Selfies kill more people than sharks.

Attachment 53476

Waitwhut?

Good.

I mean, uh, that was probably not the nicest thing to say, I'm sure I meant something nicer. Let me get back to you on that.

Knee jerk assumptions department: after 50 years of cleaning up vehicle engine emissions, what's worse for the environment: a 6210cc engine Ford F150 truck, or a 30cc engine leaf blower?

Not even close.

http://cellar.org/2015/leafbloweremissions.jpg

In fact the car and truck actually cleaned the air:

http://www.edmunds.com/car-reviews/f...af-blower.html

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngu...9/badgraph.jpg

Remarkably dishonest graph. The two lines are on completely different vertical scales, which would be somewhat dishonest if both scales were labeled and started at zero, and more dishonest if they were labeled and did not start at zero. This is worse - unlabeled, and different start points, so both the position and slope of the lines is completely arbitrary. 900000 < 300000? The pink line goes down (by the numbers) about 50%, but the slope of the line is about the same as the brown line, which goes up a bit over 10%?

And why cancer screenings? It's not like Planned Parenthood only does cancer screenings and abortions. Answer - because cancer screenings have been downplayed in recent years, and decreasing them has been suggested by major medical groups. So it's one of the few things they do that has gone down over that period.

And, related to both issues above - they only took two data points, 2006 and 2013, but put all of the intervening years on the horizontal scale. This makes it seem as if the rates were (at least somewhat) constant. A more granular line might (note that I haven't actually seen a more granular version, so this is hypothetical) show, for example, the year(s) that cancer screening policies might have changed, which would lead to explanations.

I'd suspect with Obamacare, more poor women have insurance coverage which will cover many of the things they use to get from a Planned Parenthood clinic.

HappyMonkey accurately describes this graph.
It's important to follow the 2 links.

It was presented during Congressional Hearings (yesterday) on Planned Parenthood
--- and falsely presented as being from "Planned Parenthood's Quarterly Report".

But Ms Richards (CEO of PP) countered that the source was actually
the anti-abortion group shown at the bottom of HM's posting.

It was quite an embarrassing moment for Chairman Chaffetz.

.

I'm surprised, I didn't think those clowns ever got embarrassed by their fellow clowns antics anymore. :rolleyes:

WaPo charts what kind of dwelling people live in, single, attached(row and town), multi-units, or mobiles.

That is interesting to me. Do you have a link ?

I have issues comparing things just based on %.
That is, LA is spread out over an enormous area, compared with most other cities.
Also, the % of LA housing of >50 units doesn't seem right
compared with my image of an eastern city like Philadelphia.

Sorting the cities by size might be more informative.

Kevin McCarthy thought that what happens on Fox News stays on Fox News.

Oooooops ~

Gail Collins - The Opinion Pages: NY Times - 10/1/15

Sure, http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/w...-city-charted/
% of each type of dwelling in each city, is the point. Population is irrelevant. Occams razor.
See answer #2 above.

I'm still having a hard time with that link's description of LA.
It seems to be based on a sub-link to the following article...

Measuring Sprawl
A New Index, Recent Trends, and Future Research
Urban Affairs Review Thomas Laidley 33/2/15

I'm not quite believing this either.
It just doesn't fit what I remember about LA, SF, SJ and SD,
as compared with Chicago and Boston from my lifetime living
and working in or around those areas.

I'd love to be on this sociology student's Doctorial Thesis Committee.
[OJ] If it doesn't fit, you can't convict. [/OJ] :rolleyes:

I'll bet you would, how dare his facts and measurements not match you opinion and remembered perceptions.
Torches and pitchforks! String him up, hound him out of academia.
We won't acquit, 'cause he don't fit, we'll box his ears, the little shit.

Map of anthropogenic CO2 emissions

http://cellar.org/2015/co2-anthro-emissions.jpg

but that is neither a graph nor a chart.