slngsht

:smash:

I'm waiting to see who all is going... if a few of you misfits show up, I'll come up and hang out a bit. I may have a surprise vehicle on the trailer, but it's not a seven.

welcome aboard

I'm planning to be up there if others are showing up - without a 7

that was awesome. thanks for posting.

not mine...

why debate black or white? http://development4.net/MyPics/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/weird-helmet.jpg

saw it on the local news. let me dig it up. he's admitting it.

Vance Mcallister... a "family man" http://www.hannapub.com/ouachitacitizen/news/article_dce7369e-be77-11e3-9b86-0017a43b2370.html

yup, 'bout time I guess

so nice to have some nice weather to enjoy after a LONG winter.

Participation is optional.

That is VERY cool.

something someone somewhere something it's all good

That's a harmless enough statement. How does one decide what that something is? based on being presented with facts? Are electric cars better for the environment than gasoline ones when you take the full life cycle of battery production into account. I honestly don't know the answer. I think yes. I'd like to believe that, but what source can I use to get actually true information? Should I be a good citizen and believe a "scientific" community that has no problem with providing "asymmetric information"? Do you realize how absurd it is for a news or scientific group to openly admit they're not objective and that's a good thing? or should I just trust a government that tells me there are 46 million uninsured, and 7.1 million got coverage due to their newest "something" that they did, when I know both numbers are vastly exaggerated? When they are pretty much determined to drive coal out of business no matter how much coal plants are cleaned up. Tell me, is it better to continue importing oil for transportation while improving gas mileage, or building nuclear and coal plants and accelerate development of electric cars? Is it better overall to leave energy taxes at their current level, or raising them? double, triple, quadruple, ten fold? They're all doing something, but which is the best way? Does the government have an obligation to lay out what they want to do and why? Or are you ok with "vote on it before you read it" mentality? Do you question anything you hear from government, environmental groups or unions? I question their "facts", as well as big business "facts". If you do question them, post them up in a topic here and enlighten us - and I don't mean that in a mocking way. I'm open to learning new points of view when they're supported by facts and logic. how much value is there in "doing something is better than nothing"? What is YOUR opinion about "something"?

how is pointing out a paper that calls for benefits of "asymmetric information" a conspiracy theory? If I told you an average Caterham must suck in performance with only 200 hp, would you not respond that because it only weighs 1000 lbs, that's not a full picture, and here is how it stacks up against some high horsepower cars? This is not just a one-off instance - if it were, it could be easily brushed aside.

No? send him an email

http://ajae.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2014/02/24/ajae.aau001.abstract from the American Journal of Agricultural Economics Abstract It appears that news media and some pro-environmental organizations have the tendency to accentuate or even exaggerate the damage caused by climate change. This article provides a rationale for this tendency by using a modified International Environmental Agreement (IEA) model with asymmetric information. We find that the information manipulation has an instrumental value, as it ex post induces more countries to participate in an IEA, which will eventually enhance global welfare. From the ex ante perspective, however, the impact that manipulating information has on the level of participation in an IEA and on welfare is ambiguous.

Just moving it to off topic. Leaving the link here for a couple of days

:rofl:

I agree "facts" can be manipulated to favor one side or the other in the media. Will be interesting to see how this turns out.

I haven't seen where the parents have been accused of an unhealthy home situation. This kid was already under treatment by another medical team. They suggested examination by her GI doctor, who at that point in time had moved from Tufts to Boston. That's why they went there.

Tufts probably staying quiet because nobody wants to discuss an active case. Parents have paid a heavy price for speaking out. They lost permanent custody of their daughter a few days ago. A bit of personal story on this... My older son was hospitalized for 10 days due to abcess behind his tonsil. It started out with a fever, and then his neck was visibly swollen. We took him to his doctor, and after that to the ER, where he was admitted. He was treated with one round of IV antibiotics, which were minimally effective, and after 2-3 days (still had a temp at this point), switched to a different pair of antibiotics which worked much better. After a 10 day stay at the hospital, he was sent home with the oral version of the same antibiotics. He developed a rash from the oral antibiotics and back he went. His ENT ordered another CT Scan to determine the state of the abscess, and it was still there... His doctors at the hospital ordered a change of antibiotics to another pair, including Levaquin. Not being an expert in medicine, I decided to at least google around to find some info on the drugs. Levaquin has some nasty potential side effects. We insisted - after MUCH heated argument - on a 2nd opinion. They contacted an infectious disease doc at Georgetown, who confirmed their choice. At the recommendation of our ENT, we stopped treatment at the local hospital, checked him out, and drove him down to Childrens in DC. Their specialist examined the CT scans and put him back on the original antibiotics, which solved the problem. So how did the specialist at childrens arrive at a different conclusion? He LOOKED at the scan, rather than relying on the radiologist's readings. The Georgetown doctor, as well as the one at the hospital we were at both assumed the remaining abscess was fully formed. Why did Levaquin scare me so much? This is the case I read about: Does that mean it would have happened to my son? No. But I still had the ability to decide which team of experts to go with. If they had refused to let me do that, I'd be in exactly the same situation.

That is the prevailing liberal logic. Even the ones who deal with black market guns :lol: