Troy

Russia's impact on our election is not Obama's fault; Russia is to blame. Now we can argue about what an appropriate response should have been, but we both know virtually anything Obama would have done would have been twisted by the other party and the Trump campaign, or thwarted by the Republican House and Senate.

Del, stop it. Explain the problem with the statement. Is the probability of getting a head on a coin toss 75%. Yes or No?

Thanks for the article Mel. I need to renew my subscription to the Amsertdamn News, I let it lapse... Did the use of the word "Afro" strike you? I guess they used it in place of "Black." I read a lot of Black articles and I have not seen the use of terms "Afro-owned," or "Afro Family" used this way--even in the Amsertdamn News, they must have recently adopted a new style. I just did a search for "Afro Family" and all the results I looked at dealt with Afro in terms of the hair style, there were 86 (ignoring similar results) for "Afro-owned." and the ones I looked at used the work in a different context.

Congrats on you win Elva, I'm sure you deserve all the credit If you decide to get the seal; please send me the revised book cover and I'll update your book's page.

What was the problem with the statement besides the somewhat awkward wording? Was it the mouse/horse tail analogy or the 75% chance of getting heads As far as the second statement, I have nothing to add, for it is clear. I'm not sure what "Wow" means. The reason for your denial of climate change deserves the "Wow."

Del I could spend 80 hours a week doing it. But I'd rather watch the trees sway in the wind. Dude quoting expects is an informed opinion. That is how knowledge is usually acquired, someone who knows more than you tells you something you did not already know or explains something you don't not understand. I don't reject the information of experts. If you tell me something about Astrology and I use that information relate to formulate an idea to someone else that is an informed opinion. Most of us do not create new information, not really. Del I did not need your help in the lab, because I was able to learned WordPerfect, Lotus, and Access on my own. In fact, I performed the exact same job as you my 2nd semester. (What ever happened to that petite sista that worked with you?) I began to sell PC shortly thereafter. It is interesting you remember something I mentioned about probability from years ago, that you perceived to be wrong. I wish I knew what you were talking about--I'd be willing to bet I was not "wrong" But it is also interesting I remember your apparent confusion about sampling rates but your unwillingness to accept information from an engineer like myself. Funny that we both remember things like that. That must mean something.

Black-owned airline (is it in Africa?), please share the link here too! If you organize it Mel, I'll be happy to promote it and to go in with you 50-50% We can discuss the details it that sound interesting to you. I'm sure you have as many good ideas as I do

Harry, you got me thinking about Black Unity and the apparent lack of support for Black booksellers in the age of Amazon. Do you think people would make any sacrifices to support a Black Bookseller? Even the Brother who wrote this book is almost completely dependent upon Amazon to sell his book online... it is an impossible quandary.

A recent post about a book on Black Unity prompted this question. Here is the setup for the question: One of the most significant changes I've made to AALBC.com is that I've designed the site so that I can send readers to any site to purchase a book. Right now, by default, I send readers to Abe Books, Amazon, Books-A-Million, BarensandNoble.com, and Indiebound (a consortium of independent booksellers). I even provide a link to one's local library. I also direct readers other Black owned booksellers; right now, for example, MahoganyBooks is running a sale on Kimberla Lawson Roby's new book, Sin of a Woman. For some publishers, I send readers to the publisher's website. Check out any of "Buy" links for the books published by Black Classic Press, or Just Us Books. Of course, it should be obvious by now that I can also sell books directly. Well, the way it would work is that I would collect payment and have the book shipped directly from the distributor. The problem is that people only buy from Amazon. Sure, some people buy from B&N link but the numbers of B&N sales are so small--I don't even factor those sales into my bestsellers list. and no one by from the other retailers I link to...not a single person ever. Now if you thnk this is only because Amazon has the best prices--think again. Amazon does not aways offer best prices (always price shop). I've offered a popular book for sale directly, that was autographed and priced LOWER than Amazon. Amazon did not have autographed copied and I beat them on price., but still people still bought the books from Amazon! This was before Amazon offered their Prime service, so getting sales away from Amazon is today is exceedingly difficult. The result is that Black owned booksellers, both online and in physical world must fight against Amazon's dominance. I'm afraid we are losing the battle. But it is not a battle we can wage alone. Readers must join us in the fight. I argue it is a fight we must wage because what we have gained in terms of low prices and same day shipping does not make up for what we will lose. Keep in mind, there is also no guarantee that Amazon will continue selling books at a loss once all of their competition has been eliminated or marginalized into obscurity. What is the benefit of an Indie bookseller? The personalized service, curated selection, and passion for books offered by independent booksellers simply can‘t be replicated by an algorithm. Someone who knows you, understands your culture, maybe even your financial position is not available at Amazon.com. I've actually sold books to people on credit--told to send me the money when they got it, because I knew the book I was giving them was something they needed. I took their word they would pay me. Of course, I've given away countless number books too--thought I probably should be selling more of these. I visit books store all over the country. As a bookseller, I'm always amazed to discover a writer or book I was previously unfamiliar with. These books are simply undiscoverable on Amazon, their algorithms don't work that way. Amazon is designed to extract as much money from you as possible. In business school well called that "maximizing shareholder wealth." Independent booksellers are mission driven and have a passion for what they do. Mine is celebrating Black culture. We are also keenly interested in helping you to be as entertained, enriched, and informed from the books we recommend. As a bookseller, my biggest joy is not how much money I make off the reader, but hearing from them how much they enjoyed a book I turned them on to. Readers typically value this service, but I don't they truly appreciate how close we are to losing it Today we have far fewer bookstores and websites than we did 10 years ago. Many of the ones that remain are struggling. Even AALBC.com is in a constant state of fighting for survival. As a result, my ability to sell books and maintain this website is greatly constrained. Obviously, the services provided by indie booksellers don‘t come without a cost. But unlike Amazon, we are not bolstered by Wall Street investors who don't mind us selling books at a loss to gain market share. We must actually generate a profit from the sale of books, collect sales taxes, and do all the other thing you'd expect business to do. It is not unrealistic to envision a time, in the near future, that Amazon will be the only place to buy a book written by a Black person. We already know B&N shelves are not overflowing with books written by Black writers. Many people simply do live near a Black bookstore (there are less than 80 Black owned bookstores in the US). If Amazon owns Black book sales we will not be exposed to the best books; We'll be exposed to the books that make the most money for Amazon. Perhaps it will be the books that Amazon published and are promoting, or maybe it is the book with the largest marking budget. If we allow Amazon to be the only place we can buy a Black book, we will be severely underserved, if not harmed culturally. We simply can not allow a fantastically wealthy and powerful corporation, which is solely motived by money, to control our stories, our history, our very culture. Question: If you truly value the services provided by indie booksellers Are you willing to support us by paying the full retail price, traveling to our stores, or waiting a few days it to have it delivered?

Mel I too noticed that $10 coupon today, but I could not take advantage of it either, by the time I sorted things out it never returned. I agree with you on the level of personal page engagement versus the business side. I noticed that many of my friends using Facebook just to share photos get much more engagement that I do on my business page--and I have well over 20K fans on my business page. Facebook has locked down organic reach on the business side. Google has made it much easier to track engagement from other sites like Facebook with their Tag Manager service. I'm kicking myself for not implementing this years ago, because it is so my better that using the old Google Analytics code. but that is a subject for another post. I don;t honestly believe that Facebook was ever the advertising juggernaut the claimed to be. Now I know they had a lot of revenue, but it is hard to tell, beyond my own site, how effective they were for brands relative to other advertising platforms. I never heard of txt.fyi before now cute That was a crazy story and speaks to the shiestiness of Facebook--image serving ads to dead pages.

Hey @harry brown , I just read an excerpt from Black Unity: The Total Solution to Financial Independence and Happiness by Terrance Amen, which came out back in December of 2011. I just read the excerpt. The idea is that Black folks would form an organization in which we would pool our resources, provide our own education, use our own services and keep the money within our own community. Our spending power is more than many nations and if we simply choose to wield it in an organized fashion we would all be much better off. Of course, this sounds great in theory but would be virtually impossible in practice. Harry I'm not sure if you've noticed but the handful of folks who post here regularly can have profound disagreements on a wide variety of topics. We've willing to talk about and understand the nature of our differences (at least I think we are) but most people are not nearly so open. We also have the another problem; the hope for the American Dream, which often means a nice corporate gig, a home in a nice white neighborhood replete with white-run schools and business, and for some a nice white spouse. This lifestyle choice is perfectly rational, in an American context. White neighborhoods are provided with better services and the families in them enjoy better outcomes; less crime, better schools, higher property values, nicer stores, better parks, etc, etc. It would be entirely unrealistic to expect large nubers of families to give up a relatively comfortable life to struggle with the masses. People tend to do what they feel is in their best interest. The tremendous buying power of Black folks largely belongs to people who are fairly secure, and not likely to direct resources and support. People will support their local Church, maybe a Greek letter organization, or some other social club, but supporting some unformed organization with the grandiose goal of unifying all Black people globally--forget about it... I, for example, could not have run AALBC.com full time before reaching middle age. I needed money, I wanted to travel, raise a family and have a comfortable life. I could not have done that with the money I earn from AALBC.com. A significant part of the reason is a lack of support from Black folk. I have trouble getting folks to pay full retail price for a book when buying it directly from AALBC.com--instead, they choose to support the white-owned Amazon. Again I understand the reasoning. Why pay full price from me, when Amazon will sell them the book for 40% off and get it to you the next day (same day in NYC) with free shipping? That is a rational decision, right? Maybe. I say maybe because AALBC provides services that Amazon does not. As more people support Amazon rather than an AALBC.com, AALBC.com growth is constrained. The upgrade which will take two years could have been done 5 years ago in less that 3 months with more resources. This is exactly why we have fewer book sites today than we had 10 years ago and all the ones still active struggle. I envied some of those sites that no longer exist because they were doing great things, but readers will never enjoy those sites because they are gone now and were never able to realize their full potential. Now I can explain to people that Amazon is supported by Wall Street investors who gives them money to grow. This allows Amazon to sell books at a loss, kill competition, and dominate a market. This is uninteresting-they just want cheap books. Meanwhile, I have to actually cover my expenses--no one is just giving me money to AALBC.com grow (well a few people are but not nearly enough). That is just one example. Now extend this across the entire landscape of products and services, and you begin to see how challenging a proposition it would be to get a critical mass of Black folks to support Black business.

I think you Facebook investors may wanna keep an eye on this. I tried using my AALBC.com Facebook page for the first time in several months and the performance was so bad I couldn't even post a photo. The browser continued to timeout. I simply could not use my fan page. This morning I tried again and experienced the same problem. I just glad I have no dependencies on my Facebook page, if I did I would be in sad shape, because there is really no support for this type of issue. I was, however, able to add the photo to my personal page. But the performance there suffered too, but I was at least able to use the page. Given the number of people that regularly use Facebook, it really is astounding they don't have more problems. Ca they really scale to 2 billion users while fighting out hackers, maintain performance and increasing functionality? It seems unlikely, but time will tell.

I think my question is perfectly valid Del. You just won't answer it because it would force you to consider the inconsistency in your position and beliefs. I'll presume that you don't believe dinosaurs and man walked the Earth at the same time and that; (1) you have not way to prove it yourself and; (2) that you trust the vast majority of scientists--even though there a few nutty one other who do not believe it. You want me to explain my belief beyond what I think or know and think for myself. Well in many instances this is highly commendable. But I also recognize that in order for me to get to the point when I could legitimately debate the science, would take years of study--perhaps many, and that is assuming I have the mental capacity and desire to even engage in the effort. Do you see my point? I think the fundamental difference in or perspectives is that you believe you have surpassed the scientists' understanding (or believe they are lying). I simply do not believe I'm in a position to debate the issue. That does not make me dumb, I just recognize my ignorance and trust those you study the issue. Would you agree with that assessment? One of the other things that confuse people about this issue is the idea that climate change is being debated among scientist. If 97 scientists agree on something and 3 disagrees there really is not much of a debate dude. Again the media make if seems as it if is because they have that same number of people on both sides of the issue as if there is a 50-50 split. Del this issue of man-made climate change has been accepted by the scientific community, just like the Earth being round, and Dinosaurs becoming extinct millions of years before man evolved.

"I analyse mumbers. And I think critically and come to a conclusion." So the presumption Del must be that you don't think the scientists that disagree with you think critically or have the ability to analyze numbers. You actually believe that you know more than all the scientists who have reached an overwhelming consensus because you know statistics. That is deep Brother man, very deep. Del my opinion about some movie does not compare to my opinion about a scientific finding. One is just my take on how much I was entertained and the other requires some level of knowledge I simply do not presume to have, unlike yourself. As far as Obama, sure most of my opinions are based on my experience and those around me. People are struggling more than ever. I had lunch with a Brother yesterday that still does not have health insurance-- he said the $169 per month he was asked to pay for Obama care was too much. Of course, I can go on and on with anecdotes from my corner of the world in Harlem. Things are still bad and getting worse for poor folk.., so I qualified to have an opinion on Obama's effectiveness. Again with the science, I'm not pulling core samples, but there are people who do and they tell me what they've found. I've chosen to trust them, because my critical analysis of the entire situation says what motivation would they have to lie. What you think is critical analytics is limited solely to crunching numbers.... "To a boy with a hammer, all the world is a nail." Dude you don;t have any more "free time" than I do or anyone else for that matter. I choose what I do with my time. I could be crunching numbers to justify being a climate change denier, or I could be using that time to converse with you. I was much less "critical" when Al Gore was sounding the alarm, but more information has come forth and now I'm convinced. Del if you look hard enough you can find communities of people who believe anything, so I'm not moved by your list of deniers. You act like no one else is aware folk? There are millions of people right here in the United States that believe the world is only 6,000 years old and Dinosaurs roamed the Earth with man. They to have "scientists" that assert this to be fact and they have spreadsheets too. Of course, the vast majority of scientists say the Dinosaurs and Sapiens are separated by millions of years. Can I can prove they are right--no, but I trust them. Why? That is called thinking man. @Delano, do you believe Dinosaurs and man walked the Earth the same time? Can you prove it? Why do you believe what you believe?

I agree with that 100% Cynique. At the end of the day, I'm not a follower of Farrakhan, in fact, I'm a follower of no man, it simply is not in my nature. But I understand why others might get feel the need to follow someone--for them, it can be very beneficial. There are people who follow Farrakhan and their lives are much better for it. They derive discipline, a strength in character. I know a few of these brothers and Farrakhan has had a positive impact on them. Again the NOI is not for everyone it definitely is not for me, but I recognize their positive influence Farrakhan get my respect because he is their leader. I also feel I've obtained some benefit from the NOI--easily when I was in my 20's he helped inspire Black pride and Black unity. This was the power of the MMM that I think you may not appreciate. That impact was felt even by Brothers who did not attend. But again I'm just not gonna be rocking a bow tie, going to services every Sunday, and giving up pork and alcohol to get down with them. I also recognize that many people derived a great deal of joy and inspiration from Obama's presidency, and if that has helped them get through life more easily--I'm all for it.

...After almost 4 months, I've decided to end my boycott of social media. I definitely won't go back to posting every day, nor will I engage in efforts to increase engagement on these platforms. Maybe I'll post once a week, in the hopes that someone with an engaged social media audience shares what I've posted. Others sharing my posts is what has generated all of my social media traffic for the past three years, anyway... Social media is very powerful, too powerful if you ask me.

No, Del I did not miss your point, I fundamentally disagreed with it. There is a difference; you keep confusing disagreement with a lack of understanding. But since you are a cool dude I'll explain; I did not choose to discuss "the data," because I completely disagree with the premise. What is the point of discussing the two plots you've posted? As I said, I do not think what you've presented is sufficient to understand man's impact on climate, what is the point on delving deeper into what I view as a flawed assumption? Looking at it another way; Lets take it for granted that I agree 100% with the conclusions you've drawn from the data you've obtained. That will not change my position on climate change. Do you understand why? Even if I completely disagreed with your interpretation of the data, that will not prove that I'm right about climate change; besides you'll simply say I'm too stupid to understand the data. In either scenario, my position does not change. @Delano, you feel you have discovered something all the other scientists have missed, right? (that is a direct question).

@Delano understand that you invested a lot of time energy and money to master statistics. Obviously, we disagree about man's impact on the climate change. You bolster your opinion by saying how smart you are and how dumb anyone who disagrees with you must be. I support my opinion my saying you simply can not know more than the entire community of scientists who study the subject for a living. No need to continue beating a dead horse... The issue about Black/white science is a silly diversion, and as @Xeon eloquently described makes no sense.

Cynique if you put it that way; Obama got my vote (twice), but Farrakhan failed to get me to come out to DC, So in that regard, Obama was more effective with more people (though traveling to DC was a lot more difficult that traveling to one's polling place). Obama's becoming the first "Black" president is a historic accomplishment, one that is not likely to be repeated for another century. This is indeed indisputable. Cynique, from a personal perspective I think you are overemphasizing my negative views of Obama. I have both positive and negative things to say about both men. I have positive and negative things to say about myself. One can hold all of these opinions. Obviously, I'll continue to voice my opinions them whenever I choose. I also go around prefacing every Obama critique with something positive just to make people who nothing bad to say the man feel comfortable...

@Pioneer1 , if it means anything to ya Bruh I agree 100% @Cynique , nothing Pioneer wrote disagrees with what you or Xeon wrote. I would go as far as to say what he wrote is indisputable--which is saying a lot Sorry for anyone who saw that protected and obscene racist post. Truth be told some of it was kinda funny, but if you did not see it don't worry about it. Racist trolls are everywhere.

@Xeon, I'm not attempting to speak for Pioneer, but given what you wrote; “Negroes are still mired in a quagmire of high unemployment, illegitimacy and fatherless homes, being the last in every single category of academic achievement, first in homicide (victims of other Negroes) which is the number one cause of death for black males 18-35, incarcerations being the norm, the negative perception and low expectation of black people by non-blacks is still unwavering, etc, etc.” assuming this is true, why blame this state on what you perceive as the failure of the MMM? Using this logic it would be reasonable to place our current predicament at the feet of every Black person including Obama, King, El Haji Malik el Shabazz, and you and I. Why single out Farrakhan's MMM to blame? We all have a hand in this, including our oppressors. At the end of the day, Farrakhan's MMM was a powerful event for many. Of course, this is not universally accepted, but nothing is universally accepted where man is concerned.

Del, no one is saying the science is perfect, they point out a potential problem, you run with it a reject the conclusions. That is fine, I'm ok with the conclusion presented in the Boston Globe article and the article you posted (when I actually did read). Both articles were entirely consistent given the information available and their assessment of it. I'm perfectly happy to agree with the conclusion they have arrived at. I also read the last article you posted, but I no longer see the link, I guess you removed it. I'm glad. Del, maybe if you went to Antarctica and collected data on how rapidly it is melting, or if you pulled core samples to measure CO levels, or measured tree rings, or performed any of the myriad other tests to measure climate over time you might arrive at a different conclusion. But you are perfectly free play weekend climatologist with your limited dataset, knowledge, and experience. I'm simply trusting the experts on this one. And really Del that is all it boils down to my trusting the scientists more that lay people in the general public. I understand how an airplane works, but I would not try to tell a pilot how to fly it. This is one of the reasons back seat drivers, especially the ones without licenses, are so annoying. It takes bravery to stand up for an unpopular position especially when they are in the extreme minority. Sometimes you have to step back, try to understand why so many knowledgeable people disagree with you rather than digging deeper and becoming even more rigid. Sometimes it takes more bravery to admit you still may not understand all of the issues to draw sound conclusions. Stay in your lane bruh and let the pros handle this one Truth be told, I actually wish you were right.

Del it is easy, and again beneath you, to continue making snide remarks about my intelligence as a way for you to dismiss the science. Again it is not me you disagree with. You are disagreeing with the sum output of the planet's scientific community. I'm only reporting their conclusions--including from a source YOU provided! You cherry picks lines out of context, to make a point. It is the way some people use the Bible and a sorry tactic. A conversation not being possible was obvious when I started the thread, Del. It puzzled me how otherwise intelligent people, with no ties to the fossil fuel industry, could dismiss the science and deny global warming. Now I, and I hope others, have more insight as to how this is possible. Thanks. It will be fascinating to see if you change your mind and what you read that changed it.

I removed that statement. Here is a good timeline: http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-15874560 Answer my question, thanks.

Again, you want me to debate a conclusion that is based on an assumption that I'm not even sure is true. @Delano do I understand you correctly: are you drawing the conclusion that climate change only started in 1980 based upon the graph above? Please confirm.