Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Moderate Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: zonder who wrote (13605)	11/10/2004 10:06:58 AM
From: Sun Tzu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20773

Frontline had an interesting program called The Persuaders last night. You can get the drift of it here pbs.org (and watch the full program online in a couple of days) Although it was about brand marketing and brand association rather than politics, they did have some reference to marketing the brand "George Bush" during a brief period. The main technique is narrowcasting. Apparently, Americans can be pigeon holed into 70 groups and the technology is there to track a person across the country and keep bombarding him/her with the same message. The advantage is that a candidate can present one message to one group without letting another group hear it and be alienated by it. The line from program that has stuck with me is "The secret of it all is to persuade people to persuade themselves". As a side note, it occurred to me that the main job of marketing, be it for material products or political candidates, is to create unhappiness; happy satisfied people have no need or desire to buy products. ST

To: zonder who wrote (13605)	11/10/2004 10:30:30 AM
From: Sully-	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20773

"Wstera here is trying to wiggle away from answering my reply to him by pointing me towards a million questions which he originally asked someone else." First, those questions quite appropriately apply to your responses to me. Second, I'll repeat my original response to you. Your response proved absolutely nothing that is going to change my mind, let alone prove that real science proves anything about global warming or the Kyoto Treaty. So why should I bother answering your non-response to me?........ FWIW, I'm not interested in more junk science. There exists no model that can recreate our past global weather & temps, where known data actually exists. None! ZERO! How do you expect me to buy into a theoretical model that is proven to be flawed? One that will have input into it purely speculative data about future trends for thousands, if not millions of data points. Show me a model that can perfectly recreate past known weather & temps on a global scale using known data. When that happens I'll listen to their purely speculative theories about the future, but I will still be skeptical. Until then it is junk science fostered by people more interested in environmentalism than pure science. Ö¿Ö dev.siliconinvestor.com