Announcement

**Ogie Oglethorpe** · August 18, 2011, 13:03

Originally posted by gribbler View Post

I guess it's still not a consensus if only 75 out of 79 climate scientists agree.

By definition yes. Unless you wish to revise the meaning of the words unanimous consent.

**giblets** · August 18, 2011, 13:07

Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe View Post

By definition yes. Unless you wish to revise the meaning of the words unanimous consent.

I don't. But claiming that "consensus" means "unanimous consent" appears to be a revision on your part:

1. majority of opinion: The consensus of the group was that they should meet twice a month.
2. general agreement or concord; harmony.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/consensus

**Ogie Oglethorpe** · August 18, 2011, 13:15

Miriam Webster gives it as UNANIMITY as the first defnition. Obviously there is no consensus on the definition.

**Guynemer** · August 18, 2011, 13:17

Touche.

**Ben Kenobi** · August 18, 2011, 13:34

Your degree is in history because you were not intelligent enough to continue your science degree at a ridiculously low-standard rural university.

So my degree is a BA in history from UBC? Cool.

You remain an idiot, and so, too, are your imaginary climate scientist friends.

Is that like imaginary numbers?

**SlowwHand** · August 18, 2011, 14:03

At any rate, you'll grow to love Perry.

**Docfeelgood** · August 18, 2011, 15:10

Originally posted by SlowwHand View Post

At any rate, you'll grow to love Perry.

Sorry bro, Tricky Ricky will do to this country what pantyhose did for finger ****ing.

**Jon Miller** · August 18, 2011, 17:42

Growth is Texas' secret

http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2011/08/labour-markets-1?fsrc=scn/fb/wl/bl/growthistexassecret

For more jobs, the solution is more growth

How Texas does it?

JM

**Asher** · August 18, 2011, 18:13

Originally posted by Jon Miller View Post

http://www.economist.com/blogs/freee...histexassecret

How Texas does it?

JM

And it's exactly what I said.

After all of this, what can we say about the Texas economy? I think we shouldn't understate the extent to which oil and gas helped the state. Direct industry job creation may not have added that much to employment, but the contribution to growth—and growth expectations—supported job creation elsewhere.

It's the same story in Alberta.

**Ben Kenobi** · August 18, 2011, 18:16

Direct industry job creation may not have added that much to employment

Which is what I said. You said that Oil and Gas were responsible for more employment than any other sector.

You were wrong.

**Asher** · August 18, 2011, 18:20

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi View Post

Which is what I said. You said that Oil and Gas were responsible for more employment than any other sector.

You were wrong.

What I said was:

Originally posted by Asher View Post

I'm sure the Texas job growth has nothing to do with high oil prices and a resurgent US energy sector.

Do you ever not lie?

Higher oil prices and resurgent energy sector drives the whole economy, not just via direct job growth. Note that I even clarified that later in the thread when gribbler said Texas consumes more oil than it produces. I wasn't referring to direct jobs.

**Asher** · August 18, 2011, 18:22

What YOU said was "It's the taxes"

Resurgent energy sector? Have you seen what Obama's done to drilling, and the EPA crap they are dumping on TX? It's the taxes.

**Ben Kenobi** · August 18, 2011, 18:36

Higher oil prices and resurgent energy sector drives the whole economy, not just via direct job growth. Note that I even clarified that later in the thread when gribbler said Texas consumes more oil than it produces. I wasn't referring to direct jobs.

You specifically claimed that the oil and gas industry created more direct jobs. Liar.

Had you said that oil and gas were driving the economy and left it at that, you'd have been fine. But you didn't.

**Dinner** · August 18, 2011, 18:42

God, I hope they're dumb enough to run Perry. They could show video of him pandering to secessionist ********* when ever he tries to wrap himself in the flag, they can show how Texas's record is just about the worst in the country on just about every measurable category, and lastly they can ask people "Remember the last President from Texas?" Bush's legacy would sink him like the Titanic. Just about the only candidates they could pick who would be worse would be the true crazies like Bachman or Palin. Perry isn't really crazy like the tea bagger scum; his just more then a bit on the dumb side but willing to pander to any idiot and suck any **** for cash.