Jump to content


Advanced Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

10,270 Excellent

About heybruce

  • Rank
    Titanium Member

Recent Profile Visitors

14,495 profile views
  1. heybruce

    Best massage business in CM?

    It's off-topic, but yeah, sure, especially when out for drinks. Even Thai beer is a pleasure when it is served by a smiling pretty.
  2. Thank you for identifying yourself as a troll. Not that it was difficult to deduce.
  3. Right. No one is buying it. You posted a fact free ad hominem insult directed to those who disagree with you, the kind you object to others posting, and have no answer now that you've been exposed.
  4. heybruce

    Best massage business in CM?

    I think the OP needs to clarify what kind of massage he is interested in.
  5. " Ad hominem (Latin for "to the person"[1]), short for argumentum ad hominem, is a fallacious argumentative strategy whereby genuine discussion of the topic at hand is avoided by instead attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself. " https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem hyku1147 doesn't want others to use ad hominem arguments, but clearly feels free to use them himself.
  6. Breathless whingers--do you mean Trump? BTW: Your link discusses the Harvard estimate. This topic is about Trump whinging about the GWU death toll estimate.
  7. With degrees in mathematics and engineering and a background in aerospace system test, I think I have some grasp of rational, evidence based analysis. And you? "ad hominem An ad hominem, short for argumentum ad hominem, is an attack on an argument made by attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, rather than attacking the argument directly." http://ad hominem An ad hominem, short for argumentum ad hominem, is an attack on an argument made by attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, rather than attacking the argument directly. A poster questioned the people who conduct scientific analysis with an argumentum ad hominem, I replied with another argumentum ad hominem, and now you've replied with the same. Do you have a point? Since this topic is not about elevating an idea from hypothesis to theory through testing and attempting to disprove the hypothesis, I'm not sure why you think the scientific method is pertinent.
  8. I do recall that drivers and trucks could not learn where they were needed (communications were down all over the island) and often found roads impassable even if they knew where they were needed. Do you have sources to support your claim that FEMA support was stolen by crooked politicians?
  9. In other words, you reject science, statistics, evidence and anything else that leads to a conclusion that you do not like. You only believe what you want to believe. Reminds me of the beginning of a Rush Limbaugh rant on climate change I heard while channel surfing on the car radio. I changed channels immediately after he stated "I don't know science, but I know liberals....". He admitted he didn't understand the science behind what he was about to discuss, so I didn't care what he had to say.
  10. The new number is the scientific number, and Trump is notorious for his lies and admissions. But that doesn't matter to Trumpies, doe it?
  11. Do you understand the difference between opinion (editorial) and news articles?
  12. People who don't understand polls, probability and statistics shouldn't comment on them. The Presidential polls gave an accurate prediction of the popular vote. And death tolls don't go by an electoral college.
  13. "John Mutter, a Columbia University professor, has been gathering personal testimonials and public records of those killed in Katrina for an effort he calls Katrinalist. Mutter estimates the true death toll will top 3,500 if those killed by the storm and by its many after-effects are accurately tallied. And yet other counts put the toll at an estimated 1,800." https://www.chron.com/news/nation-world/article/5-years-after-Katrina-storm-s-death-toll-remains-1589464.php The same source puts the official death toll from Katrina at 1464 in Louisiana alone. It's impossible to say with certainty which was the more deadly hurricane, but I think we can agree that the US government response was seriously bungled, with tragic results, in both cases.
  14. Yes it does, and the official death toll is 2,975. http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/08/28/puerto-rico-governor-raises-hurricane-maria-death-toll-from-64-to-2975.html Edit: It's worth noting that Fox News does have real journalists reporting real news, but they receive little attention. Fox News is known for its talk show pundits--Hannity, Ingraham, Carlson, and its entertainment programs such as Fox and Friends. These are not news programs, but Fox viewers don't know that. Trump definitely doesn't know that.
  15. If Trump knew what he was doing, or was willing to learn and do a little work, he might actually do some good. However I think it is more likely he will vaguely delegate responsibilities, possibly to the wrong people, declare hurricane recovery a great success, and give himself full credit.