Carping Comments – Idiots and “poseur”

It’s been a long while since we had a “Carping Comments” posting. Seems that aggressive discouragement of trolls, Alinsky Method attacks, and rudeness has generally removed the value from carping and insulting. I.e. no “emotional reward” so no bad behaviour.

Yet every so often some new person wonders by and just can’t resist tossing a firebomb. This one was on the thread.

Now you might think that a posting consisting almost entirely of links to where you can download a GCM Global Circulation Model and run it (on a Mac or PC with 30 day free trial then a payment, or as source code to inspect) and then a cursory walk through the code mostly saying things like “This part seems to handle solar and that part looks to do clouds” would be about as uncontroversial as you can get. But some folks just have their hair catch on fire over most anything, and love to toss rocks at others to watch them duck. Perhaps it was my assertion that the program is forced to find CO2 causal and it makes forcings only from radiative gasses… yet that is what the code does. (Yes, there are other parameters, things like TSI, but they just flesh out the context for the ‘FORCING’ data)

So what was the “insult to the person” in this one?

“What an idiot you are, plus a poseur”

Now that kind of insult has exactly zero effect on me. First off, I know my I.Q., know I’m well above the acceptance level for Mensa (though still have not bothered to join… but it’s on my list of someday things). I’ve got my official I.Q. number, my SAT scores (that qualify me for Mensa all on their own) and my GMAT scores (that had Wharton School of Business solicit me to apply…) and more (including a NASA examination and …) all of which prove beyond any doubt that I’m not “an idiot”. So such insults are, at most, information about the bomb thrower. I don’t agree with them on some point, and they best they can muster is name calling… so most likely they are the ones of, shall we say, “diminished capacity”?

Then the other part “plus a poseur”. Since a “poseur” is someone pretending to be what they are not, and that posting was about being a computer programmer, the pertinent facts (which I’ve shared before, but the firelighter clearly doesn’t know) are: My first programming language was FORTRAN IV back in the early 1970s. I’ve been programming ever since (so about 45 years). I then learned COBOL (that I then avoided using for most of my professional career having seen what was in it…) and ALGOL (that is in many ways my favorite). Then ALGOL begat Pascal, that I’ve used. Which begat C, that I’ve used more. Also some PL/1 and one program in APL (that taught me never to use it again…) along with lots and lots of SH, KSH, and C shell scripting. Oh, and several database systems (being a Senior Consultant on the RAMIS II product in the ’80s) including FOCUS, HP Image and Query (oh, and used their Business Basic that is Basic created by a frustrated Pascal programmer – functions and long variable names and BEGIN END blocks and…) along with Sequel, Informix, and some others. Plus modest amounts of maintenance work on Perl and Ruby and Python and some others. Frankly, I’ve lost track of all the languages I’ve used at one time or another. (Oh, and was sent off to Germany once to evaluate an ADA Compiler for Amdahl…interesting language and better than JOVIAL, but a bit complex in the compiler making…)

So in the end, looking back on a lifetime of programming ranging from Mainframes to Supercomputers (life on the Cray was interesting… “supercompting is never having to say ‘now we wait for a response’…”) to several Mini computers (VAXen and Sun and HP and..) and just about every micro-computer from 286 and 6800 on up to now – including assembly language programming one built from piece parts with an Intel 8080? chip in it. Altair MITS? I think it was. Yes, this is it: I find it hard to think of what, related to computers, I might be “posing” as that I haven’t actually done, several times…

I once took a contract to “bring up a Sun Server” for a new client. They wanted it done over the weekend. It was a 16? CPU box about the size of a refrigerator. Easy, takes about 3 hours if you are slow. Mostly just checking boxes and answering config questions. When I got there, I found the CFO had figured he could buy the ‘repair parts’ cheaper than the whole machine, so “bring it up” also consisted of installing the CPUs on the boards, installing memory, loading a base OS, etc. etc. That MITS experience paid off ;-) Well, long story short, “we had a talk” and renegotiated to “time and materials” and then I ran off to FRYs to get an allen wrench… the CPUs are held on by hex head screws at 6 inch-pounds IIRC.. and I calibrated my finger with a 1 lb can… there not being an inch pound torque wrench available at 9 PM on a Friday… Bottom line was I had it up and running on Monday Morning when it was critical to their production to have it running (another long story there…), but only on 12 CPUs as some of the CPU / board release levels were not compatible with others.

Now when you’ve done everything from building computers up from piece parts, installing operating systems and applications software, hacking Unix and Linux OS code, writing applications software that was sold commercially, managed data centers including a supercomputer center, and been an independent contractor doing ‘whatever is needed’ at dozens of companies for a decade or two (including network design and install at Sun’s Newark campus… several LARGE buildings – 3 Cisco Catalyst switches per building with fibre cross connects and a MAN…) AND installed it including wiring… Well, it’s a bit hard to see what I’m supposed to be “posing” about.

Running the Cray (for 7 1/2 years) was fun. It was mostly used for simulations. Moldflow for plastic injection flow modeling. Several secret CPU and computer simulations. And more. The key point being I have lot of years of High Performance Computing in the context of running computer models. Each Moldflow run was about 10 hours. For ONE well described fluid in ONE mold and ONE injection temperature… Oh, and on decommisioning, I let a Ph.D. student at Stanford run his “Cloud formation model” on the Cray for several days. (Well, really, for security reasons, I ran the codes after inspecting them, then returned the output when done… so you could say I’ve been running Climate and Cloud models from as early as the 1990s) He’d used all the time he was allowed at school, but didn’t have enough to finish his thesis. As we had spare cycles then, it was a nice gift to him (and he got his Ph.D.) As the computer was to be decommissioned in a couple of days, it wasn’t economical to sell the time (since at any minute we might pull the plug… site shutdowns are like that) So it can’t be about any unfamiliarity with computer models or high performance computing. Oh, and I built a 7 node Beowulf Cluster out of old machines “just for fun” in the early ’90s… and used to compile a BSD based ‘I.T. Department in a box’ product for one client. That’s the whole BSD plus enhancements and applications… so it can’t be per ‘distributed computing’.

So I’m left to assume the guy is just a 20 something (or an immature 30 something) who doesn’t have the experience to know what a Data Dictionary is, so assumes I’m making it up. It is a term of art from Mainframe Database use (mostly some years back, but still with currency) and a very useful term, but even in the ’80 we had a hard time getting most of the programmers to accept the importance of building one for their programs. (The main database guy made most of them after the fact when trying to get their applications to play well with others… and squeeze out data redundancy. This was at Amdahl Corp.) So I do it to this day.

It’s really a pretty simple idea. You collect the metadata about a data item and put it all in one place. Things like, oh, the name of it, what it contains, size, type, etc. For example:

Client Name, CNAME, 32 Characters, AlphaNumeric, used in: List of programs or databases.

Now if (or perhaps “since”) they don’t know that concept, and maybe do ‘by the seat of their pants’ maintenance programming at the junior level, they think I’m “posing” for saying I’m making a Data Dictionary. Yet I know I am doing it, and it is a Very Good Idea… Similarly, Block Diagram. I typically list all the subroutines, then graph out the MAIN program, then make a list of which block is called by which other and make a nice diagram of how all the blocks fit together. Now at that point, you have a decent idea what all the data items are, where they are used, and what they do, along with what processes the program does. ALL before you get into the down and dirty details of what happens inside any one block of actual code. Saves a lot of time. Reduces error rates greatly. Eases the workload on the mind. LOTS of benefits.

So what “poseur” tells me is this person lacks clue. (Lacks a lot of clues, actually… both about my personal history, and about good programming style and efficient program maintenance.) Given that, I’ve provided that clue in the above discussion.

Oh, and I’ve got a lifetime Teaching Credential at the Community College level in “Data Processing and Related Technologies”… so I do get a bit pedantic sometimes and do like to show folks better ways to marshal information and ideas. So yeah, I’m being a “bit the teach” in this posting. This also is part of why I try to speak in Standard English and not Tech Jargon. Sometimes I’ve had folks mistake that for lack of Tech Knowledge. In fact, it indicates a higher level of Tech Knowledge AND the ability to express it in different language styles.

Now, given all that, I think it’s pretty clear how “idiot and poseur” causes me to just smirk and chuckle. Clearly it is they who are waving the “idiot” flag around and just as clearly, they don’t have enough experience to gauge me and my experience (so just who is posing? Hmmm?)

So “Tkach thenos” gets added to the “forever moderated” list in WordPress. It is a nice little setting given to blog operators where they can list keywords that toss that posting into the moderation queue. Or SPAM.

And yes, that’s what I do with all folks who’s ability and ‘style’ limit them to Carping Comments. Things with zero intellectual interest and loads of insult and invective need not see the light of day nor trouble others. Trolls, firelilghters, Alynsky Acolytes and serial insulters especially “insult to the person”; have no place here. “Life is too short to drink bad wine!” and they are all piss and vinegar, so down the drain with them. If Tkach had read the “About” box they would have known that, but apparently “know your opponent” is not in their wheelhouse either…

OK, with that, I now return you to the rest of 2017, but with the hope that others can learn from this bit of Carping Comment commentary and behave accordingly. I know it’s a foolish hope, but I’m ever the optimist.

Subscribe to feed


About E.M.Smith

A technical managerial sort interested in things from Stonehenge to computer science. My present "hot buttons' are the mythology of Climate Change and ancient metrology; but things change...
This entry was posted in Carping Comments and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

26 Responses to Carping Comments – Idiots and “poseur”

  1. Gail Combs says:

    I may have been the culprit E.M. I posted a few bits and pieces of what you were doing over at Tony Heller’s and then Drudge picked up his article and 700+ comments plus dozens of pingbacks later… Seems someone actually read my comment and tracked it back to here.

    BOY, they really must be getting desperate in Progressive Warmist Land.

  2. Gail Combs says:

    Oh, and “Tkach thenos” did not comment on Tony’s article so maybe I am wrong..

  3. E.M.Smith says:


    No Worries!

    I accumulate a fairly constant stream of Trolls and Carping Comments no matter what, so don’t take any guilt on yourself!

    Frankly, I’m the one doing the publishing, and fully expecting folks will snip bits they like and post them elsewhere. That is the very nature of blogging. If I wasn’t “up for that”, I wouldn’t run a blog!

    So continue fo feel free, copy / paste and post, and don’t worry about it. It’s just a normal day in the life.

    And, as noted in the article, it doesn’t really bother me at all. I get more of a “sick humor” out of it. Clearly folks doing that have limited skills, low imagination, and stunted horizons. (Oddly, if the insults were particularly well done, subtle, and with some real “bite” hidden under the frosting, I’m actually likely to let it through… I admire skill, even if it is in folks who want to insult me ;-)

    In thinking about it, that is in many ways what I find most sad about the whole Loony Side Of Left and their Alynsky Attack mode. It’s just so dumb in the implementation. I mean, how many times can you hear “Hey Hey!, Ho Ho!, I’m A Prat and Here For Show!” from an adult 3 year old and not tire of the stupid in it? Give me some subtle wit and a bit of slander just beyond the level of most folks perception and I’m loving it! (It’s that British Blood Sport thing I got from Mum ;-)

    Self deprecating admission: I once “congratulated” a singer in the presence of her sister (who was a bit brighter and knew ‘sis’ was not that good) with the statement ~”What an interesting rendition. And the note selection was quite imaginative!” at which the smarter sister gave me the ‘trying to hide it appreciative look / smirk’ and the ‘singer’ was quietly pleased with herself…

    Besides, you may have given me the material to make this article, in which case a h/t would be in order! 8-)

  4. PhilipG says:

    As a technology enthusiast who had business responsibility for the technology group of a financial exchange, the few people like yourself that I found over 20 years were absolute gold…but they were increasingly hard to find over the last 10 years and I was never quite sure why…love your work.

  5. Lynn Clark says:

    FWIW, “wander”, not “wonder”, and “whose”, not “who’s”. I wrote up a long paragraph about possessive forms in the English language a long time ago. Maybe one of these days I’ll re-write it with a bit of formatting to improve its readability and usefulness:

  6. Gail Combs says:

    No problem Chief, I just hope I managed to also divert a few new folk your way who will appreciate this blog.

  7. Serioso says:

    While I should be glad to see another troll visit your blog, the comments made were so wide of the mark that I had to laugh. On the other hand, Mr. Smith, your response was also disproportionate: Why do you go on and on about your expertise and qualifications? Your response was long-winded to the point of boredom. Lack of intelligence is not your problem. Nor lack of experience. No. Your problem can be stated in a single word: Hubris.

    You claim to know more about global warming (and its causes) than the scientists who have studied it for decades. You choose data to support your views with astonishing selectivity: A small cooling event close to home makes you ignore a major warming event across the continent. You claim to know more about hacking and cybercrime than all the agencies of the US government. The list goes on: You present opinions on stock markets without providing data on your success and failures. Your problem, simply stated, is you live in an echo chamber, where your views and opinions get magnified, and are rarely (if ever) contradicted or even confirmed. What you need is some fresh air, some exposure to facts and opinions that conflict with your own.

    So here’s a tiny start: A (relatively) short piece in the Sunday New York Times magazine today. I hope you will read it and respond. [On the other hand, when I posted another link to the New York Times recently, you trashed it, and when I complained you had read it too hastily, you continued to ignore some of the article’s strongest points.) Can’t win every exchange! The owner of the sandbox always wins! Which shows, alas, the limitations of your educability.
    You should, I think, not at all humbly, rejoice in my opposition. I appear to be the only opponent you appear to take the least bit seriously. You need to hoist yourself out of the sandbox, or, to choose another metaphor, the echo chamber. My question, as always, is how such a curious and well-educated fellow be so stupid. It’s a puzzle!


  8. David A Anderson says:

    Serioso, what makes you think EM takes you seriously? ( Using your poor comunication skills as an example of how NOT to disagree, is not proof of taking you seriously)

  9. Tom Harley says:

    Trolls are basically projecting their own failed personality.

  10. E.M.Smith says:


    Serioso just likes to toss pebbles at me. I’m OK with that. He also has poor grasp of who I am and what drives me (so is also always way wide of the mark). Despite several large attempts to help him to see ‘who I am’.

    Take, for example, his above assertion of “hubris”.

    Hubris (/ˈhjuːbrɪs/, also hybris, from ancient Greek ὕβρις) describes a personality quality of extreme or foolish pride or dangerous over-confidence.[1] In its ancient Greek context, it typically describes behavior that defies the norms of behavior or challenges the gods, and which in turn brings about the downfall, or nemesis, of the perpetrator of hubris.

    So extreme pride and over-confidence. That is, in fact, very far from what I am.

    I’ve mentioned before the Amish roots of my family. I’ve stated many times that “pridefulness is a sin”. Somehow that doesn’t enter the brain of Serioso. He projects onto me his own feelings.

    Similarly, I’m not over confident. I’m quite certain I’ll make a dozen mistakes tomorrow. Exactly what will need to wait for the unfolding. I do know I have pretty good ‘coping skills’ at finding and fixing errors. Not perfect, but very good. I’m also quite certain that it’s a bit of a daunting task to make my own GCM and I’m highly likely to fail or just not complete it. I’m pretty good at “sizing jobs” having done it for a few decades with good results, and I’m pretty good at knowing when there’s a skill set mis-match, so I’m also pretty good at avoiding running into that wall without seeing it coming, but that doesn’t mean Hubris, it means a nose that has had plenty of bruises…

    No, what he thinks is “hubris” is, in fact, a simple statement of the facts. No pride in it really. I’m, at best, 3 sigma above the norm. I don’t qualify for the 6 sigma group / club. Similar facts: I have nearly zero artistic talent. I can sing, barely, almost good enough for Church ;-) My athletic ability is grim, to say the best of it. I have extremely poor social small talk skills and have almost zero knowledge of “what is trendy” and can’t talk at all about Social Life among the “stars” (or politicians or just about anyone, really). I’m so ‘way not cool’ and a drab excuse for a person as to be correctly termed a ‘wall flower’ at parties. I could go on. Oh, and as Lynn points out, I’m a bit ‘free form’ with exact grammar in English and often make typos ( I catch a LOT of them in the proof read, but not all…) with a tendency to mix languages and use phonetics without noticing…

    But the point? Stating those truths does not make me a person of low self esteem, someone thinking themselves incompetent or a failure in some way. They are just facts.

    Similarly, that I’m good at certain tricks, like programming and managing computers or doing math well enough to score very high on the SAT also does not make me filled with pride nor “hubris”. That being on the edge of Aspe (or as the spouse puts it “on the spectrum”) does mean I notice LOTS of detail others miss. It is just an artifact of this hardware and software. They, too, are just facts. I state them just as “evidence” presented to show the foolishness of the assertion made by folks who are without knowing of them.

    Somehow that causes Serioso to squirm and assert I’m being prideful and stuffed with confidence. Silly, really.

    In many ways I’m just a self aware machine that knows what it tested good at and what it tested bad at, and has enough understanding to do mostly what it can do well. That’s it. My emotional state is typically “semi-bored and centered” and I’m usually what would be termed a “cold fish”. None of that is the emotive mush Serioso projects onto me.

    So no, I don’t take him seriously. That he has amply demonstrated a willful refusal to learn those facts about me, to internalize my statements about my state and self image, or to accept any evidence presented, really; all that make him Troll more than serious dialog.


    Why am I prolix? As I’ve said many times, I’m on the borderline of Aspe. (Per the spouse, the high function normal side. She is credentialed in this and does it for a living so I think she is right.) Part of what comes with that is a compulsion to completeness. Get a clue. As per listing such a long list of qualifications: I’ve hardly touched the surface. There’s a few degrees not mentioned and about 30 years of experiences left out.

    Now you make a bald assertion that is quite wrong:

    “You claim to know more about global warming (and its causes) than the scientists who have studied it for decades.”

    I have never said that. YOU assert it. What I believe is that I know some things they have left out, and that they have made errors in some key places. (Such as handling error bars poorly, ignoring Nyquist, getting water vapor wrong, etc.). I’m quite certain they can run rings around me on radiative physics. In fact, I think that’s part of their problem. TOO focused on the hammer of radiative physics and not seeing the buzz saw of water vapor or the laser level of UV vs IR distribution…

    Oh, and as of now, I’m also one of those folks who have studied it for a decade.

    “You claim to know more about hacking and cybercrime than all the agencies of the US government. ”

    Again, I have not said that. I’m quite certain there are folks in the NSA, for example, better than me. What I have said is that the public pronouncements do NOT agree with the public evidence and what is publicly known is not sufficient to point at Russia with certainty. Those are truths. Now if the NSA, CIA, et. al. have hidden info, they might well be able to show it was Russians. I don’t have their PRISM tools, for example. But just as true, the CIA is in the disinformation business (and the NSA in the never-say-anything business), so you can NOT trust their public releases to be simple and honest.

    Please learn to read what I say and not jump off the cliff of conclusions…

    “You present opinions on stock markets without providing data on your success and failures. ”

    Actually, I don’t present opinions most of the time. I present a stock chart with indicators and state “how I read it”. That IS NOT OPINION, it is technique. Anyone can do it (and my major goal is teaching others the interesting techniques). I’m quite open to anyone presenting better methods (Lord knows there’s lots of them and some will be better than mine). As per my “success and failure”, it’s an open book. I’ve not gone back erasing statements of what I expected and the history of the results. You want a spread sheet: Go read the postings and make it. (Though it is also a fact that I’ve more or less ignored the market for the last year or two as I was doing other things).

    Next you assert I live in an echo chamber. Well, first off, I don’t have any ‘problem’. You have one with me, but that’s not my problem. Second, you have heard / read (or at least I’ve posted it where you were active) the litany of sources I follow. (Short form: Fox, Fox Biz, CNBC, RT, Al Jazeera, CNN, MSNBC, and a lot of semi-random printed media as evidenced in quotes lifted from things ranging from Australia to India to England to…) How that can be an “echo chamber” is an amusing question. No, what galls you is that I refuse to let folks be insulting and rude and toss insults “to the person”. That isn’t an echo chamber, that’s being polite and having manners.

    And once again you reach for your (seemingly) one and only input, the NY Times. A failing media with dropping circulation and a Poor Johnny One Note editorial bias. Your complaint? When I read your references, I find them lacking and biased. Well, that’s what they are. So no, I’m not going to bother with it. Certainly not any article that is about a “post truth era”. There is no such thing. There is always a truth, and it is always the era for it. That they are hopping on the “truthyness vs false news” bandwagon just shows they are hooked in with the Loony Side Of Left talking points du jour and ‘got the memo’.

    Per your parting insult “to the person” (that you know to be a forbidden action here) of calling me stupid:

    Stupidity is a lack of intelligence, understanding, reason, wit or sense.

    Please re-read the posting above. You seem to have missed the statements of credentials demonstrating intelligence, etc.

    Thinking your positions daft, your arguments weak, and your evidence biased is not “stupid”, it is observational skill in action…

  11. E.M.Smith says:


    Good one… and about right IMHO.

  12. E.M.Smith says:

    Oh, and I likely ought to add, per my relative expertise compared to “climate scientists”:

    IMHO, my major advantage is that I am NOT agenda driven, do NOT have preconceived notions of ‘what it must be’, and approach the whole issue with an open and unbiased mind. While they are very often deeply steeped in the Received Dogma, and like Hansen, working from a very strong Agenda, and approach it from the POV of demonstrating that it MUST be CO2…

    I’ll take open and unbiased questioning over biased agenda driven ‘for effect’ anytime. Technical Skill is useless once contaminated by political goals…

  13. philjourdan says:

    I suspect the election will bring out more irrational trolls, not less. As the debate on AGW actually gets started (now that skeptics will be more free to post actual data that may not conform to the religion), they feel a need to suppress it via trolling than to debate it. I think we had a few months of grace as they were in shock. But the new year will bring them out more nasty than ever.

  14. Power Grab says:

    Warmistas don’t build, they tear down, no?

    Since they lost the election, now they’re back to their usual business of nipping at the heels of those who really do want to build something durable.

    They had their chance to run things. Folks are tired of it.

  15. E.M.Smith says:


    Thanks for the compliment. FWIW, I think the drop off in quality of programmers was caused by a confluence of things. “in the beginning” folks were drawn to the tech by the tech. There was a natural selection for the curious and careful. It was also the case that it was largely self learned. You just jumped into it and did it.

    Over time, that changed. Money was there, so folks with little interest and less innate talent at it signed up for classes in the hopes of getting a high paying job.

    Then the feedback loop started…

    Companies put the emphasis on cheap production costs, not effective programs. This pushed toward languages and methods that any idiot could code, so any idiot did… It was cheap to hire a “poor Johnny One Note” who could install Windows 7 as opposed to the generalist who could do everything. Balkanized skills ensued. Blend in the Microsoft Way weakening minds throughout the industry (making things like “If it has a problem reboot it” and “let the customer debug the code” and “who needs backward compatibility anyway…” standards instead of horrors to be avoided).

    Then it became an academic pursuit. Academics began making painful to use languages due to some obstruse idea that got them their Ph.D. Those got taught to the new crop of programmer wanna-bees and then pushed into industry. Wash and repeat.

    Finally, the push to Certifications. Companies saw they could cream off about $2k to $5k per person per year or two from the computer professional class. As of now, just to stay certified in all the things I have done for decades would cost me about $15,000 per year. That further forces silo thinking.

    So now you can hire a semi-interested person who knows how to do one narrow thing and has a degree and certification to prove it; but the generalist who can cover it all and knows how things work at the lowest and highest levels can’t get a job because they cost too much and don’t have the Cert the HR department put on the checkbox.

    Oh, and a flood of H1B visa toting guys from India came in who had degrees, but had never actually touched a computer… ( I interviewed one with a Ph.D. computer science who had never actually touched a Cisco router… their system is read the book, pass the paper based test… No experience required…)

    That’s the way I see it, anyway.


    Yup. Once the sober up, see the reality in their face, and get their UN / Soros / NGO / DNC marking orders, expect the “community organizing” rabble rousing approach to hit hard. Put on your armor and pick up your sword, it isn’t going to be pretty…


    I think that is THE thing that the DNC et. al. have least recognized. We The People were being polite and quiet until we saw the game was rigged and run by liars and thieves.

    That perception, once had, does not go away.

    So they went back to the usual same-old same-old and were met with derision and cat calls. Like Serioso still posting links to the NY Times. They have flaming pants on and we are laughing and pointing at them and Serioso still thinks their stories matter… Or the Washington Post…. Seems the Big Push to brand things as “Fake News” has caught their pants on fire too…

    WaPo had a story about “Russia Hacking The GRID!!!” Evil Russians!! Grid in peril! Darkness and cold at any minute!!!

    They’ve now posted a retraction stating it was really just one laptop, and that was not connected to the grid controlling part of things, and, well, nevermind

    All the while I looked at their first story and didn’t buy it anyway as the Washington Post was outed as a DNC Wing and Chief Propaganda Organ of the left…

    (Hope that investment pays off for Jeff Bezos… as circulation drops… buying a paper to run your favorite flavor of bias and propaganda usually isn’t all that profitable. Now, in the internet age, it’s down right monetarily suicidal…)

    So now the WashPo gets to wear the “Fake News” tag for the foreseeable future… yet they are still pushing the Fake News Narrative that it’s only the right wing sites and Russians that are faking it… Post, meet hoist and petard…

  16. Gail Combs says:

    ” They had their chance to run things into the ground. Folks are tired of it.” There fixed it.

    Interactive before-and-after photos of Detroit offer unrivaled look at city’s decline

    Never before have you been able to so starkly see the impact that time has had on Detroit.

    Taking before-and-after pictures to an new level, the pioneers at Detroiturbex*com have painstakingly matched up historic photos with current ones. What makes this cool is a sliding bar that give you the ability to seamlessly move the historic photos over the current ones to get a wondrous sense of change…..

  17. LG says:

    So, reading E.M’s comment
    for a moment I thought I had read:

    Oh, and a flood of H1B visa toting guys from India came in who bad degrees,

    After my a double take and reading along, the H1B’s degrees are indeed dubious, IMH.

  18. Power Grab says:

    @ Gail: Thanks. ;-)

    Somehow the typo I fixed ended up as “Warmistas as” instead of “Warmistas…”

    You got my point anyway. :-)

    {Reply: Fixed it to “Warmistas” for you… -E.M.S.]

  19. Gail Combs says:

    Speaking of Carping and idiots…
    I just read a paper the exemplifies ” THE thing that the DNC et. al. have least recognized…”

    They really really don’t SEE us. They have built up this image of their ‘enemy’ and given it characteristics that are as far off as Gavin’s temperature data.

    Politicization of Science in the Public Sphere: A Study of Public Trust in the United States, 1974 to 2010

    …Conservatives began the period with the highest trust in science, relative to liberals and moderates, and ended the period with the lowest

    The patterns for science are also unique when compared to public trust in other secular institutions. Results show enduring differences in trust in science by social class, ethnicity, gender, church attendance, and region. I explore the implications of these findings, specifically, the potential for political divisions to emerge over the cultural authority of science and the social role of experts in the formation of public policy.

    OH, my this study is hilarious. The guy spouts all the Progressive talking points about ‘Conservatives’ Not a surprise since he is from University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill. The local saying is: “The best thing to come out of Chapel Hill is route 15-501”

    This is how he characterizes those who don’t swallow Fake News and Junk Science.
    “…the new right (NR)—a group skeptical of organized science and the intellectual establishment in colleges and universities. The NR is often closely aligned with the religious right and promotes limited government, strong national defense, and protection of traditional values against what they view as encroachments of a permissive and often chaotic modern society…”
    WOW, so we got a clue that the Progressives had completely taken over schools! Who’d a thunk.

    OH, and is that ‘new right’ Hillary’s Alt-Right?? Or the beginnings of the Tea Party?

    Interesting that the 2010 Blair-Rockefeller poll finds the NR/Tea Party well educated Americans and not the gun-toting, bible thumping, knuckle dragging morons the Progressives try to label them as.
    “Nearly half of Tea Party members (49.9%) are middle class, with an annual household income of 40 to 100K, another 13.9% make over 100K. Tea Party members are less likely to fall below the poverty level than Non-Tea Party members. The majority (65.3%) of Tea Party members have some college training, with 27.5 % having earned a Bachelor’s Degree or higher.Moreover, only 7.2 % of Tea Party members have less than a high school education, as compared to 13.4 % of Non-Tea Party members. “

    Think that education and success in life might just mean the NR/Tea party are paying attention and have a clue?
    “When asked a battery of “political sophistication” questions—factual questions about the contemporary government—Tea Party members outperformed Non-Tea Party members repeatedly.”

    Notice how the abstract is very misleading compared to the conclusions in the body of the text of the Chapel Hill paper:

    The GSS asked respondents the following question: “I am going to name some institutions in this country. As far as the people running these institutions are concerned, would you say you have a great deal of confidence, only some confidence, or hardly any confidence at all in them [the Scientific Community]?” Respondents were then given the choice to respond “a great deal,” “only some,” or “hardly any” (they could also choose “don’t know” or “refuse”). Over the 36 years of the GSS, 40.8 percent expressed a “great deal” of confidence in the scientific community, 46.2 percent responded “only some,” and 6.6 percent expressed “hardly any.” In addition, 6.5 percent of respondents chose “don’t know” or “refuse.” ….

    Approximately 34 percent of respondents identify as conservative, 39 percent identify as moderate, and 27 percent identify as liberal over this period…

    Liberals ended the period with the highest levels of trust among ideological groups, due to consistently low levels of trust among moderates and a decline among conservatives. In summary, moderates show the lowest levels of trust among ideological groups for most of the period, conservatives close the gap with moderates around the millennium, and a large gap opens up between conservatives and liberals after the 1980s.

    The chart on page 9 showed moderates were the first to lose confidence, dropping fast from 1974 to 1982, the conservative decline in confidence was more gradual and the ‘liberals’ stated brainwashed throughout. Notice that the moderates are the biggest group (39%) and the first to lose confidence but the report zeroes in on conservatives (34%) instead of moderates.

    And this guy, writing such a slanted report, wonders why people might lose confidence???

  20. catweazle666 says:

    Serioso says:
    2 January 2017 at 4:26 am
    “While I should be glad to see another troll visit your blog”

    Well, at least you admit you’re a troll, which I suppose shows at least a glimmer of self-awareness.

    Tell us, why do you appear to consider making a fool of yourself in front of your intellectual superiors confers some sort of cachet?

  21. Larry Geiger says:

    NYT and WaPo. I don’t go there. If that means that I live in a bubble then so be it. If anyone links to one of those I ignore them. Even somewhat conservative places like HotAir. Just can’t make myself go there. HuffPost also mostly off the list of places to go. I can go look at main stream media on occasions and even some of the other side blogs but there is a limit. As of this month I think that NatGeo might get on the list of never visit also. We’ll see. When in public places I sometimes see snatches of “the View” or “the Chew” or some sort of nonsense. AAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHH!! It’s just awful.

    Lately I’ve been in too many doctor places and many of them play that awful stuff. But a few have Fox News on. My dermatologist makes enough money to buy specialized programming that talks about skin stuff. Wish more doctors and medical places would do that.

  22. H.R. says:

    @Larry Geiger
    “My dermatologist makes enough money to buy specialized programming that talks about skin stuff. “

    At least your dermatologist has some skin in the game ;o)

  23. Gail Combs says:

    Larry Geiger, I quit watching the boob tube 4 decades ago so the stuff to me is completely foreign. I generally go YUCK! and grab a book. (There are generally a couple in the trucks, in my purse, on the desks, chairs, dressers, tables…..)

  24. Glenn999 says:

    My guess is that serio has yet to leave his parent’s house, probably not yet graduated from highschool. He never forgets to insult, as the temptation is too great. Best to ignore those with closed minds. By the way, I read the silly NYT article.

  25. E.M.Smith says:


    New Right: As opposed to the old right who were beaten into submission and act as doormats to the Democrats – McCain, “Weepy” John Boehner, Paul Ryan… the New Right have some spine and don’t drink coolaid, preferring a good Scotch with a double espresso chaser… They also talk back when accosted, refuse to accept insults “to the person” especially, and any attack on them is met with strong resistance (sometimes with immediate Trump-Grenades, sometimes via Special Forces like delay and indirection, but ALL attacks are countered)

    And yeah, those folks who are not sucked into any ideological wing, who think for themselves, and refuse to be taken in by propaganda, those “moderate” folks, were the first ones to see the politicization of science and the destruction of truth that brought… Oh, the humanity…

    Now Conservatives have caught clue too. Just leaving the beneficiaries of the last 40 years of Socialist Corruption Of Science as the last true believers… Who’d a thunk it… (In the 1960s, there were conservative colleges. By the 1970s, there were pressures on conservative professors and in my school, the Social Sciences had gone off the deep end into Socialism, but the Ag and Science and especially Business schools were still sane. By the 1980s my local school – where I was in a masters program – had gone to a trivial minority conservatives, almost exclusively in the Business College. Now? It’s all a wasteland… and they wonder why we don’t kneel before them in their Academic Enclave? Because of THEM.)


    Once you visit one “Liberal Left” site, there is no need to visit another. Over the last decade+ they have become one mouthpiece with one narrative. The Talking Points are issued and the same story shows up on all outlets at the same time. Minor variation in cadence, delivery, and particulars of the Snark ‘N Snide pitch.

    I force myself to sample them daily. “Opposition Research”. CNN, MSNBC, NBC, “whatever”. I’ll do a rotation through them. Same stories. Same spin. Doing web searches on topics, I’ll hit a Huff’N-Puff or a NTY or a Wa-Po or a “whatever”, and usually sample at least 2 for confirmation. Same Stories. Same Headlines. Same Spin. Same Talking Points Du Jour. Frankly, that was my first clue (some years back) that there was rampant coordination going on. I figured it was just ‘delegation’ to news aggregator agencies like Reuters; Hillary Gate showed that it was more pernicious… and Gail got me pointed at the root cause: Soros and his Fellow Travelers as puppet master. ( I found Her accusation at Trump of “Puppet” particularly revealing… as often the case with those who insult and accuse, they accuse of what they are… She the Soro’s Puppet…)

    So having confirmed that it is always The Same Spin in all, I only need a small sample / day to do all the opposition research I need…

    Frankly, what I LOVE about RT, is how it is NOT all the same. has their news site. Some headlines right now:

    Russia scales down military presence in Syria, Admiral Kuznetsov aircraft carrier to leave first

    ‘Who gave them this and why?’ Trump blasts leaks of secret report on ‘Russian hacking’

    ‘Dock here anytime’: Duterte visits Russian destroyer, wants Moscow to be ally & protector

    ‘Governments loathe transparency, can do wicked things’ – Assange

    UN warns Damascus water crisis may be ‘war crime,’ as 5.5 million people affected

    How much of that is on MSM in America?…

    They have some left wing loons. They have some folks I’d classify as right wing. They have some clearly pro-Islam. They have some behind the scenes Russian Advocacy in war zones. You get a different point of view from each show. Redacted Tonight is classical Socialist Hates Business. World News is generally straight news, though with a bit of deference to the Russian POV and with video from ‘the other side’ of many conflicts. Then Larry King is just the same show he’s run in America for what, a century now? ;-) Interviews all sorts of folks. Crosstalk: I love it. Semi-Centrist occasionally right occasionally left… Likes to have folks discuss an issue openly, and with some very good guests. (Rodgers on money and international money issues, for example) is their U-Tube channel…

    “‘Innsbruck sex attacks could have been prevented’ – Austrian politician to police”

    “LIVE from outer space: First spacewalk of the year”

    “Good Morning Station! Waking up in Space (360 Video)”

    “View of Aleppo as Syrian ceasefire gets underway ”

    And so much more that isn’t in the NYT or on MSNBC…


    Now now! Best not to be rude. I’m sure he’s “well educated” and been to college. The Indoctrination is clearly embedded… (though I can’t speak to Mom or the basement…)

    THE characteristic that stands out most is the “must insult” and preferably “to the person”. Claims not to know the Alynsky Method, yet uses it every comment. So either well indoctrinated, or hangs out with those who are, or is just a fundamentally mean person who likes to Troll. Hard to say. Clearly was not raised with manners and politeness as parental teaching moments.

    Why don’t I ignore or ban? Because I believe in finding the highest and best use for everyone and everything, and a “good bad example” adds value missing in the silence of a ban… while ignoring invites more and others to join the insult parade.

  26. Glenn999 says:

    I was speaking for myself after having tried once to communicate with the “troll”.
    You, however, should be commended for your efforts to educate and communicate; perhaps sainthood is in your future:]

Comments are closed.