j_b

“I was disappointed with the image on the shirt.” Melby said. “I don’t think evolution should be associated with our school.”

It seems that it is way too big in extent to be a morainal complex for the puny glaciers in that part of the world.

trees on dead ice:

It's possible but a non-active rock glacier (or what's left over after the ice melts) could have trees on it and the surface would be irregular due to ground ice melting. There are lots of trees (even entire forests) growing on dead-ice topography, such as in the lower reaches of large alaskan glaciers.

Probably a rock glacier that are not uncommon in the Northeastern cascades (quite a few on the northern aspect of the ridge north of lake Chelan). They are understood to be either a glacier remnant covered by rock debris (that insulate ice from further melt) or more commonly, talus (from rockfall, lanslide and what not) mixed in with refrozen melt water in continental climate (i.e. not much peri-annual snow but cold enough for part of the day/year to allow refreezing of melt-rain below the surface). The surface ridges are caused by mixed medium (rock+ice) creep. This one doesn't look very active and/or healthy as the surface looks deflated except in the upper reaches of the photograph.

like what for example?

Cliff Notes version of J_B's post: Peter's right! (No pun intended!) as if it were news that conservative could attain power only through failure of the democratic process. I am sure that if it happens thanks to a ~35% turn-out at mid-term elections, you'll still manage to call it a landslide.

For the nth time over the last few months, Politico has been trying to confuse a drop in confidence in Obama with greater approval of conservative policies. But far from it being the case, approval of the GOP isn't budging and peaking around 20%: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/08/21/poll-confidence-in-obama-drops-no-gains-for-gop/ Flat to decreasing support for conservative policies is in fact shown on most issues: a majority of americans being against further deployment in Afghanistan, a steady large majority support for a public health insurance option (despite misleading reports and polls), etc.. To be sure, long term loss of confidence with Obama will likely translate into GOP gains but it'll be through decreasing turn out at the ballot box because of the lack of a visible alternative to the left of conservative democrats. Little else.

"Per usual" you attack those rebutting your points rather than the points they make. You asked for evidence that Moore is a fraud, whose "documentaries" are full of distortions, and you got them. I guess it's just an "inconvenient truth" - just like this: you're a fucking joke, j_b. Terrible logic as per usual. FW cited wikipedia as if the people mentionned in the quote were to be trusted regarding Moore's work. No point they made was cited. I simply pointed out some of the reasons why these people couldn't be trusted to be impartial. That sums you up to the letter. anyone knowing our respective histories of posting here probably had a good laugh.

Nice circle-jerk you have there. Hitchens is a closet neocon who still supports the invasion of Iraq. Koch is an establishment conservative who supported Bush. Plenty of pundits didn't like F911 but I haven't heard one who had a leg to stand on as is typically the case. Basically, per usual you don't have anything, except insults and fear-mongering of course.

No. You are making the claim Moore's movies aren't truthful. The onus is on you to support your assertions and unsurprisingly you never do.

It is standard operating procedure for FW. He knows that his position is untenable so he resorts to insulting and demonizing one liners. It just shows the type of readers he targets that he rarely attempts to provide a cogent answer. Pathetic really, but then again he can always count on the 15-20% dead-enders that didn't find anything wrong with the Bush administration. I don't fact-check everything that goes into Moore's movies but the times I checked (notably when the wingnuts tried to smear him over columbine and F911), it was quite accurate. I suspect it is possible that he made errors somewhere but I'd think it is pretty rare.

Nope. Seems a bit of hypocrisy in operation, though. Not really. He isn't gambling with people's investments and retirement funds, refusing people the minimum wage or union busting, or doing anything else highly unethical that would deny someone his human and economic rights. He is probably overpaid but that is the lot of most the media-entertainment industry. At least he uses his access to an audience to attempt moving things forward. Moore's movies are all fact-based. He editorializes but you can go on his web site to check that he has debunked all criticisms to the effect that his movies were inacurate. Limbaugh is a gasbag who lies through his teeth most of the time (or is so badly deluded one wonders how he has access to a pulpit).

"Do not let their bleeding in the past justify the bleeding of others in the present" unknown.

COntinental glaciation reached a little south of Olympia (probably close to Tenino) during the last Pleistocene event, but you are also just down the road from Rainier. Which is it?

It is a blunt way to point out the great chasm between Netanyahu's discourse and his apartheid policies. Sure, it was bound to provoke the usual fake outrage from the crowd that has no problem with the death of over a million Iraqis since invasion. What else is new?

There shouldn't be many if any in southwestern WA as continental glaciation didn't make it that far. But, there used to be a lot more around Seattle before they were carted/blasted away. Just imagine the lost potential.

I had no idea poison ivy got this big. Does the non-climbing kind get as large?

I haven't seen the film yet, but after Reservoir Dogs (which I liked very much) Tarantino has largely turned out to be a one-trick pony: in your face gore told as if it were a comedy. It gets old pretty quickly IMO.

First, don't believe everything you read. Second, are you really blaming Moore for making a very good living at what he does?

sounds familar? and, on libertarianism and dictatorship: http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/25/112.html

[video:youtube]jHVwrCzRUX0

[video:youtube]IhydyxRjujU

[video:youtube]tlCVAaBmQ2Q

capitalism prevails thanks to $9 trillions in bailouts and government loans and not thanks to the "free market" that led us to the fiasco we are in. Everywhere friedman's ideas were applied has lead to concentration of wealth and power reminiscent of the middle ages.