Valsuelm

Pot calling the kettle black.

I'm not really concerned because when we all go in the voting booth there are no Russians in there with us. Yeah maybe they are spreading disinformation. But considering who are last three Presidents were and the four nominees who didn't get elected I'd say it was all just a choice of bad options. Not one of them would have been better than any other. And some maybe a good deal worse. So because of the Russians unflattering things end up in the news? OK, I figure most Americans aren't watching anyway. You know the problem with all those ugly e-mails and other info released to wikileaks? If the principles in the DNC and Hillary Clinton's campaign had conducted their business in a professional manner, like people do at their jobs every single day, there would not have been much to release. I'd hazard a guess and say no one with any sense voted for either Clinton or Trump. They voted against the alternative. And until people figure out there are more than two options that voting is not the answer the race to the bottom will continue. Bottom was achieved quite awhile back. We're currently digging deeper and deeper into the darkness. To what end I'm not yet sure, but it's not looking good.

Fear is a mindkiller.

If you were not convinced prior to the memo leaking that the investigation into Trump colluding with the evil Russians, or the evil Russians hacked our election, or whatever you want to call it is 100% pure BS (on a cartoonishly epic scale), then the memo wasn't like to convince you. Likewise, if you had much faith that the FBI was trustworthy, honest, law abiding, honorable organization, then the memo is like to not convince you otherwise. What did you expect the memo to do? What were you looking for a memo to convince you of? Or think others were looking for?

You're against government transparency and the public being fully informed?

We must release it to find out what is in it.

Like the NSA concerns you? NSA? Not in the slightest, I trust institutions like the NSA, CIA and FBI on most matters. This GOP memo is a deliberate attempt to misrepresent information and the FBI has publicly criticized the GOP move, unusual for them LOL

I'd ask what makes you come up with such an assumption but I would just be pretending I cared. So for now I'll just agree with you, nodding my head on this side of the screen. I didn't bother to watch it, as Trump lost me as someone who will bother to listen to his speeches after his U.N. speech. The bar is very low for good Presidential speeches in the last 10 30+ years, so I can easily see you being correct that it's the best one. The vitriol no doubt is at an all time high this millennium and still climbing, so you're likely right about your observations on the opposition as well. Certainly, no one grinds their teeth quite like Nancy Pelosi. It's comical, until you remember just how truly propped up, paid for, and incompetent she is. Eh... it's still funny, dark times calls for dark humor.

Lots to be said there. It's an online retailer, principally owned and run by Jeff Bezos. If you're really interested in Amazon, I suggest getting really interested in Jeff Bezos. Also, understand how the market works, it's history, and the impact of online retailing on the marketplace. Understanding how Jeff Bezos became the reported 'wealthiest person in the world', is of no small import, if one wants to learn about Amazon.

Would it be better if it was owned by registered Democrats? Would it be better if it was owned by unregistered Republicans? Unregisted Democrats? What about if it was owned by someone registered 'Independent'? Or unregistered? Would it be better if it was owned by a business magnate mostly only interested in gaining more power, who buys and sells all of the aforementioned regularly to get what they want? Or would a foreign business magnate up to the same be better?

For what Alexa is worth, it says that Breitbart is actually quite a bit more visited than Huffpo these days. That of course may change, and again.... for what Alexa, a company owned by Amazon, is worth....

Apt. Should we start a 'My Climate future predictor thingie model is bigger than yours!' thread? Facts, and theories, and models oh my!!! Why bother differentiating between the three, right? There's no fun in that. It's much more fun to mix them all up and pretend it's all real! Are models based on facts superior to models based on theories? Or are models based on 'alternative facts' better? What if we have a model based on theories that are based on both facts and alternative facts? Or a fact based on a theory..., oh wait!! Can't do that, or can we? So many ways to mix things up and toy with people's minds. What fun!!! The best part is when we print it up somewhere official looking and people think it's all real. Well.... maybe the second best part. The best part of course is.... hahahaahahah.... HAAHAAHAHAAHAHAHAHA................. AHAHAHHHHAHAAAAHAAAAHAAA............ ....... shhhhhhhhhhhh.

You are very correct on the bolded. He is a politician, in a world where most people don't have much of an attention span. One is not a successful politician at the national level, without being guilty of the bolded in the modern age. Sad, but true.

This is sort of a red herring. Because in Antarctic winters, it's too dry to snow. But during it's summers is when it amasses all it's new ice mass. With increasing global temperatures it's expected that Anarctica enjoys of period of increasing mass. The problem is that continued warming will lead to milder winters, and will revert back to a period of even worse calving. Another issues is that much of the mass is added to the core of the Antarctic, where as it's ice sheets continue to recess. The decrease in surface area lowers the amount of solar radiation reflected back into space, and it's the surface area at the edges (i.e. the ice sheets) that reflect the most light away from the planet. Lots of theory you write there. Some of it with merit, but it barely touches on the the full story, whatever it is. The article and what it references isn't really a red herring I'd say, just more of a complete picture than most will ever look at. You attempt to delve even deeper, which is good. Keep delving and don't stop. I only linked it as it corroborates some of what Trump was saying. Contrary to the fairly widely held misbeliefs of some, the guy does have a clue and rarely if ever just makes stuff up as some like to pretend.

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/nasa-study-mass-gains-of-antarctic-ice-sheet-greater-than-losses