home

Saturday College Football OpenThread

The picks: (All picks 2 units unless otherwise indicated): Washington State +9 Competitor: Stanford Northern Illinois -3 Competitor: Purdue, Western Kentucky +3 Competitor: Navy, Minnesota +2, Competitor: Iowa, South Florida +20, Competitor: Miami (Florida), Oklahoma -3 (4 units) Competitor: Notre Dame, South Carolina -7, Competitor: Central Florida, USC +4 (3 units), Competitor: Arizona State, Texas A&M -15, Competitor: Arkansas, Alabama -14 (3 units), Competitor: Mississippi, Florida State -23, Competitor: Boston College, Ohio State -7 (3 units), Competitor: Wisconsin, Florida Atlantic +14, Competitor: Rice, Tennessee -18, Competitor: South Alabama, Georgia -3, Competitor: LSU, TCU -19, Competitor: SMU.

After a slow start, I've been hot the last 2 weeks, 20-5-2. For the season: 30-24-2 (55.5%), +20 units.

Go Gators!

Open Thread.

< Friday Open Thread | NFL Sunday Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    AN AXE LENGTH AWAY, vol. 141 (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by Dadler on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 10:29:37 AM EST
    Hmmmmm, (5.00 / 1) (#8)
    by bmaz on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 02:01:09 PM EST
    I see you learned your lesson betting on the Sun Devils. Smart man.

    You may have (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by lentinel on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 06:49:25 AM EST
    read about the EPA's recent release of new carbon emission standards for new coal plants in the US. This, along with a new statement from the UN on the impact of global warming indicates a degree of awareness of the dangers to human life being posed by the continuation of our use of fossil fuels.

    I found it interesting to read a UBS newsletter that was emailed to me.

    The headline was "Endangered Coal".

    So it is "coal" that is endangered from the Wall Street perspective.

    Nothing personal.
    Just business.

    This is the conflict we have.
    Keystone is a potential environmental nightmare.
    But its proponents cite the potential employment for people along its path.

    The same with coal.
    People are dependent, especially in Virginia, West Virginia and Kentucky on the coal industry for their livelihoods. Illinois, the president's home state, also is tied in with the coal industry. They have been promoting it as "clean".

    Unless there are government programs designed to retrain people for alternative means of employment, we will have a continuation of the battle posed between those of the American people who want to breathe clean air and save the planet, and those who want to continue to be able to make a living.

    We need some kind of governmental action now.

    What we need is for the man made (1.00 / 2) (#24)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 11:40:40 AM EST
    global warming hoax to be recognized for what it is.

    A hoax designed to get money and power from all the chicken littles of the world.

    Parent

    The earth is flat. The moon landing was faked. (5.00 / 3) (#25)
    by Angel on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 12:00:52 PM EST
    I'd laugh at your ignorance but realize there are millions more such as yourself who refuse to accept the scientific truth.  Quite scary.

    Parent
    No, the earth is not flat. (1.00 / 2) (#30)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 02:13:13 PM EST
    Your ability to think logically is flat.

    Explain please why the temperature has plateaued for the last 15 years or so while whatever mankind is doing has increased.

    And while you're at it, explain why MMGW does not meet the requirements to be a valid scientific theory:

    A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on knowledge that has been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experimentation.[1][2] Scientists create scientific theories from hypotheses that have been corroborated through the scientific method, then gather evidence to test their accuracy. As with all forms of scientific knowledge, scientific theories are inductive in nature and aim for predictive and explanatory force.[3][4]

    Wiki

    Parent

    I have (none / 0) (#27)
    by lentinel on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 01:06:28 PM EST
    definite proof that the Earth is flat - and that the round-Earth lobby is a bunch of money-grubbing map makers.

    It is well documented that at least 15,000 people fall off the Southern tip of the Earth every single quarter.

    So much more to report.

    Parent

    Money and power???? (none / 0) (#28)
    by oculus on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 01:26:08 PM EST
    LIke I said... (5.00 / 2) (#26)
    by lentinel on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 01:03:57 PM EST
    it's them dang lyin' icebergs - pretendin' to melt jest to fkusup.

    Parent
    Do you mean this ice?? (1.00 / 1) (#32)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 02:29:33 PM EST
    Sea ice at record levels for this date

    Of course we now know that the UN missed all of their predictions.

    ""Temperatures have not risen nearly as much as almost all of the climate models predicted," Roy Spencer, a climatologist at the University of Alabama at Huntsville, told FoxNews.com.

    "Their predictions have largely failed, four times in a row... what that means is that it's time for them to re-evaluate," Spencer said.

    Yes it's from Fox because MSNBC and NBC wouldn't tell you.

    BTW - Can you tell me why the Medeival Warming Period, around 1000-1100 AD, was warmer than now???

    What was it??? All those ox carts?

    ;-)

    Parent

    Taking (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by lentinel on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 04:08:12 PM EST
    what you wrote at face value, and that temperatures did not rise "nearly as much" as predicted... the statement acknowledges that they did in fact rise.

    To what do you attribute that rise?

    Parent

    The facts are that (1.00 / 3) (#46)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 06:54:08 PM EST
    the temperature has plateaued and held steady for 15 nor so years.

    Why has that happened given that man has kept on keeping on??

    Parent

    What you quoted was... (none / 0) (#51)
    by lentinel on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 10:02:52 PM EST
    "Temperatures have not risen nearly as much as almost all of the climate models predicted," Roy Spencer, a climatologist at the University of Alabama at Huntsville, told FoxNews.com.

    This person, Mr. Spencer, says that the temperatures have risen -
    although, he says, not as much as predicted.

    You're telling us that temperatures have not risen in the last fifteen years...
    So, you're saying that this quote, that you provided, is fifteen years old?

    Parent

    What I am saying is that the (1.00 / 3) (#52)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 10:15:04 PM EST
    "The world stopped getting warmer almost 16 years ago, according to new data released last week.

    The figures, which have triggered debate among climate scientists, reveal that from the beginning of 1997 until August 2012, there was no discernible rise in aggregate global temperatures.

    This means that the `plateau' or `pause' in global warming has now lasted for about the same time as the previous period when temperatures rose, 1980 to 1996. Before that, temperatures had been stable or declining for about 40 years."

    Link

    And what did Spencer say??

    "Temperatures have not risen nearly as much as almost all of the climate models predicted," Roy Spencer, a climatologist at the University of Alabama at Huntsville, told FoxNews.com.

    If the prediction was 10 degrees and the result ws 0 degrees..... ""Temperatures have not risen nearly as much as almost all of the climate models predicted"

    BTW - Did all those ox carts cause the Medieval warming period????? Inquiring minds want to know.

    lol

    Parent

    The EPA (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by lentinel on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 10:54:50 PM EST
    among other sources offer a different opinion.

    To whit:

    Seven of the top 10 warmest years on record for the contiguous 48 states have occurred since 1998, and 2012 was the warmest year on record.
    Worldwide, 2001-2010 was the warmest decade on record since thermometer-based observations began.

    EPA

    You can check this out too:

    ...Analyses from all three groups point to the decade between 2000 and 2009 as the hottest since modern records began more than a century ago. Temperatures in the 2010s have been running slightly warmer still.

    WHAT ABOUT THE UNITED STATES?
    The year 2012 was the warmest on record for the contiguous United States, according to the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC).

    The above is from the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research.

    I reluctantly must say that I think you are blowing smoke.

    I wish you knew what you were talking about, because I don't think that the governments of the world are going to do anything to avert this crisis - and so I wish that it were not a crisis but just a hoax as you proclaim.

    Parent

    Quoting temps about (none / 0) (#59)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Sep 30, 2013 at 12:39:40 PM EST
    the US isn't exactly "the world."

    Go back and look at my original source.

    Rest easy. The world will cool and you can start worrying about a real problem.... reduced food production because of cooling.

    Parent

    Here, jim, have fun with this: (5.00 / 2) (#64)
    by Anne on Mon Sep 30, 2013 at 01:58:56 PM EST
    Evidence of climate change

    Certain facts about Earth's climate are not in dispute:

        The heat-trapping nature of carbon dioxide and other gases was demonstrated in the mid-19th century.2Their ability to affect the transfer of infrared energy through the atmosphere is the scientific basis of many instruments flown by NASA. Increased levels of greenhouse gases must cause the Earth to warm in response.

        Ice cores drawn from Greenland, Antarctica, and tropical mountain glaciers show that the Earth's climate responds to changes in solar output, in the Earth's orbit, and in greenhouse gas levels. They also show that in the past, large changes in climate have happened very quickly, geologically-speaking: in tens of years, not in millions or even thousands.3

    Sea level rise

    Global sea level rose about 17 centimeters (6.7 inches) in the last century. The rate in the last decade, however, is nearly double that of the last century.4

    Global temperature rise

    All three major global surface temperature reconstructions show that Earth has warmed since 1880.5 Most of this warming has occurred since the 1970s, with the 20 warmest years having occurred since 1981 and with all 10 of the warmest years occurring in the past 12 years.6 Even though the 2000s witnessed a solar output decline resulting in an unusually deep solar minimum in 2007-2009, surface temperatures continue to increase.7

    Warming oceans

    The oceans have absorbed much of this increased heat, with the top 700 meters (about 2,300 feet) of ocean showing warming of 0.302 degrees Fahrenheit since 1969.8

    Shrinking ice sheets

    The Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets have decreased in mass. Data from NASA's Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment show Greenland lost 150 to 250 cubic kilometers (36 to 60 cubic miles) of ice per year between 2002 and 2006, while Antarctica lost about 152 cubic kilometers (36 cubic miles) of ice between 2002 and 2005.

    Declining Arctic sea ice

    Both the extent and thickness of Arctic sea ice has declined rapidly over the last several decades.9

    Glacial retreat

    Glaciers are retreating almost everywhere around the world -- including in the Alps, Himalayas, Andes, Rockies, Alaska and Africa.10

    Extreme events

    The number of record high temperature events in the United States has been increasing, while the number of record low temperature events has been decreasing, since 1950. The U.S. has also witnessed increasing numbers of intense rainfall events.11

    Ocean acidification

    Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, the acidity of surface ocean waters has increased by about 30 percent.12,13 This increase is the result of humans emitting more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and hence more being absorbed into the oceans. The amount of carbon dioxide absorbed by the upper layer of the oceans is increasing by about 2 billion tons per year.14,15

    More on who backs these findings.

    And maybe you could miss a couple meetings of the Flat Earth Society, so you'd have time to peruse some of these sites...

    Accompanying graphics of interest.

    Parent

    You and all the usual suspects (none / 0) (#68)
    by jondee on Tue Oct 01, 2013 at 03:00:53 PM EST
    from talk radio and some creationists have taken the GOPs environmental Norquist Pledge and are at odds with 97% of the scientists in the world..

    Whole thing's a dang hoax..like the Cardiff giant..and Obama bein' born in the U.S..

    Parent

    Roy Spencer ?!? (5.00 / 2) (#61)
    by Yman on Mon Sep 30, 2013 at 01:16:21 PM EST
    The same guy who claims creationism has more of a scientific basis than evolution?!?

    I finally became convinced that the theory of creation actually had a much better scientific basis than the theory of evolution, for the creation model was actually better able to explain the physical and biological complexity in the world.

    Heh.

    BTW - Re: "Sea Ice" levels - the title of your link is wrong ... as usual.

    "Sea ice" levels on the whole are not at record levels.  Antarctic sea ice levels have increased slightly (around 1%/decade) while Arctic sea ice levels have fallen sharply:

    "Although Arctic sea ice extent underwent a strong decline from 1979 to 2009, Antarctic sea ice underwent a slight increase. The Antarctic ice extent increases were smaller in magnitude than the Arctic increases, and some regions of the Antarctic experienced strong declining trends in sea ice extent." (NSIDC)

    This difference in the two areas of sea ice is entirely expected and not at all inconsistent with MMGW.

    Want to try again, Jim?

    Parent

    This is, of course, the same Fox News ... (none / 0) (#38)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 04:40:43 PM EST
    Donald, they are quoting a (none / 0) (#47)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 06:55:37 PM EST
    UN paper.

    BTW - You do realize that attacking a source without refuting it is tantamount to agreeing with it.

    Aloha, old opponent.

    Parent

    Rather, it represents the utter disdain and complete contempt I have for Fox News, and the odd feeling of pity I have for those who somehow continue to insist that a clown car is a reputable and reliable source of information.

    Parent
    Domald, if there is a clown (none / 0) (#60)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Sep 30, 2013 at 12:41:17 PM EST
    around, and I mean this lovingly, it is you with your continual off the cuff bragging and posturing.

    Parent
    Whatever. (none / 0) (#63)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Sep 30, 2013 at 01:44:28 PM EST
    If you're going to regress to your adolescent years and make it personal, this conversation is over.

    Parent
    Uhhhhmmmm ... not remotely, Jim (none / 0) (#66)
    by Yman on Mon Sep 30, 2013 at 02:55:52 PM EST
    BTW - You do realize that attacking a source without refuting it is tantamount to agreeing with it.

    Forget any actual science, Jim ... try a course in basic logic, first.  Spencer's merely offering the opinion of a lonely skeptic.  His scientific judgment is extremely relevant to anyone deciding what weight to give his opinion.  Given that he's one of only a tiny few skeptics with any background in climatology, along with the fact that he believes Creationism is more credible than evolution, I know precisely how much weight his opinion should be given. ... only slightly more than your lay opinion.

    BTW - From your own Fox News article:

    "It's important to keep in mind that there are natural short-term variations in global temperature that happen right alongside human-induced warming," Aaron Huertas, of the Union of Concerned Scientists, told FoxNews.com.

    "For instance, it would have been impossible for the IPCC to predict if a volcanic eruption might temporarily cool the Earth, as the Mount Pinatubo eruption did in 1991."

    Not to mention that this report has been debunked time and again by actual scientists.

    Link 1

    Link 2

    Link 3

    Link 4

    Should I keep going, Jim?

    Parent

    And this is, of course, the same Fox News ... (none / 0) (#39)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 04:55:21 PM EST
    ... which also asks other questions that MSNBC won't.

    Nor would NBC, for that matter.

    But, hey, whatever floats your boat, Jim.

    Parent

    Because only FOX will tell us. LOL!! (none / 0) (#50)
    by shoephone on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 07:51:57 PM EST
    It's an NBC conspiracy!

    And that link from the knuckleheaded Steven Goddard is the same dumb link you've been promoting here for months, with the same result: it's meaningless. You've been proven wrong countless times with actual facts from actual scientific sites, and yet you persist.

    Don't you ever work on new material?

    Parent

    shoephone (1.00 / 2) (#53)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 10:18:00 PM EST
    You don't need to further demonstrate your lack of knowledge and understanding.

    And no. No one has proven me wrong from actual scientific sites....

    Now, my dear Chicken Little, run out and scream, "The earth is burning! The earth is burning! Give the hoaxers your money!"

    lol

    Parent

    Yeah, only me and Yman (5.00 / 2) (#54)
    by shoephone on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 10:42:14 PM EST
    and dozens of other people on this blog, have proven you wrong -- with facts -- time after time. You, my dear old Jim, have made yourself a laughingstock, once again. But please... do tell us all about the NBC conspiracy to keep the truth from us!

    Parent
    Neither of you could carry a (none / 0) (#58)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Sep 30, 2013 at 12:36:11 PM EST
    scientists lunch box.

    shoe, what you don't grasp is that, unlike you, I don't care what you, or others think. I am true to my beliefs and I think they reflect what is best for the country.

    Have a nice day and thanks for making me laugh at your juvenile snarks....and the fact that you cannot challenge me on a technical fact based basis.


    Parent

    You're too tiresome to continue proving wrong (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by shoephone on Mon Sep 30, 2013 at 01:43:26 PM EST
    but I see Yman has more energy today for challenging your extraordinary b*llsh*t than I do. This is gonna be fun!!!

    Parent
    Why would shoe or I ... (5.00 / 1) (#65)
    by Yman on Mon Sep 30, 2013 at 02:38:16 PM EST
    ... challenge you on a "technical fact based basis"?  It's not like you listen to facts or reason, let alone the overwhelming consensus of the 97% of actual climate scientists who support the concept of MMGW, or the overwhelming body of scientific research from which they draw their conclusions.

    You choose to believe what you want based on whether it fits your conservative agenda, citing wingnut blogs and an occasional tabloid opinion article as "evidence" - actual facts and science be damned.

    It's not just silly ... it's gotten boring.

    Parent

    "True to your beliefs" (5.00 / 1) (#67)
    by MKS on Mon Sep 30, 2013 at 09:53:48 PM EST
    I believe that you are, that you do not care what anyone thinks.....or what the evidence actually shows.....

    It is about "belief."    I would venture there is a high correlation between climate change denial and belief in Christian Fundamentalism.....

    Parent

    a scientist's lunch box.. (none / 0) (#69)
    by jondee on Tue Oct 01, 2013 at 03:04:58 PM EST
    but at the same time you think 97% of them are "hoaxers"..

    Parent
    Wouldn't (none / 0) (#29)
    by lentinel on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 01:30:26 PM EST
    you settle for an alternate source of fuel on the simple basis that the air you breathe would be somewhat cleaner?

    Or do you dispute that these emissions cloud the air?

    Parent

    If you are arguing for a cleaner environement (1.00 / 1) (#31)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 02:20:45 PM EST
    say so because the two are not connected.

    Technology has cleaned the air in places like LA and Denver to an acceptable level. Do you understand the concept of if you move the goal posts you will never get there??

    The issue of alternative fuels is far more complex than the air quality.

    BTW - Do you know how many people in the Third World have died because we outlawed DDT and the replacement is not as effective and cost more??

    Wise up and start viewing the world as a complex place and start viewing people who tell you they have the only solution to any problem are either stupid or trying to manipulate you.

    Parent

    Thanks so much (none / 0) (#34)
    by lentinel on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 04:13:09 PM EST
    for your advice to wise up.

    I will.

    In the meanwhile, since you acknowledge that air quality is an issue, I subject that there are alternative energy sources much cleaner than coal. Miners' faces would seemingly attest to that.

    So, seeking to clear and clean the air has, at least in theory, the collateral benefit of ameliorating the global warming.

    But, suppose it doesn't.

    It wouldn't be a total loss, because we would be breathing cleaner air.

    Win. Win.

    Parent

    What if it's a big (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by Edger on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 04:35:46 PM EST
    Perfect. (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by lentinel on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 04:38:50 PM EST
    Just what I was thinking...

    Suppose there were no global warming...

    We would have created a world with clean air for nothing.

    Great cartoon.
    Thanks for the link.

    Parent

    Unfortunately you did not (none / 0) (#48)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 07:14:56 PM EST
    tell us what the cost comparisons are between those "cleaner than coal" and coal.

    And while we have been cleaning the air for years you claim that MMGW has increased.

    Maybe we should dirty the air??

    That would cool the world.. or don't you remember the "nuclear winter" scenario beloved by the Left before MMGW was discovered.

    ;-)

    Of course what you are doing is a typical tactic. You change the subject from MMGW to clean air.

    The facts are that a clean environment can be obtained through technology... UNLESS we start shutting down science through embracing false premises that destroy the economy.

    BTW - I remember my Mom hanging out clothes to dry in the winter that were covered by....soot.... WOOD fire soot... and later coal soot.

    If we hadn't moved forward with electrical power... generated largely by COAL... none of the advances in medicine, etc., would have happened.

    If you want to live in the middle of a forest unfettered by all that a modern society has brought you be my guest.

    But please don't drag the rest of us down with you.


    Parent

    And not only that, but ... (none / 0) (#35)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 04:16:47 PM EST
    ... Barack Obama is secretly holding the country's entire population of passenger pigeons and ivory-billed woodpeckers captive at Area 51, in order to expand the power of the EPA and National Park Service.

    Is there no end to the left's deceit, lies and nefarious coverups?

    :-P

    Parent

    Donald, your inability (1.00 / 4) (#49)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 07:18:16 PM EST
    to explain why we know less about this President than any of the others speaks for itself.

    And please, quit the old "humor" trick as a way of obfuscating that simple undeniable fact.

    Parent

    "We" know less about him.. (5.00 / 1) (#57)
    by jondee on Mon Sep 30, 2013 at 07:04:56 AM EST
    and what we do know doesn't jibe with the secret knowledge we've gleaned from listening to talk radio.


    Parent
    That USC line... (none / 0) (#1)
    by Dadler on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 10:28:17 AM EST
    ...has to make Pat Haden feel good. Er...

    Oops, wrong USC (none / 0) (#3)
    by Dadler on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 10:37:59 AM EST
    Ha! But Pat Haden still isn't happy. But the basketball season should turn his mood around.

    Parent
    Saw they're playing Stanford (none / 0) (#4)
    by Dadler on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 10:48:57 AM EST
    Gonna get ugly in the slow Lane for the Trojans, I believe.

    Parent
    Holy Sh*t I was out of it this morning (none / 0) (#17)
    by Dadler on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 09:10:30 PM EST
    What schedule was I looking at? What planet was I on? Stanford USC is in November. Sheesh. Go back to sleep, dude.

    Parent
    USC is at Arizona State tonight, while ... (none / 0) (#18)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 10:13:23 PM EST
    ... Stanford is taking on Washington State at the Seahawks' stadium in Seattle. As of this writing, the Trojans are down 7-0 in the 2nd, and the Cardinal are up 17-3, also in the 2nd.

    Parent
    You can stick a fork in SC coach Lane Kiffen. (none / 0) (#40)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 05:04:41 PM EST
    He's done by a 62-41 count, thanks to a second-half pratfall that ought to have the USC alumni's panties wadded up real good in a collective bunch by 8:00 a.m. PDT Monday morning, when the university's administration office opens for business.

    Parent
    Hawaii is behind in the news today (none / 0) (#41)
    by CoralGables on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 05:11:41 PM EST
    Kiffin was fired when the plane landed in California last night

    Parent
    Although the AD recently said he was behind (none / 0) (#42)
    by oculus on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 05:21:33 PM EST
    Kiffin "150%".

    Parent
    I believe the well known Pat Haden quote is (none / 0) (#43)
    by CoralGables on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 05:38:11 PM EST
    "We support our coaches 100 percent until they're no longer our coaches."

    Parent
    I guess the 150% is so 2012. (none / 0) (#45)
    by oculus on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 06:09:38 PM EST
    I was at the UH-Fresno State game last night. (none / 0) (#44)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 06:04:58 PM EST
    I didn't hear the news 'til later.

    Parent
    Take this ball and run with it... (none / 0) (#5)
    by Edger on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 11:46:48 AM EST
    The Guardian Friday...
    NSA employee spied on nine women without detection, internal file shows
    The case is among 12 documented in a letter from the NSA's inspector general to a leading member of Congress, who asked for a breakdown of cases in which the agency's powerful surveillance apparatus was deliberately abused by staff. One relates to a member of the US military who, on the first day he gained access to the surveillance system, used it to spy on six email addresses belonging to former girlfriends.

    The letter, from Dr George Ellard, only lists cases that were investigated and later "substantiated" by his office. But it raises the possibility that there are many more cases that go undetected. In a quarter of the cases, the NSA only found out about the misconduct after the employee confessed.

    It also reveals limited disciplinary action taken against NSA staff found to have abused the system. In seven cases, individuals guilty of abusing their powers resigned or retired before disciplinary action could be taken. Two civilian employees kept their jobs - and, it appears, their security clearance - and escaped with only a written warning after they were found to have conducted unauthorised interceptions.

    The abuses - technically breaches of the law - did not result in a single prosecution, even though more than half of the cases were referred to the Department of Justice. The DoJ did not respond to a request for information about why no charges were brought.



    Who could have forseen it? (5.00 / 2) (#9)
    by Dadler on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 02:12:37 PM EST
    Gee, nobody. Give an inch and your local government voyeur will F you with it and take photos. Gimme a break. Sacrifice freedom for security, deserve neither, all that.

    Breakfast with the NSA

    One Too Many at the NSA Mixer

    Parent

    So, remind me, howndid the alleged (5.00 / 3) (#11)
    by oculus on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 02:50:54 PM EST
    Boston Marathon bombing suspects escape notice by our watchers?

    Parent
    Israel wasn't able to process all that (none / 0) (#14)
    by Militarytracy on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 05:28:40 PM EST
    Raw data yet

    Parent
    Don't tell DiFi (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by shoephone on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 05:43:08 PM EST
    Pretty obvious incompetence (none / 0) (#16)
    by Dadler on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 06:48:08 PM EST
    And what seems to be a fundamental lack of understanding of the genuine psychology at work. IOW, people who do not have a fundamental understanding of OTHER people, or how to really perceive it at all. Sentient is not a word I would ever associate with the NSA, CIA, or any others around the world.

    Parent
    "enrichment" data (none / 0) (#21)
    by Edger on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 05:50:10 AM EST
    N.S.A. Gathers Data on Social Connections of U.S. Citizens
    Since 2010, the National Security Agency has been exploiting its huge collections of data to create sophisticated graphs of some Americans' social connections that can identify their associates, their locations at certain times, their traveling companions and other personal information, according to newly disclosed documents and interviews with officials.
    [...snip...]
    The agency can augment the communications data with material from public, commercial and other sources, including bank codes, insurance information, Facebook profiles, passenger manifests, voter registration rolls and GPS location information, as well as property records and unspecified tax data, according to the documents. They do not indicate any restrictions on the use of such "enrichment" data, and several former senior Obama administration officials said the agency drew on it for both Americans and foreigners.
    Only in the enrichdest country on earth, of course...

    Parent
    Non-football factoids: Luciano Pavorotti (none / 0) (#6)
    by oculus on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 12:09:14 PM EST
    and soprano Mirella Freni were born in the same town in the same year.

    Is the Michigan football program so flush (none / 0) (#7)
    by oculus on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 12:10:53 PM EST
    It need not even play a game today?

    Given that the Wolverines ... (none / 0) (#19)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 10:23:21 PM EST
    ... dodged two consecutive bullets against Akron (28-24) and UConn (24-21), against whom they had been heavily favored by 20+ points. I'd think you'd welcome the break for them. Next up for them on Saturday is the Big 10 opener at home with Minnesota.

    Parent
    Houston baseball (none / 0) (#10)
    by Zorba on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 02:31:01 PM EST
    If a team loses and nobody is watching, did they actually lose the game?

    According to Nielsen TV ratings, the Sunday afternoon baseball game between the Houston Astros and the Cleveland Indians on Comcast SportsNet Houston got a 0.0 rating. Zero point zero. By their count, nobody watched the game.

    Zero people.

    Link.

    Now, I'm sure that some households were watching the game, because after all, only a few households participate in the Nielsen ratings, which provide just a sampling from which they project the wider numbers.
    But still, pretty embarrassing for the Astros, and Astro fans.

    The Astros/Colt .45s (none / 0) (#12)
    by CoralGables on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 03:44:10 PM EST
    franchise began in 1962, and for the next 49 years managed to never lose 100 games in a season. That all ended in 2011 when they set a club record with 106 losses. Not satisfied, they proceeded to set a another record for losses with 107 in 2012. The pressure on, the 2013 team proved its mettle by setting a record for the 3rd year in a row. They now have 109 losses with two games remaining.

    Houston has now lost at least 106 games for three consecutive years. Only the Mets of '62,'63,'64,'65 have done worse in 144 years of professional baseball.

    The Stros are currently on a 13 game losing streak (new team record). With all that record setting, you'd think the Astros fans would take notice.  

    Parent

    LOL! (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by Zorba on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 04:48:28 PM EST
    Oh, I'm sure that the Astros fans have taken notice.  That's why they're not bothering to watch the games.       ;-)
    The early to mid-60's Mets, though, as I recall, were considered the "lovable losers."  I don't think that anyone in the Houston area is thinking of the Astros in the same way.

    Parent
    Is Northern Illinois that good, or ... (none / 0) (#20)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Sep 28, 2013 at 10:43:14 PM EST
    ... is Purdue really that bad? The Boilermakers got roundly booed by fans in West Lafayette as the were getting annihilated by the NIU Huskies at home, 55-24.

    And out in West Huskyland, the question on everyone's lips is whether Washington's for real, after today's decisive 31-13 triumph over Arizona. We'll know for certain really soon, because the Dawgs' next two games are Saturday at Stanford, followed by Oregon the following week in Seattle.

    Wow. Just returned from a wild game. (none / 0) (#22)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sun Sep 29, 2013 at 05:51:26 AM EST
    The UH Rainbow Warriors haven't been looking so good this season, and tonight wasn't looking to be any different with the 'Bows down to No. 25 Fresno State, 42-3, at the 6:15 mark in the third quarter.

    But then something happened after the 'Bows changed QBs and Sean Schroeder entered the game, drove the team quickly donflied for their first touchdown, closing the score was 42-10.

    And all of the sudden, an outmanned Hawaii defense turned it up three furious notches and ripped the wheels off the heretofore highly efficient Fresno offense. The 'Bows forced four straight turnovers on each of the next four Bulldog possessions, which QB Schroeder and the rejuvenated UH offense converted into four straight TDs, closing to 42-37 with 7:51 to go in the game.

    It looked like we were about to witness a miraculous comeback -- but alas, both defenses held firm the rest of the way, and the Bulldogs escaped, 42-37. It wasn't over until Fresno safety L.J. Jones picked off Schroeder's pass in the end zone on the final play of the game.

    Just goes to show you that sometimes when you think it's all over, it ain't. Given up for dead, the 'Bows played their hearts out that last third of the game, and clawed their way back into it. They can be very proud of that effort.

    Aloha.