George Noory Sucks! - The Definitive Compendium

[Inglorious Bitch]

Anyone that's curious:  Yes, George asked "What if Einstein had a computer?"

What if Jorch Nuri had a brain?

[albrecht]

So the other night Norry had the psychic lawyer on the show to explain quantum physics and Norry once again used odd phrasing:

"well we had Micho Kaku on trying to explain it, so we will let you take a dive at it."

Not "take a shot at it" or "dive into it" but "take a dive at it." I really think Norry grew up speaking another language because, like a foreigner or when you learn another language, you often make mistakes in the sayings.

[ziznak]

What if Jorch Nuri had a brain?

these two things cannot occupy the same space time

[maureen]

precisely! the squiggle over the "N" means the difference of wishing someone a Happy New Year or Happy New Anus!

[ACE of CLUBS]

So the other night Norry had the psychic lawyer on the show to explain quantum physics and Norry once again used odd phrasing:

"well we had Micho Kaku on trying to explain it, so we will let you take a dive at it."

Not "take a shot at it" or "dive into it" but "take a dive at it." I really think Norry grew up speaking another language because, like a foreigner or when you learn another language, you often make mistakes in the sayings.

We all know that George isn't 'the sharpest spoon on the wall' ........

[Zetaspeak]

George spotted a chance and persuaded Zimmerman to stay an extra hour, thus reducing his exposure to those Midweek Open Lines to a single hour (or the two bursts of 20 mins he's actually on the air).

That was actually a good decision by him. The less time on those awful open lines the better.

[albrecht]

That was actually a good decision by him. The less time on those awful open lines the better.

Norry mentioned that he allowed Tommy to do some open-lines last week as his birthday present to Tommy. Some birthday present: "here, I will let you do my job." He and Norry's discussion about hunting was ridiculous, such a crazy, uninformed debate. "Deer meat," not venison, and Norry segued into a story about a little dog that some sicko shot and Norry is going to support the fund-raiser but can't fund-raise on their own. Now, Norry, how will you be able to implement your C2C Health Insurance Plan or your C2C Listeners Foundation, or other items promised,  if you can't even set-up a fundraiser for a single dog?

[ItsOver]

Norry mentioned that he allowed Tommy to do some open-lines last week as his birthday present to Tommy. Some birthday present: "here, I will let you do my job." He and Norry's discussion about hunting was ridiculous, such a crazy, uninformed debate. "Deer meat," not venison, and Norry segued into a story about a little dog that some sicko shot and Norry is going to support the fund-raiser but can't fund-raise on their own. Now, Norry, how will you be able to implement your C2C Health Insurance Plan or your C2C Listeners Foundation, or other items promised,  if you can't even set-up a fundraiser for a single dog?

Don't forget his intense fight to protect the grid. 

[zeebo]

That was actually a good decision by him. The less time on those awful open lines the better.

Zimm's a pro.  He handled Bill the AAA with style and dealt diplomatically with even more annoying people like George himself.  I may have to add him to my exception list guests worth tolerating Noory for, which right now includes only LMH.

[ItsOver]

I have to remember LMH is up tomorrow.  She's one of the few Art old-timers I'll listen to.  She's outlasted Art and doesn't need Noory, of course.  All he's good for is getting bonked on the head by Linda.

[NoMoreNoory]

The 'psychic lawyer' is on again tonite.  I'm still waiting for the 'telepathic accountant'.

Not quite, but tonight we do get the crime reporter and sports writer introducing his friend the time traveller.
So get ready for that!

[albrecht]

Not quite, but tonight we do get the crime reporter and sports writer introducing his friend the time traveller.
So get ready for that!

Tax season is approaching for most, certainly C2C could find a former veterinarian and traditional Chinese homeopathic intuitive to advise us?

[PB the Deplorable]

I hate to say it, because as bad as he still is...Jorch has been stepping his game up in the past few months...coincidentally since Art quit...

Well that's shtrange, George historically puts in less effort the further Art is from doing a show

[PB the Deplorable]

Tax season is approaching for most, certainly C2C could find a former veterinarian and traditional Chinese homeopathic intuitive to advise us?

Tommy must cut George's hair, otherwise he's have a bunch of guys from a geezer barbershop randomly on giving advice.

[Gumby, Dammit]

Tommy must cut George's hair, otherwise he's have a bunch of guys from a geezer barbershop randomly on giving advice.

[136 or 142]

The guest on tonight discussing Nibiru is the same guy who was on with Ian Punnett claiming that Congressman (U.S Representative) and former musician Sonny Bono was murdered because he gave Bono some documents regarding something to do with, I think, illegal activity of the C.I.A.

He clearly seems to have a 'Walter Mitty' Complex if that is an official psychiatric term.

[136 or 142]

For those who don't know, the 'official' story on the military equipment used by many police forces in the United States is that it was surplus military hardware that was donated to the police by the U.S Government after the second Iraq War.

[Morgus]

Norry mentioned that he allowed Tommy to do some open-lines last week as his birthday present to Tommy. Some birthday present: "here, I will let you do my job."

That was during a recent Friday night's open lines for the last <20min segment of the night which Noory often uses to cut out early to play a replay tribute anyway...

[loveslibraries]

There are so many gems that go undocumented each night, but the last WTF? moment I had was when George said:
"It's almost as if we have a third eye. In the back of our head." George Noory to open lines caller on 3/21/08

And, tonight's gem.... (During an ad for arthritis relief) "Do you ever wake up in the morning and feel your stiff p- as a board?"     .

[Zetaspeak]

The guest on tonight discussing Nibiru is the same guy who was on with Ian Punnett claiming that Congressman (U.S Representative) and former musician Sonny Bono was murdered because he gave Bono some documents regarding something to do with, I think, illegal activity of the C.I.A.

He clearly seems to have a 'Walter Mitty' Complex if that is an official psychiatric term.

I have to give you props, nice reference 

[Just Me]

Bob Fletcher was last nights guest and I didn't know who was on c2c so caught his act in the last half hour. As soon as I heard Bob's voice I went, hey, that's old Bob.

Old Bob started out years ago on c2c with a story of his toy business that he owned and some shady guy wanted to buy the shebang, so old Bob made a deal to sell, but the guy forgot to pay old Bob and used the toy business as a front to run weapons all around the world.

Then, after that interesting tale wore thin on the lecture circuit, he started on the Sonny Bono murder and when that faded into the night he did Nibiru. He had all this info from secret sources and made a dvd, which he sold to anyone dumb enough to buy into that fantasy. Anyway, old Bob last night kept pitching the dvd every fifth word. Kind a sounded like those guys selling a book and when telling their c2c story keep saying, "you'll find in my book, bla, bla, bla", "In my book I bla, bla, bla". Than we have to torture ourselves further with shoe shine boys clown antics and out the ass comments.

[ItsOver]

Linda tonight.  Sorry, no dead cows.  It looks to be about Fukushima.

[zeebo]

Linda tonight.  Sorry, no dead cows.  It looks to be about Fukushima.

Whether it's cow-downs or melt-downs, I'm in.

[ItsOver]

Whether it's cow-downs or melt-downs, I'm in.

Same here, Zeeb.  The possibility of an LMH slam-down of Jorch alone makes it worthy.  Prepare for quotable moments.

[albrecht]

Whether it's cow-downs or melt-downs, I'm in.

Whether it is cored rectums or cores wrecked 'em, I'm in for LMH.

[zeebo]

Whether it is cored rectums or cores wrecked 'em, I'm in for LMH.

[Dateline]

Question left unanswered, were all of the baby faces in Denver, mean baby faces?

[136 or 142]

I have to give you props, nice reference 

Thanks. But, while I remember reading the book in middle school (as do or did most people) I saw the Danny Kaye version of The Secret Life of Walter Mitty a couple weeks ago with my mother.

I recommend the film as it is quite enjoyable.  Most viewers these days would likely wonder why the film's narrative essentially stops while Danny Kaye sings a couple of comedic songs that have nothing to do with the story (the first song in particular is quite long) but my mother explained to me that Danny Kaye was famous for his comedic songs and the audiences of the day expected his films to contain them.  I believe Danny Kaye wrote both of the songs in the movie.

Danny Kaye is Jewish and I believe my mother once told me that she met him at some Jewish event and he couldn't have been nicer.  My mother also met Julie Andrews on a beach in London England in the 1950s and that Julie Andrews wanted to be left alone to play with my mother and her friends  but that her 'handlers' forced her to leave.  My mother said that Julie Andrews also couldn't have been nicer but that she was quite sad.

Some may put these stories down to the rememberances of a person who is possibly in the early stages of Alzheimer's (which is why I saw the movie with her) (though people with Alzheimer's frequently have difficulty remembering current events but have no problem remembering things from years ago), but my mother has actually told me both of stories on occasion going back about 30 years now, so I certainly believe her.

[136 or 142]

Mish Shedlock was one of the commentators in the 'news' segment tonight.  Does everybody else here find him as annoying as I do? 

The thing is, he sounds totally sincere but his views are simply logically inconsistent.

Using oil as an example he says:

If the price of oil is falling:  The demand for oil is declining, it's a sign the U.S, if not the world is in a recession (or a depression.)
If the price of oil is rising:  The demand for oil is increasing and the rising price will put the U.S, if not the world in a recession (or a depression.)
If the price of oil is neither falling nor rising: The markets are uncertain and uncertainty means that people are afraid to invest so the U.S, if not the world either is or will be in a recession (or a depression.)

While individually all three of these are plausible economic arguments, collectively they can't be correct as it would obviously mean that the U.S, if not the world is either permanently in a recession or permanently about to go into a recession.  The reality is that since the recession at the beginning of the century, the U.S has suffered one very deep and relatively long recession that started a while before the housing crisis but that GDP has grown year over year for roughly 12 of the 15 years in this century.

I'd like to know who buys his publications as I'd like to ask them why they bother given that they know he's going to write "the U.S, if not the world, either already is in a recession, or it's about to go into a recession." 

Given that he holds these logically inconsistent positions, his value as a Coast to Coast economics adviser is precisely zero.  Although, in my opinion, that still makes him better than the former Coast to Coast 'science adviser' Richard C. Hoagland whose value is measured in the negative.

I've said a number of times here before that while I don't have an economics degree, I have taken a number of economics courses and that I believe I am capable of commenting on most economic issues.  As far as I know I've studied all of the core concepts in economics as they are all analyzed in first level micro-economics and macro-economics courses and then analyzed with (fairly simple) calculus in second level  micro-economics.  There actually isn't a second level stand-alone macro-economics course as essentially all of the higher level economics courses are macro-economics.  In addition to those three courses, I've taken three other economics courses (labor economics, environmental economics and money, banking and financial institutions) and the only core economics concept that was greatly expanded upon in any of those courses was the 'equimarginal principal' in environmental economics, although that concept is also used in utility theory which is one of the main theories in micro economics.   Of course, there are economics courses that cover specialty fields like econometrics and the emerging field of behavioral economics and it's semi related cousin game theory that I make no claim to having extra knowledge in (Game Theory is actually being increasingly applied to virtually every social science discipline if not the scientific disciplines and is not specific to just economics).  I believe that most third level economics courses just cover the same core concepts with additional fields (trade economics, development economics...) and that forth level economics courses also just cover the same core concepts using increasingly difficult calculus.

So, I do feel I have the education to comment on George Noory's economics adviser (like me, as far as I know none of whom actually have a degree in economics- but then neither Richard Hoagland or Robert Zimmerman have degrees in science either.)

While I don't think a person needs a degree in economics to have a good grasp of many of the concepts it's mostly the concepts in micro-economics that can be intuitive, whereas I think a person does need to have at least some training in macro-economics to understand that, and it's macro-economics that Noory's 'economics advisers' discuss. 

In addition to Shedlock, Noory's other cavalcade of clowns economics advisers are, as we all know, Gerald Celente, Catherine Austin Fitts and Andre Eggelletion. 

Celente also strikes me as being totally sincere, but the writers as rationalwiki completely disagree with me on that: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gerald_Celente
While I don't remember hearing this on Coast to Coast, this is what Rational Wiki writes Gerald Celente said: Made on November 13, 2008: By 2012 America will become an undeveloped nation, that there will be a revolution marked by food riots, squatter rebellions, tax revolts and job marches, and that holidays will be more about obtaining food, not gifts. “We’re going to see the end of the retail Christmas… we’re going to see a fundamental shift take place… putting food on the table is going to be more important that putting gifts under the Christmas tree,” said Celente, adding that the situation would be “worse than the great depression"

I do remember however hearing Celente say the last time he was on that he predicted there would be a severe recession in 2016 and I remember that I wanted to call up the show and ask him "will the recession of 2016 be as severe as the recessions of 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012 and 2011 that you also predicted?"

While I don't know how Celente would answer that, I don't doubt that some people here would say that the U.S would have been in a recession for that period of time were it not for the Federal Reserve engaging in 'quantitative easing' (printing money.)  However, this is actually incorrect.  If you look at the Federal Reserve's Balance Sheet you'll see that they printed up somewhere over $3 trillion dollars but that nearly all of that money is actually sitting in the Federal Reserve's account as it has been deposited back into the Federal Reserve by the member private banks.  As one of the guests correctly said on Coast to Coast, 'The Federal Reserve can print up all the money in the world, but if it doesn't circulate it doesn't do anything."  In economics this is referred to as 'dead money' and that this money has never been lent out explains why all that printing of money did not result in inflation. 

The quantitative easing did do some positives though, as, if you remember back to the height of the financial crisis in late 2008 banks were unwilling to lend to each other or to the public (small amounts excluded) as they were unsure about their liquidity, and the Federal Reserve money printing did allay those concerns.

Anyway, I do believe that Gerald Celente is a highly ethical person because he constantly says he is.  So, while his economic predictions are worthless and his analysis is worse, in the end, what he is is essentially a negative nostalgic romantic.  He is nostalgic because he yearns for the return to the 1950s and early 1960s when the U.S dominated manufacturing and he is a romantic because he frequently speaks of his love of art and nature.  I can go with him on some of his romantic notions, but, again, as an economics adviser, his value is precisely zero.

Catherine Austin Fitts is a bit more interesting, because she actually strikes me as frequently insincere.  Like the politicians she used to work for, she has her finger in the wind.  For instance, when Barack Obama's approval ratings was around 40% she would complain that 'Obamacare' would result in a massive U.S recession as she claimed that it took away the income from consumers that they had previously used for discretionary spending.  However, as Obama's approval ratings crept back up to 45-50% (where they presently still are) she started to say nice things about 'Obamacare.' I forget what exactly she said, but it was something about how 'Obamacare' had reduced costs for business and was therefore, good for the economy.

Other than that, as I write here every time she comes on, a great deal of the time I have no idea what she is talking about.  For instance, what exactly does 'we need to move from a debtor economy to a creditor economy' mean?  I know she actually does have a degree in finance, so maybe that sentence does mean something to her, but I suspect it's just a meaningless sentence with a couple buzzwords used to make her sound insightful.

Finally, there is Andre Eggelletion.  While based on the title of his book "Thieves in the Temple" he is likely a promoter of the fiction that the Federal Reserve is a 'private bank' and that he likely also promotes a return to the pseudo-economics of the gold standard, of the four, he actually is the only one, in my opinion, who analyses the data in GDP and employment reports accurately and without a built-in bias and I find his analysis to be worth listening to.  It's therefore, also no surprise that of the four he is by far the one who appears on Coast to Coast the least.
 

[nooryisawesome]

Mish Shedlock was one of the commentators in the 'news' segment tonight.  Does everybody else here find him as annoying as I do? 

The thing is, he sounds totally sincere but his views are simply logically inconsistent.

Using oil as an example he says:

If the price of oil is falling:  The demand for oil is declining, it's a sign the U.S, if not the world is in a recession (or a depression.)
If the price of oil is rising:  The demand for oil is increasing and the rising price will put the U.S, if not the world in a recession (or a depression.)
If the price of oil is neither falling nor rising: The markets are confused and confusion is a sign of instability and instability means that the U.S, if not the world either is or will be in a recession (or a depression.)

While individually all three of these are plausible economic arguments, collectively they can't be correct as it would obviously mean that the U.S, if not the world is either permanently in a recession or permanently about to go into a recession.  The reality is that since the recession at the beginning of the century, the U.S has suffered one very deep and relatively long recession  that started a while before the housing crisis but that GDP has grown year over year for roughly 12 of the 15 years in this century.

I'd like to know who buys his publications as I'd like to ask them why they bother given that they know he's going to write "the U.S, if not the world, either already is in a recession, or it's about to go into a recession." 

Given that he holds these logically inconsistent positions, his value as a Coast to Coast economics adviser is precisely zero.  Although, in my opinion, that still makes him better than the former Coast to Coast 'science adviser' Richard C. Hoagland whose value is measured in the negative.

I've said a number of times here before that while I don't have an economics degree, I have taken a number of economics courses and that I believe I am capable of commenting on most economic issues.  As far as I know I've studied all of the core concepts in economics as they are all analyzed in first level micro-economics and macro-economics courses and then analyzed with (fairly simple) calculus in second level  micro-economics.  There actually isn't a second level stand-alone macro-economics course as essentially all of the higher level economics courses are macro-economics.  In addition to those three courses, I've taken three other economics courses (labor economics, environmental economics and money, banking and financial institutions) and the only core economics concept that was greatly expanded upon in any of those courses was the 'equimarginal principal' in environmental economics, although that concept is also used in utility theory which is one of the main theories in micro economics.   Of course, there are economics courses that cover specialty fields like econometrics and the emerging field of behavioral economics and it's semi related cousin game theory that I make no claim to having extra knowledge in (Game Theory is actually being increasingly applied to virtually every social science discipline if not the scientific disciplines and is not specific to just economics).  I believe that most third level economics courses just cover the same core concepts with additional fields (trade economics, development economics...) and that forth level economics courses also just cover the same core concepts using increasingly difficult calculus.

So, I do feel I have the education to comment on George Noory's economics adviser (like me, as far as I know none of whom actually have a degree in economics- but then neither Richard Hoagland or Robert Zimmerman have degrees in science either.)

While I don't think a person needs a degree in economics to have a good grasp of many of the concepts it's mostly the concepts in micro-economics that can be intuitive, whereas I think a person does need to have at least some training in macro-economics to understand that, and it's macro-economics that Noory's 'economics advisers' discuss. 

In addition to Shedlock, Noory's other cavalcade of clowns economics advisers are, as we all know, Gerald Celente, Catherine Austin Fitts and Andre Eggelletion. 

Celente also strikes me as being totally sincere, but the writers as rationalwiki completely disagree with me on that: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gerald_Celente
While I don't remember hearing this on Coast to Coast, this is what Rational Wiki writes Gerald Celente said: Made on November 13, 2008: By 2012 America will become an undeveloped nation, that there will be a revolution marked by food riots, squatter rebellions, tax revolts and job marches, and that holidays will be more about obtaining food, not gifts. “We’re going to see the end of the retail Christmas… we’re going to see a fundamental shift take place… putting food on the table is going to be more important that putting gifts under the Christmas tree,” said Celente, adding that the situation would be “worse than the great depression"

I do remember however hearing Celente say the last time he was on that he predicted there would be a severe recession in 2016 and I remember that I wanted to call up the show and ask him "will the recession of 2016 be as severe as the recessions of 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012 and 2011 that you also predicted?"

While I don't know how Celente would answer that, I don't doubt that some people here would say that the U.S would have been in a recession for that period of time were it not for the Federal Reserve engaging in 'quantitative easing' (printing money.)  However, this is actually incorrect.  If you look at the Federal Reserve's Balance Sheet you'll see that they printed up somewhere over $3 trillion dollars but that nearly all of that money is actually sitting in the Federal Reserve's account as it has been deposited back into the Federal Reserve by the member private banks.  As one of the guests correctly said on Coast to Coast, 'The Federal Reserve can print up all the money in the world, but if it doesn't circulate it doesn't do anything."  In economics this is referred to as 'dead money' and that this money has never been lent out explains why all that printing of money did not result in inflation. 

The quantitative easing did do some positives though, as, if you remember back to the height of the financial crisis in late 2008 banks were unwilling to lend to each other or to the public (small amounts excluded) as they were unsure about their liquidity, and the Federal Reserve money printing did allay those concerns.

Anyway, I do believe that Gerald Celente is a highly ethical person because he constantly says he is.  So, while his economic predictions are worthless and his analysis is worse, in the end, what he is is essentially a negative nostalgic romantic.  He is nostalgic because he yearns for the return to the 1950s and early 1960s when the U.S dominated manufacturing and he is a romantic because he frequently speaks of his love of art and nature.  I can go with him on some of his romantic notions, but, again, as an economics adviser, his value is precisely zero.

Catherine Austin Fitts is a bit more interesting, because she actually strikes me as frequently insincere.  Like the politicians she used to work for, she has her finger in the wind.  For instance, when Barack Obama's approval ratings was around 40% she would complain that 'Obamacare' would result in a massive U.S recession as she claimed that it took away the income from consumers that they had previously used for discretionary spending.  However, as Obama's approval ratings crept back up to 45-50% (where they presently still are) she started to say nice things about 'Obamacare.' I forget what exactly she said, but it was something about how 'Obamacare' had reduced costs for business and was therefore, good for the economy.

Other than that, as I write here every time she comes on, a great deal of the time I have no idea what she is talking about.  For instance, what exactly does 'we need to move from a debtor economy to a creditor economy' mean?  I know she actually does have a degree in finance, so maybe that sentence does mean something to her, but I suspect it's just a meaningless sentence with a couple buzzwords used to make her sound insightful.

Finally, there is Andre Eggelletion.  While based on the title of his book "Thieves in the Temple" he is likely a promoter of the fiction that the Federal Reserve is a 'private bank' and that he likely also promotes a return to the pseudo-economics of the gold standard, of the four, he actually is the only one, in my opinion, who analyses the data in GDP and employment reports accurately and without a built-in bias and I find his analysis to be worth listening to.  It's therefore, also no surprise that of the four he is by far the one who appears on Coast to Coast the least.