Tippmann Pneumatics Inc. Homepage
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Promise Broken

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 4567>
Author
Eville View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Strike 1 - 5/19, Filter-dodge

Joined: 19 September 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 3147
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Eville Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 March 2009 at 3:04am
Originally posted by oldpbnoob oldpbnoob wrote:

Originally posted by ParielIsBack ParielIsBack wrote:

Originally posted by mbro mbro wrote:

Science is scary


Apparently oldpbnoob thinks so.

I fear complacency and the blind acceptance of everything presented by scientists as absolute fact. They are not always right and they don't always have your best interests in mind. Regardless of what you think, science is a business in the sense that it has to generate income  in the form of grants, studies, etc.  If there were no problems to solve,  a lot of scientist would be out of a job. If you think all scientists are pure in their motives. Think again.
 
Blindly follow sheep.


so first it was just the study that was flawed, but since being proven wrong on that now you blame all of science for being wrong.  anything that doesnt backup your schema for how things should be is completely ignored and written off as lies.  way to prove everyone wrong about conservatives being ignorantClap
Back to Top
High Voltage View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Fire in the disco

Joined: 12 March 2003
Location: 127.0.0.1
Status: Offline
Points: 14179
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote High Voltage Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 March 2009 at 4:37am
Originally posted by oldpbnoob oldpbnoob wrote:

Originally posted by High Voltage High Voltage wrote:

Except when multiple scientific studies prove otherwise.
Thank you for clarifying what I am and am not allowed to disagree with. Glad we cleared that up. Your input has been invaluable. Not sure how I survived for 41 years without it. Can I put you on speed dial to make all of my decisions as to what I can and can't agree with? Sweet.
 
For people so consumed with free thought, a lot of you seem very convinced of what my thoughts should be.

I was responding to this:
Originally posted by oldpbnoob oldpbnoob wrote:

Simply because I disagree with you, doesn't make me wrong.

I don't care what you think or claim, I just know not to believe you when you have been proven wrong. Why can't you get past that?
Back to Top
Darur View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Stare directly into my avatar...

Joined: 03 May 2003
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 9174
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Darur Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 March 2009 at 7:16am
Originally posted by oldpbnoob oldpbnoob wrote:


I fear complacency and the blind acceptance of everything presented by scientists as absolute fact. They are not always right and they don't always have your best interests in mind.


*Sigh*

You're perfectly right.  Science is never 100% guaranteed fact. No matter how precise our measurements and experiments are, they will never be perfect.  The beauty of this physical world, however, is that it can be described mathematically, and as such we can calculate the exact percent error of a measurement or calculation. 

Many times, as you've pointed out, science makes wrong assumptions, based on correlation of commonsense notions.  Lamarck assumed that animals picked up traits in their life and passed them on to future generations.  Subsequent testing and papers by others such as Darwin proved this hypothesis incomplete*.  Hoyle assumed the Universe has always existed as it is, remaining perfectly static without beginning or end.  Gamow and many other Physicists disproved this concept and demonstrated this Universe was born from the Big Bang.

Science is self correcting in this way.  The only interest in Science is to find the truth and explain the world we live in.

Quote
Regardless of what you think, science is a business in the sense that it has to generate income  in the form of grants, studies, etc.  If there were no problems to solve,  a lot of scientist would be out of a job. If you think all scientists are pure in their motives. Think again.


There is certainly a great deal of greed in the sciences.  The fame, recognition and even money from these breakthroughs are a great driving factor for many scientists, not science.

Now, you claim that this greed makes science untrustworthy, so lets consider this example:

A scientist puts out a paper claiming at the very fabric of space-time, the universe is driven by cosmic kittens.  He is able to back up this proof with some formulas and experiments, and for how sensational and outrageous a proposal this is, it generates lots of attention in the media. 

We have two possible cases of what follows this: He's wrong or he's right.

If he's wrong, we can break this down into two more sub-cases: The entire scientific community plays along and agrees with him, or someone rats him out. 

Lets consider the first of these sub-cases.  Our scientist sends word to his other science buddies and they all agree to tell everyone he's right, maybe find some thought experiment to back it up, or find a special case of some prior theory that implies this is the case.  That's fantastic!  You successfully united some several hundred million individuals across the world in a grand conspiracy.  In fact, you got more then that involved, since you're discounting the future students of science for the rest of mankind, as well as any Joe Schmuck who isn't involved in the sciences, but has read enough to understand the theory and find the flaws. Sounds perfectly reasonable. 

Or, we can consider the second sub-case, that of this entire population, someone steps forward.  Maybe it was a brilliant, distinguished professor from the old school of thought before this new theory, clinging on to his old proofs.  Or perhaps it was a Grad student, desperate to find some problem to tackle or disprove for his dissertation.  Or it could be one of the many millions of individuals who would find tremendous amounts of recognition or money for slaying this theory.

Game theory tells us the Nash equilibrium has not been reached.  In the first of these sub-cases, each conspirator might get some tiny slice of the pie from the ringleader if they play along, or they could get a huge reward by breaking their silence, as in the second sub-case.

Finally, in the case that the scientist is right, it doesn't matter if he conspires or not, either way the theory is correct.

Quote
Blindly follow sheep.


Irony: This is it.
Real Men play Tuba

PH33R TEH 1337 Dwarf!
DONT CLICK ME!!1
Back to Top
StormyKnight View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar

Joined: 28 July 2003
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2981
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote StormyKnight Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 March 2009 at 8:36pm
Originally posted by Eville Eville wrote:

i think, hope, that he was making a funny.  
 I was making a funny.  There was just a bit of irony that I couldn't just let go.  I apologize if I've upset anyone by pointing that little tidbit out.
Back to Top
Eville View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Strike 1 - 5/19, Filter-dodge

Joined: 19 September 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 3147
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Eville Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 March 2009 at 8:45pm
I move for the immediate guesting of  the user known as "StormyKnight"on the grounds that he isn't a liberal.
Back to Top
StormyKnight View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar

Joined: 28 July 2003
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2981
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote StormyKnight Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 March 2009 at 8:46pm
I think now that abortion funding has been kicked up by Obama we won't have to worry about as much C02 emissions as there will be less people coming into the world.  Also, if we get rid of cattle and eat a purely Vegan diet, that should also cut down on C02.  Obama should completely annex the Central and Southern American continents to stop deforestation which will help keep C02 levels down. 
 
Thus endeth the semi-comedy relief  at this time...
Back to Top
StormyKnight View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar

Joined: 28 July 2003
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2981
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote StormyKnight Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 March 2009 at 8:47pm
Originally posted by Eville Eville wrote:

I move for the immediate guesting of  the user known as "StormyKnight"on the grounds that he isn't a liberal.
I should also be 'guested' as I'm not a Conservative either!  Tongue
Back to Top
Eville View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Strike 1 - 5/19, Filter-dodge

Joined: 19 September 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 3147
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Eville Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15 March 2009 at 8:51pm
Originally posted by StormyKnight StormyKnight wrote:

Originally posted by Eville Eville wrote:

I move for the immediate guesting of  the user known as "StormyKnight"on the grounds that he isn't a liberal.
I should also be 'guested' as I'm not a Conservative either!  Tongue

QFT
Back to Top
StormyKnight View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar

Joined: 28 July 2003
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2981
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote StormyKnight Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 16 March 2009 at 1:17am
Originally posted by Eville Eville wrote:

Originally posted by StormyKnight StormyKnight wrote:

Originally posted by Eville Eville wrote:

I move for the immediate guesting of  the user known as "StormyKnight"on the grounds that he isn't a liberal.
I should also be 'guested' as I'm not a Conservative either!  Tongue

QFT
 That is a much better funny than mine.  You are the master...
Back to Top
FreeEnterprise View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Not a card-carrying member of the DNC

Joined: 14 October 2008
Location: Trails Of Doom
Status: Offline
Points: 4788
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote FreeEnterprise Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 April 2009 at 2:20pm
Promises, promises...
 
 
Shocking that they still can't find libs that have paid their taxes...
 
 
Sebelius is now number 6, that didn't pay, that Obama tried to push through...
 
Nice...
They tremble at my name...
Back to Top
Peter Parker View Drop Down
Member
Member
Avatar

Joined: 02 March 2003
Location: New York
Status: Offline
Points: 998
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Peter Parker Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 April 2009 at 2:31pm
Wow. She made errors totalling $7k over the course of three years. And as I recall her tax situation is a little complex.

I just found out that I made an error in my taxes this year (state, not Federal), to the tune of roughly $4k. The error was discovered and remedied. I guess that still prohibits me from holding state office.

"E Pluribus Unum" does not mean "Every man for himself".

Pop Quiz: What do all the Framers of the Constitution have in common?
Back to Top
agentwhale007 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Forum's Vladimir Lenin

Joined: 20 June 2002
Location: GNV FLA
Status: Offline
Points: 11696
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote agentwhale007 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 April 2009 at 2:35pm
Originally posted by FreeEnterprise FreeEnterprise wrote:

Promises, promises...
 
 
Shocking that they still can't find libs that have paid their taxes...
 
 
Sebelius is now number 6, that didn't pay, that Obama tried to push through...
 
Nice...


Originally posted by the article the article wrote:

"I can make a firm pledge," he said in Dover, N.H., on Sept. 12. "Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes."


If only there was some way to not have to pay this cigarette tax.

As far as the second link goes: We have been over this. 
"So when Romney wins in a landslide, what will the liberal media do?"
This Ma**edited**hine Kills **edited**as**edited**ists.




Back to Top
FreeEnterprise View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Not a card-carrying member of the DNC

Joined: 14 October 2008
Location: Trails Of Doom
Status: Offline
Points: 4788
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote FreeEnterprise Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 April 2009 at 2:40pm
I for one would have been squirming at the amount of "suspect" nominations that my guy put up...
 
Do you guys that support obama ever feel like he really isn't trying?
 
6 for tax fraud.
 
Not 1, or 3, or even 5
 
 
SIX, in two months...
 
Bruce, I get it, taxes are hard... But, SIX people with major tax issues...
 
Come on, already.
 
 
How many tax cheats nominated would be too many?
 
 
They tremble at my name...
Back to Top
Peter Parker View Drop Down
Member
Member
Avatar

Joined: 02 March 2003
Location: New York
Status: Offline
Points: 998
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Peter Parker Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 April 2009 at 3:06pm
You toss about the phrases "tax cheat" and "tax fraud" rather casually.

Has even one of these people been investigated or charged by the IRS? Call me when that happens.

Also - who uncovered these tax discrepancies? I believe the answer to that, in all cases, was that the Obama campaign uncovered the discrepancies through their vetting process. That was certainly the case for Sebelius.

Which raises the next question: Would this had been discovered if the Obama team was not particularly thorough in their investigations? Which raises the next obvious question: How many of your "tax cheats" have sailed through nominations in prior administrations because their tax errors were non-obvious and the vetting teams didn't dig as deep?

I don't know the answers to those questions either - but I do find it interesting that it is apparently the Obama team that is uncovering the tax issues, not some secret GOP hit squad.

I agree that the number of nominees with tax issues is unusually high - I am just not certain what to conclude from that factoid.


Edited by Peter Parker - 01 April 2009 at 3:11pm

"E Pluribus Unum" does not mean "Every man for himself".

Pop Quiz: What do all the Framers of the Constitution have in common?
Back to Top
ParielIsBack View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
future target of fratricide

Joined: 13 October 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 3782
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote ParielIsBack Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 April 2009 at 3:09pm
In other words, you are suffering from your usual problem, FE:

You see exactly what you want to see, no matter what the facts are.

Not that the rest of us don't.  But some of us at least pretend objectivity.
BU Engineering 2012
Back to Top
oldpbnoob View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Not old, Not noob. May be Dave's grandma

Joined: 04 February 2008
Location: Yankee Stadium
Status: Offline
Points: 5676
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote oldpbnoob Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 April 2009 at 3:17pm

I personally think the tobacco tax should be higher. 

It is frightening how many of the nominees has had tax issues. I wouldn't go as far as to call the latest one a cheat. I'll bet if I was ever audited, a few errors would be found. Doe this speak about their moral character or the fact that perhaps the tax codes are a wee bit too complicated these days? I wonder if the Flat Tax would make things a whole lot easier?
Back to Top
FreeEnterprise View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Not a card-carrying member of the DNC

Joined: 14 October 2008
Location: Trails Of Doom
Status: Offline
Points: 4788
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote FreeEnterprise Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 April 2009 at 3:33pm
Glad to see you guys are just following along... Never question, just believe the spin...
 
Oh, wait, we could look at facts...
 
 
Nah, nevermind...
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Bah, here are the facts anyway...
 
"First, she said could not find letters documenting three charitable contributions, which are required to deduct contributions greater than $250. Second, she said that she and husband had sold their house in 2006 for an amount that was less than what they owed on the mortgage. They continued to pay off the loan, and continued to deduct the interest payments. She learned from the CPA that those interest payments were not deductible."
 
 
"she said could not find letters documenting three charitable contributions"... Yeah, it happens... But, charities keep records too, and they are glad to resubmit these if needed, for up to seven years as required by law. So that doesn't pass the "sniff" test. On the farm, we call that "steppin in it".
 
" she said that she and husband had sold their house in 2006 for an amount that was less than what they owed on the mortgage"
 
Then she kept taking the "tax break" on the interest on a property she didn't own... Yeah, that sounds like a liberal...
 
Easy way to describe an action like that... FRAUD.
 
They tremble at my name...
Back to Top
Peter Parker View Drop Down
Member
Member
Avatar

Joined: 02 March 2003
Location: New York
Status: Offline
Points: 998
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Peter Parker Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 April 2009 at 3:41pm
Originally posted by FreeEnterprise FreeEnterprise wrote:

"she said could not find letters documenting three charitable contributions"... Yeah, it happens... But, charities keep records too, and they are glad to resubmit these if needed, for up to seven years as required by law. So that doesn't pass the "sniff" test.


Uh huh. I made a few charitable donations last year as well. Some in cash, some in non-cash. The non-cash donations consist of boxes full of stuff left on my porch. The charity truck pulls up, picks up the boxes, and leaves a blank undated receipt.

I report on my tax return that I made a donation that day, and report the market value of each individual item donated.

I suspect that the charity could probably confirm that I had made a donation on any given day, but I would be shocked if they could provide an inventory of the items donated.

As to the cash donations, those are often made through people fundraising in the office. They aren't with the charity, but funnelling money. I write a check - sometimes I get a receipt, sometimes not. Since my checks are kept by the bank, I often have no readily available paperwork evidencing the donation.

Could I find evidence if I really tried? Probably. Does it make me a criminal that I don't have receipts? Nope.

For pbnoob - I agree that individual tax returns are very complex. I am just not sure that "flat tax" would change that. Most of the schemes proposed as flat taxes are just as complex as what we have now. Moreover, I suspect we would discover some objections to a true flat tax once people discovered what that really means.

"E Pluribus Unum" does not mean "Every man for himself".

Pop Quiz: What do all the Framers of the Constitution have in common?
Back to Top
oldpbnoob View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Not old, Not noob. May be Dave's grandma

Joined: 04 February 2008
Location: Yankee Stadium
Status: Offline
Points: 5676
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote oldpbnoob Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 April 2009 at 3:44pm
Originally posted by Article Article wrote:

Ms. Sebelius, the governor of Kansas, explained the errors in a letter to the Finance Committee released Tuesday. In it, she said that after she was nominated, she and her husband hired a CPA to conduct a "thorough review" of her 2005-07 taxes. The CPA found three types of errors, and the couple amended their returns.

First, she said could not find letters documenting three charitable contributions, which are required to deduct contributions greater than $250. Second, she said that she and husband had sold their house in 2006 for an amount that was less than what they owed on the mortgage. They continued to pay off the loan, and continued to deduct the interest payments. She learned from the CPA that those interest payments were not deductible.

Finally, she said they had insufficient documentation for some deductions for business expenses. She amended the returns to reflect that. But she said that because they were subject to the Alternative Minimum Tax, the couple's tax liability did not change.

Actually sounds like honest mistakes to me. Sounds like they sold a house at a loss and had to continue paying the mortagage. I would have thought it could have been deducted as well.  Considering she hired the CPA, found the mistakes and cleared them up shows me good faith. 



Edited by oldpbnoob - 01 April 2009 at 3:45pm
Back to Top
FreeEnterprise View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Not a card-carrying member of the DNC

Joined: 14 October 2008
Location: Trails Of Doom
Status: Offline
Points: 4788
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote FreeEnterprise Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 April 2009 at 3:48pm
I'm glad to see that libs now accept "ignorance of the law" as a viable excuse to break the law...
They tremble at my name...
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 4567>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 10.03

This page was generated in 0.171 seconds.