alternative facts

[Hurlshort]

Given that she lost, it is hard to drum up any enthusiasm about the subject of Hillary's emails.

[redneckdevil]

Granted those emails the FBI said they never found were also the emails that cost her her election

[SonicMage117]

 

Whenever I see this thread, I think of this^

 

Yes'm... God help me!

 

 

 

[Gromnir]

 

"The Justice Department said in a court briefing filed late Friday that neither it nor the FBI has evidence that Trump Tower was the target of surveillance efforts by the Obama administration during the 2016 presidential election."

 

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/348987-justice-dept-says-it-has-no-evidence-of-trump-tower-wiretapping

 

any chance the wh apologizes for spreading fake news?

 

HA! Good Fun!

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/09/18/politics/paul-manafort-government-wiretapped-fisa-russians/index.html

 

"any chance the wh apologizes for spreading fake news?"

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

is kinda like "collusion"?  sharp simple doesn't understand what is wiretapping, or perhaps who is obama? maybe didn't botherr to actual read trump's tweet regarding obama and wiretapping?  well, am nothing if not helpful.

 

 

"Terrible! Just found out that Obama had my "wires tapped" in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism!"— Donald J. Trump 

 

https://lawfareblog.com/latest-scoops-cnn-and-new-york-times-quick-and-dirty-analysis

 

"Press reports have indicated for months that at least one, and potentially multiple, close associates of Donald Trump were subject to FISA warrants. It is possible now—as has been noted many times since Trump tweeted his accusation in March—that if the U.S. president was in communication with these individuals, his communications might have been incidentally collected. That isn’t the same as being wiretapped—and being subject to incidental collection as part of lawful collection against a third party really is not the same thing as being wiretapped by President Obama. House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes has already attempted to spin incidental collection into presidential vindication in a bizarre series of press conferences unveiling intelligence revelations—which later turned out to have been fed to him by the White House itself." (emphasis added)

 

"Nothing in this report vindicates Trump’s claims that he or Trump Tower were wiretapped."

 

'course the big takeaway from all o' this, other than the bumbling fumbduckery o' the trump campaign to bring manafort into the fold in the first place, is mueller appears to have flynn and manafort in a situation where either or both will feel pressure to make a deal... or spin the wheel.

 

 

though most important takeaway is the revelation o' the manafort warrant.  trump claimed "illegal," in his misguided tweets, but possible most significant is there does appear to have been a warrant granted for manafort electronic surveillance.  am knowing we has tried to explain previous, but USA "probable cause" is not same as most european nation "probable cause."  in the US, the cops need more than mere suspicion--need real evidence to get the warrant.  no rogue operation.  is no wild goose chase as alt-right suggests if there is warrant.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

ps  gotta add the following scene:

 

 

love the monologue.

Edited September 19, 2017 by Gromnir

[Gromnir]

not a good week for the truth

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/09/29/trump-aides-sell-tax-plan-with-pinocchio-laden-claims/?utm_term=.362567c228cc

 

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/factcheck/fact-checking-trumps-claims-from-his-speech-on-taxes/ar-AAsy8vm?ocid=spartanntp

 

am actual in favor o' a tax overhaul and a lowering o' corporate tax, but the wh defense o' their proposal has been reminiscent o' those old jon lovitz snl segments. 

 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2017/09/28/sarah-huckabee-sanders-piles-more-b-s-on-top-of-trumps-bogus-thad-cochran-claim/?utm_term=.40bdda10eb24

 

am not certain why the wh were trying to defend the thad cochran blunder, but this wh never admits an error even when defense makes one appear clownish.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Gromnir]

resurrected for a particular curious trumpian alternative facts addition

 

"Trump's view that ice caps 'setting records' baffles scientists"

 

 

arctic cap is doing a wicked witch death scene impression but for trump...

 

HA! Good Fun!

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Trump’s implication that glaciers and ice caps are growing “is simply wrong. Or maybe he is referring to a different planet,” Zemp said.

Alternate Facts for an Alternative Planet.

[Valsuelm]

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

[injurai]

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

 

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.

[Gromnir]

val, as is typical, didn't actual read linked article, or notice the date o' his own link. antarctica seeming growth were addressed in the reuters article. 

 

oh, and, "Around Antarctica, a long-term expansion of sea ice may have abruptly ended. The ice is now at a record small extent for late January, according to NSIDC data dating back to 1979."

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Valsuelm]

 

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

 

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.

Edited January 30, 2018 by Valsuelm

[injurai]

He shows little effort to sort through minutia, so whether what he spurts out is derivative of something that is true. He unmistakably globs on his own spin, rife with omission and simplification. Trump long ago should have learned the art of self corroboration. Sadly, he has not.

[Valsuelm]

He shows little effort to sort through minutia, so whether what he spurts out is derivative of something that is true. He unmistakably globs on his own spin, rife with omission and simplification. Trump long ago should have learned the art of self corroboration. Sadly, he has not.

 

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.

[Elerond]

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

 

https://phys.org/news/2017-05-growth-east-antarctic-ice-sheet.html

 

Scientists have known for over a decade that the West Antarctic Ice Sheet has been losing mass and contributing to sea level rise.

Its eastern neighbour is, however, ten times larger and has the potential to raise global sea level by some 50 metres.

Despite its huge size and importance, conflicting results have been published on the recent behaviour of the East Antarctic Ice Sheet. A study led by a group of NASA scientists, that was published in 2015, suggested that this part of Antarctica was gaining so much mass that it compensated for the losses in the west.

Determining what the largest ice sheet on the planet is doing is vital for our understanding of the factors that are influencing present day, and future, sea level rise.

To address this question, a team of scientists led by the University of Bristol and including the University of Wollongong, Australia have studied the problem by combining different satellite observations within a statistical model that is able to separate the processes related to ice mass changes over the continent.

Professor Jonathan Bamber from the Bristol Glaciology Centre which is part of the School of Geographical Sciences, said: "We used similar data sets to the NASA team but added other satellite data from a mission called the Gravity Recovery And Climate Experiment (GRACE) to help solve for mass gains and losses.

"We then conducted different experiments, using similar assumptions made in the NASA study but found that in every experiment, mass loss from the west always exceeded gains in the east."

The researchers concluded that over the study period, 2003-2013, Antarctica, as a whole, has been contributing to sea level rise and that the gains in East Antarctica were around three times smaller than suggested in the 2015 study.

Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2017-05-growth-east-antarctic-ice-sheet.html#jCp

[Valsuelm]

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.

Edited January 31, 2018 by Valsuelm

[Gromnir]

Apt.

 

Should we start a 'My Climate future predictor thingie model is bigger than yours!' thread?

 

please do, 'cause then you would see the antarctic gains, which topped out a few years ago and as has been noted numerous times by numerous folks in this thread (with sources) is 'bout as misleading as trump pointing to the harsh east coast winter this year as some kinda barometer o' non-climate change, were countered by arctic losses o' ice approximate 3x greater.  would happily compare bigger.

 

argue against man-driven climate change is requiring serious mental gymnastics, but isn't beyond the realm o' plausible.  try and spin trump comments 'bout polar caps, on the other hand, is plain ludicrous... and yet, some folks still try. is alternative facts at its best.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Elerond]

Funny thing is that if you compare NASA's study and Australian's study, it is NASA's study that gives worse prediction about global warming, because both studies seek does melting of Antarctica's ice contribute in sea level rise which both studies acknowledge to happen, which mean that NASA's study which says that Antarctica's is currently increasing which means that it should lower sea level (0.23 mm according to the study), but as sea level actually rose during study's time frame it means that water has to come somewhere else than Antarctica, which means that other glaciers has lost much more mass than predicted and as most of those glacier are much closer populous areas it means that global warming effect on those areas has been worse than predicted (in IPCC report).  

[Zoraptor]

"Putin Ordered Plane to Be Downed in 2014".

 

An article written pretty much entirely for the headline on the assumption that 90% of people won't actually read the article and presume it refers to MH17. It doesn't. Nice work, BBC.

[Valsuelm]

"Putin Ordered Plane to Be Downed in 2014".

 

An article written pretty much entirely for the headline on the assumption that 90% of people won't actually read the article and presume it refers to MH17. It doesn't. Nice work, BBC.

 

They do a pretty good job fooling people. Been at it for decades.

[Zoraptor]

BBC has gone rather off the rails lately, very Daily Mailesque. A couple of days ago they had a report on the World Service about Syria that made absolutely no sense to anyone informed on the matter, namely that Jaish Al Islam (Army of Islam) was going to evacuate all the islamist fighters from East Ghouta so there would be no excuse for a continuing offensive there.

 

Problem being that Jaish Al Islam is islamist themselves, obviously even if you can't understand Arabic, as are all the major East Ghouta groups and the Al Qaeda guys they were referring to have been busy fighting JAI* in East Ghouta for the past year+ and are in a separate area so wouldn't be doing anything brokered by them anyway. Turns out JAI were willing to deport their Al Qaeda prisoners, that's all. Exactly why anyone would allow let alone applaud that I'm not quite sure, and why it would remove any excuse to bomb Ghouta (as if one is actually needed anyway) I'm not quite sure either. To be fair, they did rewrite their website article to be far more accurate; better late than never.

 

*Part of the Saudi/ Qatar feud, Qatar supports Faylaq al Rahman who are fighting against JAI alongside the formally ex Al Qaeda affiliate HTS. Bit redundant now since they don't even border each other any more.

[Lord_Mord]

 

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.

 

I love it, how you claim in every ****ing thread that the bull**** you post isn't bull****, but everyone except yourself is too dumb to understand.

 

May I answer that once and for all with a quote? It was posted here not long ago...

 

 

The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is illusion of knowledge.

 

- Stephen Hawking

 

Oh, oh, wait ... I forgot. Stephen Hawking was a fraud. Everyone except for you is a fraud.

 

Don't mind, I have another one for you. It's from a fictitious person.

 

 

It is fine to be ignorant of a great many things; nobody has time to understand more than a few things deeply. But in those numerous topics on which we are not experts, we are nevertheless tempted to construct a coherent-seeming but illusory image of reality, and believe it with undue certainty. We are far too sure of ourselves when we have not earned it. Overcertainty is an anchor, undue inertia, dragging feet, when we should really be leaves on the winds of evidence.

 

- Xan