Incompetent People Too Ignorant to Know It

[RCG Trader]

Quote from Max E. Pad:

It is really quite easy to figure out why big government liberals control all the government bureaucracies, if you cant figure that one out then there really is no hope for you.

The reason the left, and big government folks control all of the government bureaucracies is pretty simple. First off no self respecting conservative would take half of the government jobs that are out there. I give a pass to conservative military, Police, and Fire fighters, because the motive for doing those jobs is different in a lot of cases.

With that said there isnt a self respecting, person in the world who believes in small government, who would take a job down at the DMV

The other thing is this, if you are in fact a a conservative, there is no way you are going to work your way through the ranks of any given bureaucracy by railing away against the people you work with, and saying that you want to cut the budget, and start laying off people within your own department.

You are not going to become head of the school board saying that you need to lay off teachers, and cut spending, in your own department, so basically once you join in the ranks of government employees, becoming a liberal is a survival mechanism.

If you fight for bigger budgets, and more spending within your own department of government, you will make your way up the ladder that specific department, because you are fighting for the people around you, if you fight against all of the people around you, including your own superiors, there is no way that you are going to make your way up through the ranks.

So small government people are really left with three options:

1) Stay the hell away from government jobs

2) Take a government job, and Keep your mouth shut, and fake it until you get to the top, in which case you can actually make a difference, and try to cut down on the waste within your own department. (highly unlikely that a legitimate conservative would put in this much time faking it till they made it to a position where they could make a difference)

3) Or...... Once you join the government roles, become a liberal, and support the non stop increases in spending within your department.

Most conservatives end up in number 3, i have talked to alot of guys who think they are conservative who work within government, but once you start quizzing them about the waste within their area of government, they swear up and down that they are hard done by, and there needs to be a bigger budget, but only for the area they are working in.....

Liberals control government bureaucracies, because they SUPPORT the bureaucracy its really that simple, quite frankly, i cant believe you needed something that simple explained to you.

Well you pointed out one, and I mentioned four.....so keep going

 

[Lucrum]

Quote from RCG Trader:

If you have ideations that come to dominate your day to day activities, and those ideations are inconsistent with reality, then you are in a state of psychosis.

Would lying about not having had flying lessons or ones job description count?

 

[pspr]

Quote from Lucrum:

Would lying about not having had flying lessons or ones job description count?

We should be nice to RCG. He's trying to be a new, kinder RCG. He's even started a little music thread here.

I suspect as the election season rolls on he will revert back to his liberal attack mode and we'll have to cut his legs out from under him again.

He's not much good to us if we don't have reason to beat him up!

 

[Lucrum]

Quote from pspr:

We should be nice to RCG. He's trying to be a new, kinder RCG...

Really? I hadn't noticed.

 

[Rob227]

From a nonpartisan perspective take a look at the graph. Most traders should be familiar enough to read it correctly. It clearly shows CO2 levels dramatically increasing around the time of the industrial revolution. Because this goes back over 400,000 years and includes four ice age cycles it clearly shows a change in normal patterns.

The earth is a finite area. I don't know why someone would think that hundreds of millions of cars and all the industry in the world wouldn't cause an effect in the limited atmosphere we live in.

 

[pspr]

Don't be naive. We've covered this ground already.

It is generally accepted that CO2 is lagging temperature in Antarctic graphs. To dig further into this subject therefore might seem a waste of time. But the reality is, that these graphs are still widely used as an argument for the global warming hypothesis. But can the CO2-hypothesis be supported in any way using the data of Antarctic ice cores?

At first glance, the CO2 lagging temperature would mean that it’s the temperature that controls CO2 and not vice versa.

[snip]

The differences in cooling periods does not support that it is CO2 that slows cooling phases. The dive after 230.000 ybp peak shows, that cooling CAN be rapid, and the overall picture is that the cooling rates are governed by the accumulated heat in oceans and more.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/01/30/co2-temperatures-and-ice-ages/

Quote from Rob227:

From a nonpartisan perspective take a look at the graph. Most traders should be familiar enough to read it correctly. It clearly shows CO2 levels dramatically increasing around the time of the industrial revolution. Because this goes back over 400,000 years and includes four ice age cycles it clearly shows a change in normal patterns.

The earth is a finite area. I don't know why someone would think that hundreds of millions of cars and all the industry in the world wouldn't cause an effect in the limited atmosphere we live in.

 

[Rob227]

Quote from pspr:

Don't be naive. We've covered this ground already.

It is generally accepted that CO2 is lagging temperature in Antarctic graphs. To dig further into this subject therefore might seem a waste of time. But the reality is, that these graphs are still widely used as an argument for the global warming hypothesis. But can the CO2-hypothesis be supported in any way using the data of Antarctic ice cores?

At first glance, the CO2 lagging temperature would mean that it’s the temperature that controls CO2 and not vice versa.

[snip]

The differences in cooling periods does not support that it is CO2 that slows cooling phases. The dive after 230.000 ybp peak shows, that cooling CAN be rapid, and the overall picture is that the cooling rates are governed by the accumulated heat in oceans and more.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/01/30/co2-temperatures-and-ice-ages/

I'm by no means an expert in this area and I think it's safe to say no one here is either. That being said, I read over the article you've linked and I can't quite quantify it yet but something doesn't seem to add up.

On first glance at the article you've posted the writer is using pre industrial revolution data to create his explanation. At the very least if tempature movements precede CO2 levels as a cycle before the industrial revolution, it's an unknown what will happen with a continuous increase in CO2 levels being added to the atmosphere.

CO2 at no point until recently in the overlapped graph showing the natural tempature/CO2 cycles provided in your link has CO2 dramatically shot ahead of tempature.

The writer also includes that CO2 levels do have an effect on tempature movements and doesn't have any definitive explanation how they do.

All this in my view suggests caution on the part of human development. There's also the pollution factor to consider with burning fossil fuels into the atmosphere and the long term viability. Sure they are cheap now but wouldn't it make sense to start working on some alternatives that don't pollute? It's likely just a matter of time as gas prices keep increasing alternatives will become more common.

 

[pspr]

Quote from Rob227:

I'm by no means an expert in this area and I think it's safe to say no one here is either. That being said, I read over the article you've linked and I can't quite quantify it yet but something doesn't seem to add up.

On first glance at the article you've posted the writer is using pre industrial revolution data to create his explanation. At the very least if tempature movements precede CO2 levels as a cycle before the industrial revolution, it's an unknown what will happen with a continuous increase in CO2 levels being added to the atmosphere.

CO2 at no point until recently in the overlapped graph showing the natural tempature/CO2 cycles provided in your link has CO2 dramatically shot ahead of tempature.

The writer also includes that CO2 levels do have an effect on tempature movements and doesn't have any definitive explanation how they do.

All this in my view suggests caution on the part of human development. There's also the pollution factor to consider with burning fossil fuels into the atmosphere and the long term viability. Sure they are cheap now but wouldn't it make sense to start working on some alternatives that don't pollute? It's likely just a matter of time as gas prices keep increasing alternatives will become more common.

You forgot about catalytic converters. Don't worry about CO2. It's a trace gas. But as I've said, we've been all over this discussion just recently. Do a search. There's no point in going over everything again. We get the same conclusion. Man made CO2 is not a factor in global warming. End of discussion.

 

[Rob227]

Strange though, that the consensus of the world's scientists agree that human activity is contributing to tempature increases.

Overall, less pollution in any form is a good thing for everybody. That way we don't risk our future and that of future generations on unknown outcomes.

 

[cgroupman]

Quote from Rob227:

Strange though, that the consensus of the world's scientists agree that human activity is contributing to tempature increases.

Overall, less pollution in any form is a good thing for everybody. That way we don't risk our future and that of future generations on unknown outcomes.

Right, I've never really understood the violent opposition when discussing GW. It seems most do think there is some man made causes, you would think it makes sense to conserve, recycle and all that. Cut emissions, drive less, save gas, etc. Using CSX as an example of saving fuel while hauling freight is a great commercial example.

How is conserving not a good thing? Maybe it's because so many hated Al Gore for his movie and his ranting about it.


c