I remember about 5 months ago when the Washington Post published an article featuring a quote from a top weather nerd. The article attempted to answer whether we were going to have a snowy winter or not. Here’s the quote, almost verbatim:

“Right now we expect a 50% chance of having more snow than average, and a 50% chance of having less snow than average.”

:huh:

So basically we were going to have an average winter. Thanks for putting it in simple terms, geek. Well the Post strikes again, this time with a confusing headline:

D.C. Population Shows Some Gains, Some Losses

…census figures [indicate] that the city’s population dipped by nearly 20,000 between 2000 and July 2004. City officials dispute the decline, citing a growth in housing units and the apparent stability of school enrollment. They have set a goal of boosting the D.C. population by 100,000 by the end of the decade.

I admire the Post for trying to spin a positive on the city losing 20,000 residents in four years. The “gains” came with a growing yuppie population (25-34), but if the net loss was greater, shouldn’t it be called “D.C. Population Shows Some Gains, But Much Greater Losses”? And how can the city “dispute” a census report by saying school enrollment is stable? That doesn’t make sense. And how is the city going to gain 25,000 residents a year by 2010 when they just lost that much in four? Arrrrrgh my head is starting to hurt.

And the hurting has stopped.

Related Posts You May Like: SCENE NEWCOMER YOUR JOB MAKES ME ALL HOT INSIDE ONE NIGHT STAND VS INCREDIBLE CONNECTION RE: MYSPACE STALKING WHY MEDIOCRE WOMEN DESIRE HOT MEN

My Pick-Up Guide: Bang is the book I wrote after swimming in game for six years after college. Inside I teach everything about meeting girls, dating them, and finally sealing the deal. Check out the homepage for reviews, excerpts, and a detailed outline.

sweet motha of gawd…i didnt even care to read the post diane looks awesome