A recent poll asks:
“is it your impression that most economists who have studied it estimate that the stimulus legislation: A) created or saved several million jobs, B) saved or created a few jobs, or C) caused job losses.”The pollsters allege that A is the correct answer. They base this allegation upon a CBO report using mathematical models with fabricated inputs and a single survey taken by the Wall Street Journal (a “newspaper” which UCLA academics in a scholarly paper found to be quantifiably more biased to the Left than the New York Times). Does this remind you of the mythical Man Made Global Warming “consensus”?
The cited CBO report is extremely speculative and, arguably, fundamentally flawed:
“CBO has estimated the law’s impact on employment and economic output using evidence about the effects of previous similar policies and drawing on various mathematical models that represent the workings of the economy.”Mathematical models? Do the IPCC analogies never end?
“Previous similar policies”? Like what? The brazen propaganda falsely alleging that FDR saved us from The Great Depression?
The obvious (and grossly understated) answer -- as Obama’s own metrics prove in spades -- is C!
But, answer C and the hideously dishonest arrogant elitist academics will brand you as “misinformed” (or, perhaps, inadequately indoctrinated).
But, these are the same sorts of propagandists who insist -- to this day -- that similar policies from FDR turned the tide of The Great Depression. That too is a bald faced lie! In fact, UCLA economists calculate that FDR’s policies prolonged The Great Depression by seven years!
Click here and here for more commentary on this bunk.
14 comments:
Davis Appell just won't quit.
Does David realize that his friends and family probably laugh at him behind his back because of his grave concern for globull warming?
Yes, it's true, and he probably knows this, deep inside his skull of mush. He and his concerns are a joke. He is either too stupid, too stubborn or too embarassed to admit this.
RICH,
Come on…
Don’t you think David Appell is one of the more eloquent, informed and persuasive “Progressives” on the planet?
Well, okay…
Nobody said that was a high bar to hurdle.
LOL!
RICH,
On a slightly more serious note…
Today, I added this newly published science to the citations in this post.
It’s worth a read.
Between the AMO and the solar cycles, it’s looking like another very rough decade (or two, or three, or four) to come for the totalitarian, political religion practiced by the CAGW hysteria mongers.
David,
Keep digging! Please! LOL!
SBVOR: Just because Akasofu's paper is typed up to look like a scientific paper, doesn't mean it is.
Why do you buy into it, other than that you like its results? What about it convinces you? Of its arguments, which are best? Did you read the entire paper? (Please be honest -- I highly doubt that you did.)
Was this paper peer-reviewed? Vetted by experienced and serious editors? How do experts view it?
David (Dec 20, 2010 9:04:00 PM),
If you find the published science dubious, feel free to contact the editorial board of the scientific journal which published the paper. They are the ones who reviewed and accepted the paper - Vol.2, No.11, 1211-1224 (2010).
Or, if you think you can debunk any bit of it (or my directly related post), feel free to try. Unlike your completely censored propaganda blog, I will publish any substantive comments you offer (and some that are utterly lacking in substance).
So, David, tell me…
Are you really the David Appell who, writing in Scientific American, came to the defense of Michael Mann’s fraudulent Hockey Stick garbage and attempted to minimize the massive fraud of the IPCC?
If you really are that David Appell, were you disappointed to find that Scientific American’s polling data strongly suggests you failed miserably to persuade your readers? Ouch! That must have hurt!
sbvor, as I've told you numerous times: when you have the guts to sign your real name to your opinions, I will publish them. Until then, you're a nothing and a real coward.
David (Dec 20, 2010 10:32:00 PM),
Tell me David, why are you so obsessed with ferreting out my identity? What would you do with it if you ever got it?
That's never gonna happen -- so give up already.
Gee, David…
I’m simply presenting evidence substantiating my case.
It seems to me that you’re the one behaving badly.
I guess your anonymity theory is just as bogus as the rest of your theories.
Tell me, why have you not answered my question? Are you THAT David Appell, or some other David Appell (or just an imposter)?
Tell me, David…
Why have you not answered my question? Are you THAT David Appell, or some other David Appell (or just some cheap imposter)?
Who’s dodging their identity now? I guess you’re just as hypocritical on this subject as any other.
Truly simple to comprehend data. Many thanks!
Seriously, this became very necessary to me. I am just a newer article writer. Bless you much!
Great! Thanks for this particular article! It turned out very beneficial.
Post a Comment