stan adams – December 13, 2007 06:57AM Reply Quote
If you were interviewing a recent college grad and you found this sort of evidence of their previous work how would you react:

http://slappy.cs.uiuc.edu/fall04/cs492/Group8/

I mean this was supposed to be a capstone, and the thing is poorly written, not spell-checked, sort of embarrassingly simple...

I guess it just reflects on the diminishing quality of CS grads that Illinois is churning out.

Sad. Disheartening.

rino – December 13, 2007 07:55AM Reply Quote
In America, the only respectable form of socialism is socialism for the rich.
That hurts.

El Jeffe – December 13, 2007 08:21AM Reply Quote
What a journey.
it's sad....NEXT candidate.

What a journey.

stan adams – December 13, 2007 09:13AM Reply Quote
Yeah one of the younger folks on the team (and by younger I mean she still has like 10 years experience but I was born in a the decade that came before hers...) was trying to make excuses for the person "Maybe they thought of the website as sort of a "My Space" thing" ...

I'm thinking if this loser can't spell-check/proof-read then maybe they NEED to go live in a Web 2.0 world before they look for a job in the 'normal' world. Where is Fake Steve when you need him?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/13/2007 09:14AM by stan adams.

El Jeffe – December 20, 2007 05:09AM Reply Quote
What a journey.

Dr. Strangelove – December 20, 2007 07:02AM Reply Quote
Wow, Inhofe's still at it, huh? He's up for re-election in 2008, hope the AGW denialism keeps working for him.

stan adams – December 20, 2007 08:47AM Reply Quote
I am pretty damned sure that I stated that the notion that "the debate was over" was a HUGE mistake for Al GOre et al to try and advance -- doing so in front of physical science researcher is like throwing fresh meat to a pack of piranha.

OF COURSE scientists are going to disagree. THAT IS A PRIMARY REASON THEY ARE DEVOTED TO RESEARCH! I also am not surprised that there is growing sense that attempt so control human induced global warming is utterly futile -- again science researchers are not given to optimism when it comes to getting folks to work together.

ULTIMATELY there is going to be a nasty boomerang effect here...

People generally have a little tolerance for "finer details" and the bigger picture of "act locally think globally" has NEVER EVER worked when it comes to the vast majority of problems that mankind has faced.

AS A SPECIES we have a tendency to deal with things in a "checklist" manner --

AND THEN when it turns the problems isn't "solved" we sorta ignore it and/or make a checklist.

Not good at all.

Robert Taylor – December 20, 2007 09:32AM Reply Quote
"Scientists dispute shape of earth"...

ddt – December 20, 2007 10:02AM Reply Quote
heh. am reading "Hollow Earth" by david standish... could use some better editing, but interesting how an idea was kept alive, at least in the imagination.

ddt

Dr. Strangelove – December 20, 2007 11:21AM Reply Quote
Hey, maybe Huckabee will win the nomination and pick Inhofe as his running mate. That would be entertaining.

But of course, while Huckabee has seen through the evilutionist propaganda, he's fallen for the global warming hoax, so it won't happen.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/20/2007 11:22AM by Dr. Strangelove.

Mokers – December 21, 2007 03:37AM Reply Quote
Formerly Remy Martin
What is anybody really doing about global warming than talking about it? Even under the bush administration, our carbon output has been growing at a slower pace than the EU, so until countries start doing more than complaining about other people not doing their part, I am not going to be upset about any politician not caring.

I for one wish that the country I am from had a carbon output 10x what it is now, because that would likely mean they had nice things like industry and infrastructure. The rate at which humans have been removing carbon from their energy production has decreased more in the last 100 years than at any other point in history. And since I am to believe from some people that we won't have any more oil in 50-100 years anyway, it should really plummet again very soon.

I think overpopulation is a bigger concern.

Late edit:

And if huckabee wins the nomination, I predict 12 years of left rule. Of course, the Democrats could always manage to fuck things up. Over the years I have begun to believe that the sitting government has very little control over what I do in my day to day life other than charging me money for various things. Worrying about who is in power has brought me nowhere. I'll continue to vote down every idiotic referendum in my state (read: all of them), and worry about things that might actually do me some good, like getting some tail.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/21/2007 03:44AM by Mokers.

Dr. Strangelove – December 21, 2007 04:19AM Reply Quote
Quote
Mokers
What is anybody really doing about global warming than talking about it? Even under the bush administration, our carbon output has been growing at a slower pace than the EU, so until countries start doing more than complaining about other people not doing their part, I am not going to be upset about any politician not caring.

Some countries are doing quite a bit. According to the data here, from 1990 - 2005, GHG emissions in Germany fell 18.4%, in France 1.6%, in the UK 14.8%, in Denmark & Sweden 7%. The European Community as a whole fell 1.5% (not sure how that's defined), while the US was up 16.3%. Some European countries are up, some more than the US, but there certainly are countries that do "more than complaining".

Mokers – December 21, 2007 07:03AM Reply Quote
Formerly Remy Martin
egg,

Sounds great, doesn't it? Except the European Union has adjusted it's baseline 1990 levels up several times. And as a whole, the European Union benefits from being able to include many Warsaw Pact countries that had shit economies in 1990 as part of their baseline. Germany, for example, gets to include East Germany as its baseline, and they benefit because many East German factories were shut down. Not because they had excess capacity, but because they were not profitable. And even then, Germany has not yet reached its Kyoto target.

The 1990 baseline has been heavily debated. Many European nations were switching to natural gas from coal for heating for reasons outside of signing Kyoto. Use a different baseline, say 1997 when the treaty was announced, or 2002 when the EU actually ratified it, and those numbers don't look so great. But hey, good job to the EU for negotiating a good treaty for themselves. If they are actually increasing emissions every year since 2000, it's no big deal.

And many of the countries that report decreases do so with the help of carbon credits. At one time, each country was supposed to do an 8% decrease, but the EU changed it to 8% collectively. Are we really doing that much for the earth by paying other people to let us pollute? If only we let Enron stick around for a little longer, they could have spent enough money to get carbon trading to market earlier, and really helped make themselves money save the environment.

Also, I should have been more careful with my language. When mentioning "carbon", I should have said CO2, and under the Bush administration, our rate of increase is lower than EUs. Since 1990, that may not be the case, but most of that increase came under Cliton's tenure, just to be fair.

stan adams – December 21, 2007 10:28AM Reply Quote
I think mokers view will become the mainstream US opinion -- that will lead to more catcalls when the US National Anthem is played, unless there is other Ron Reagan or BILL Clinton elected, but hey, people have to eat...

I do think that this game COULD be played for some real benefits, but in my view that won't happen because that would require that a lot of "New World Third World" countries (like Mexico, the Caribbean, Brazil, Venezuela. Ecuador, Peru) would have to prove that they are better places to invest in the manufacture of "new green tech" than the PacRim, and that seems VERY unlikely...

SO -- you are going have the EU lording it over the US and getting help from the notorius "keep my homies in the dark as long as me and my elite corrupt pals stay in power" that run NW3rdWrld.

My won't this be fun...

Mokers – December 21, 2007 11:45AM Reply Quote
Formerly Remy Martin
Quote
stan adams
I do think that this game COULD be played for some real benefits, but in my view that won't happen because that would require that a lot of "New World Third World" countries (like Mexico, the Caribbean, Brazil, Venezuela. Ecuador, Peru) would have to prove that they are better places to invest in the manufacture of "new green tech" than the PacRim, and that seems VERY unlikely...

I really don't have a problem with the green movement, but the way governments go about proving they are green infuriates me. The EU uses Kyoto for bragging rights more than anything else. The same can be said about our politicians here, of course. Just look at the new proposed MPG standards. Big number, but full of loopholes, especially when it comes to ethanol. But really, who wants to piss off the corn lobby when Iowa is coming up?

But now I'm getting myself worked up again.

rino – December 21, 2007 12:58PM Reply Quote
In America, the only respectable form of socialism is socialism for the rich.
The MPG number is too conservative IMO ... and we have asshats saying it's not feasible.

What, you think people will actually believe others are pulling the wool over our eyes and that it's not a vast right wing conspiracy to question Kyoto or the EU's claims?

All we really need is John Kerry ... hahhahahaha. The left might just fuck us again -- can't wait to see who gets the nomination.

tliet – December 23, 2007 09:34PM Reply Quote
Driving a car isn't the worst one can do to ruin the environment, still the EU is doing what it can to try to change things in the industry. Not sure if it will work tho.

What's worse than transportation? Meat.

Mokers – December 24, 2007 01:46AM Reply Quote
Formerly Remy Martin
Quote
tliet
Driving a car isn't the worst one can do to ruin the environment, still the EU is doing what it can to try to change things in the industry. Not sure if it will work tho.

Well, for those of us who don't get a chance to pump untreated chemical waste into the environment, it is up there.

And EU milage mandates have precious little to do with the higher average fuel economy over there. That award goes to various taxes you have enacted. As I have said all along, a gas tax will be the quickest way to improve fuel economy over here, but it is of course politcal suicide. I will vote for the first politician who admits that a gas tax is much better than empty CAFE promises.

ghidorah – December 24, 2007 06:45AM Reply Quote
Raise taxes on cavemen. --jw
Agree with both tliet and Mokers.

1. the overproduction (and consumption) of meat is a huge drain on our resources and environment--right up there with overfishing of the oceans

2. the only real way to reduce overall consumption of oil in the us is to raise the price

and would like to add a third point--we need to drastically reduce/reuse plastics. Its a vital material in so many ways and it will only get more difficult to produce as oil reserves run out.

Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login