| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"Captain Compassion" |
| Date: |
27 Feb 2007 12:28:59 PM |
| Object: |
Warming a cold fact? |
Warming a cold fact?
By Richard W. Rahn
February 27, 2007
http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20070226-090438-1111r.htm
Do you think those who have reservations about whether man is creating
global warming should lose their jobs and be denied the right to
present their views?
Over the last few months, there has been a concerted effort to silence
those who have doubts about global warming and man's effect on the
climate. The Oregon State climatologist was fired for disagreeing with
the "conventional wisdom." A meteorologist with the weather channel
demanded that dissenting views not be broadcast. CNN, in particular,
has treated skeptics with great disdain.
As an economist, I do not claim to know for certain who is right and
who is wrong in this debate, but I do know that attempts to shut down
debate are both wrong and dangerous. When I was a student, Keynesian
economics was the "consensus," and those few who disagreed, like
Milton Friedman and F.A. Hayek, were ridiculed by the economic
establishment, and students in many universities were not even exposed
to their views. By the late 1970s, it was apparent to those who cared
to look at the data and the world around them that Keynesian economics
had all been wrong and Friedman and Hayek had been right. Once
Margaret Thatcher, Ronald Reagan and other government leaders adopted
the Friedman/Hayek model, their economies and also the world economy,
entered the longest and highest rate of growth ever. History is filled
with those who dissented against the conventional wisdom but were
proved correct, such as Copernicus, Galileo, Albert Einstein and many
others.
The doomsayers in the media and political classes were all atwitter
last month when the most recent U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC) report was released, saying humans were partly
to blame for global warming -- so I decided to read the report.
Let's do a mind game. The authors of the report predict average
temperature will increase between 3.2 and 7.8 degrees Fahrenheit over
the next century, and that sea levels will rise between 7 and 23
inches. Assume, for the moment, that mankind can do nothing about this
projected climate change. Given that information, how would you change
your behavior? If you are like most people, you would do nothing but
enjoy the few extra days of summer and swimming. If you were going to
build a house on the sea, you might build it a couple of feet higher
than the existing codes require -- no big deal. Unless you enjoy
shoveling the snow, having a little less of if to contend with each
winter probably would bring more pleasure than pain.
Now, let us assume mankind might be able to slowly reduce global
warming by drastically reducing carbon emissions. This can be done by
increasing the cost of power and fuel. How much would you be willing
to pay to make these changes for something you would barely notice
over your lifetime? Would you be willing to take on these extra costs,
knowing they would accomplish very little if the citizens of the rest
of planet did not do the same?
What do this and other reports about climate change tell us? A
majority agrees the most notable temperature increases will be in
upper Canada and Siberia, and the moisture these areas receive will
increase -- which means much better and longer growing seasons in
these areas. These favorable developments will be partially offset by
longer droughts in some localities. But given that both these positive
and negative changes will occur slowly over a century, humankind will
have plenty of time to adapt, and on balance it will be easier and
less costly to produce food. If you are a skier, your season will be
shortened, but if you play baseball, football, golf or swim, your
season will be longer.
However, if the politicians on the left operate true to course, they
will propose even more costly regulations and higher taxes, without
any offsetting tax reduction. This will unnecessarily make the poor
poorer and reduce job creation. The brains of many on the left (and
some on the right) seem unable to understand second-order effects of
policies and actions, which tends to make them overstate problems and
come up with solutions that do more harm than good.
Vaclav Klaus, who is both a distinguished economist and president of
the Czech Republic, criticized the new U.N. report on global warming,
saying it was a political document, "without scientific basis." He
also said, "a sane person can't conclude that we are ruining the
planet" as Al Gore has said, given that the planet is now far more
user friendly for humans than it has ever been in the past.
It is worth remembering that, as recently as the 1970s, a consensus
held we were in a period of global cooling and might face a new ice
age. Those who seek to shut down the debate are only revealing their
ignorance of history and disdain for liberty.
--
There may come a time when the CO2 police will wander the earth telling
the poor and the dispossed how many dung chips they can put on their
cook fires. -- Captain Compassion.
Wherever I go it will be well with me, for it was well with me here, not
on account of the place, but of my judgments which I shall carry away
with me, for no one can deprive me of these; on the contrary, they alone
are my property, and cannot be taken away, and to possess them suffices
me wherever I am or whatever I do. -- EPICTETUS
"Civilization is the interval between Ice Ages." -- Will Durant.
"Progress is the increasing control of the environment by life.
--Will Durant
Joseph R. Darancette
daranc@NOSPAMverizon.net
.
|
|
| User: "Server 13" |
|
| Title: Re: Warming a cold fact? |
27 Feb 2007 03:58:53 PM |
|
|
"Captain Compassion" <daranc@NOSPAMcharter.net> wrote in message
news:fot8u2pgl8u7bhhop5d56qjkpujg8dk3ig@4ax.com...
Warming a cold fact?
By Richard W. Rahn
February 27, 2007
http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20070226-090438-1111r.htm
rofl The lying Moonie times. Surprise!
Do you think those who have reservations about whether man is creating
global warming should lose their jobs and be denied the right to
present their views?
Over the last few months, there has been a concerted effort to silence
those who have doubts about global warming and man's effect on the
climate. The Oregon State climatologist was fired for disagreeing with
the "conventional wisdom." A meteorologist with the weather channel
demanded that dissenting views not be broadcast. CNN, in particular,
has treated skeptics with great disdain.
He wasn't the Oregon state climatologist. He was given that title by a
university, not the state, and he deserves exactly what he got.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jeffrey Turner" |
|
| Title: Re: Warming a cold fact? |
27 Feb 2007 01:04:42 PM |
|
|
Captain Compassion wrote:
Warming a cold fact?
By Richard W. Rahn
February 27, 2007
http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20070226-090438-1111r.htm
Do you think those who have reservations about whether man is creating
global warming should lose their jobs and be denied the right to
present their views?
Over the last few months, there has been a concerted effort to silence
those who have doubts about global warming and man's effect on the
climate. The Oregon State climatologist was fired for disagreeing with
the "conventional wisdom." A meteorologist with the weather channel
demanded that dissenting views not be broadcast. CNN, in particular,
has treated skeptics with great disdain.
You know, we hear the same whining from Creationists, or as they prefer
now, the Intelligent Design'ers.
As an economist, I do not claim to know for certain who is right and
who is wrong in this debate,
Obviously.
but I do know that attempts to shut down
debate are both wrong and dangerous. When I was a student, Keynesian
economics was the "consensus," and those few who disagreed, like
Milton Friedman and F.A. Hayek, were ridiculed by the economic
establishment,
For good reason, they were idiots whose theories haven't panned out.
and students in many universities were not even exposed
to their views. By the late 1970s, it was apparent to those who cared
to look at the data and the world around them that Keynesian economics
had all been wrong and Friedman and Hayek had been right.
In a pig's eye. As the huge Reagan, and now Bush, deficits have shown.
Once
Margaret Thatcher, Ronald Reagan and other government leaders adopted
the Friedman/Hayek model, their economies and also the world economy,
entered the longest and highest rate of growth ever.
The biggest growth has been in the U.S. trade deficit.
History is filled
with those who dissented against the conventional wisdom but were
proved correct, such as Copernicus, Galileo, Albert Einstein and many
others.
I know, they laughed at Fulton and his steamship. They also laughed at
Bozo the Clown.
The doomsayers in the media and political classes were all atwitter
last month when the most recent U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC) report was released, saying humans were partly
to blame for global warming -- so I decided to read the report.
He's already admitted he's not a scientist. Obviously, according to
the Moonie Times and reality-denying conservatives, that makes him
qualified to comment on the work of hundreds of scientists who have
actually studied the world's climate. What nonsense.
--Jeff
--
Al Qaeda and the Taliban and the Salafist
movements in Algeria and Iraq are movements
outside the framework of Islam. Their
relationship with Islam resembles George
Bush's relationship with democracy.
--Nawaf Musawi, Hezbollah's foreign affairs chief
.
|
|
|
| User: "Captain Compassion" |
|
| Title: Re: Warming a cold fact? |
27 Feb 2007 02:59:25 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 14:04:42 -0500, Jeffrey Turner
<jturner@localnet.com> wrote:
Captain Compassion wrote:
Warming a cold fact?
By Richard W. Rahn
February 27, 2007
http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20070226-090438-1111r.htm
Do you think those who have reservations about whether man is creating
global warming should lose their jobs and be denied the right to
present their views?
Over the last few months, there has been a concerted effort to silence
those who have doubts about global warming and man's effect on the
climate. The Oregon State climatologist was fired for disagreeing with
the "conventional wisdom." A meteorologist with the weather channel
demanded that dissenting views not be broadcast. CNN, in particular,
has treated skeptics with great disdain.
You know, we hear the same whining from Creationists, or as they prefer
now, the Intelligent Design'ers.
As an economist, I do not claim to know for certain who is right and
who is wrong in this debate,
Obviously.
but I do know that attempts to shut down
debate are both wrong and dangerous. When I was a student, Keynesian
economics was the "consensus," and those few who disagreed, like
Milton Friedman and F.A. Hayek, were ridiculed by the economic
establishment,
For good reason, they were idiots whose theories haven't panned out.
and students in many universities were not even exposed
to their views. By the late 1970s, it was apparent to those who cared
to look at the data and the world around them that Keynesian economics
had all been wrong and Friedman and Hayek had been right.
In a pig's eye. As the huge Reagan, and now Bush, deficits have shown.
Once
Margaret Thatcher, Ronald Reagan and other government leaders adopted
the Friedman/Hayek model, their economies and also the world economy,
entered the longest and highest rate of growth ever.
The biggest growth has been in the U.S. trade deficit.
History is filled
with those who dissented against the conventional wisdom but were
proved correct, such as Copernicus, Galileo, Albert Einstein and many
others.
I know, they laughed at Fulton and his steamship. They also laughed at
Bozo the Clown.
The doomsayers in the media and political classes were all atwitter
last month when the most recent U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC) report was released, saying humans were partly
to blame for global warming -- so I decided to read the report.
He's already admitted he's not a scientist. Obviously, according to
the Moonie Times and reality-denying conservatives, that makes him
qualified to comment on the work of hundreds of scientists who have
actually studied the world's climate. What nonsense.
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a
revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
--
There may come a time when the CO2 police will wander the earth telling
the poor and the dispossed how many dung chips they can put on their
cook fires. -- Captain Compassion.
Wherever I go it will be well with me, for it was well with me here, not
on account of the place, but of my judgments which I shall carry away
with me, for no one can deprive me of these; on the contrary, they alone
are my property, and cannot be taken away, and to possess them suffices
me wherever I am or whatever I do. -- EPICTETUS
"Civilization is the interval between Ice Ages." -- Will Durant.
"Progress is the increasing control of the environment by life.
--Will Durant
Joseph R. Darancette
daranc@NOSPAMverizon.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jeffrey Turner" |
|
| Title: Re: Warming a cold fact? |
27 Feb 2007 03:44:03 PM |
|
|
Captain Compassion wrote:
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 14:04:42 -0500, Jeffrey Turner
<jturner@localnet.com> wrote:
Captain Compassion wrote:
Warming a cold fact?
By Richard W. Rahn
February 27, 2007
http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20070226-090438-1111r.htm
Do you think those who have reservations about whether man is creating
global warming should lose their jobs and be denied the right to
present their views?
Over the last few months, there has been a concerted effort to silence
those who have doubts about global warming and man's effect on the
climate. The Oregon State climatologist was fired for disagreeing with
the "conventional wisdom." A meteorologist with the weather channel
demanded that dissenting views not be broadcast. CNN, in particular,
has treated skeptics with great disdain.
You know, we hear the same whining from Creationists, or as they prefer
now, the Intelligent Design'ers.
As an economist, I do not claim to know for certain who is right and
who is wrong in this debate,
Obviously.
but I do know that attempts to shut down
debate are both wrong and dangerous. When I was a student, Keynesian
economics was the "consensus," and those few who disagreed, like
Milton Friedman and F.A. Hayek, were ridiculed by the economic
establishment,
For good reason, they were idiots whose theories haven't panned out.
and students in many universities were not even exposed
to their views. By the late 1970s, it was apparent to those who cared
to look at the data and the world around them that Keynesian economics
had all been wrong and Friedman and Hayek had been right.
In a pig's eye. As the huge Reagan, and now Bush, deficits have shown.
Once
Margaret Thatcher, Ronald Reagan and other government leaders adopted
the Friedman/Hayek model, their economies and also the world economy,
entered the longest and highest rate of growth ever.
The biggest growth has been in the U.S. trade deficit.
History is filled
with those who dissented against the conventional wisdom but were
proved correct, such as Copernicus, Galileo, Albert Einstein and many
others.
I know, they laughed at Fulton and his steamship. They also laughed at
Bozo the Clown.
The doomsayers in the media and political classes were all atwitter
last month when the most recent U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC) report was released, saying humans were partly
to blame for global warming -- so I decided to read the report.
He's already admitted he's not a scientist. Obviously, according to
the Moonie Times and reality-denying conservatives, that makes him
qualified to comment on the work of hundreds of scientists who have
actually studied the world's climate. What nonsense.
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a
revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
Oooh, the irony.
--Jeff
--
Al Qaeda and the Taliban and the Salafist
movements in Algeria and Iraq are movements
outside the framework of Islam. Their
relationship with Islam resembles George
Bush's relationship with democracy.
--Nawaf Musawi, Hezbollah's foreign affairs chief
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jeffrey Turner" |
|
| Title: Re: Warming a cold fact? |
27 Feb 2007 06:00:06 PM |
|
|
Jeffrey Turner wrote:
Captain Compassion wrote:
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a
revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
Oooh, the irony.
The Captain is pretending to be a revolutionary? rofl.
--Jeff
--
Al Qaeda and the Taliban and the Salafist
movements in Algeria and Iraq are movements
outside the framework of Islam. Their
relationship with Islam resembles George
Bush's relationship with democracy.
--Nawaf Musawi, Hezbollah's foreign affairs chief
.
|
|
|
| User: "Captain Compassion" |
|
| Title: Re: Warming a cold fact? |
27 Feb 2007 07:25:39 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 19:00:06 -0500, Jeffrey Turner
<jturner@localnet.com> wrote:
Jeffrey Turner wrote:
Captain Compassion wrote:
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a
revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
Oooh, the irony.
The Captain is pretending to be a revolutionary? rofl.
I suspect that the religious left will be burning folks at the stake
before this madness is over.
--
There may come a time when the CO2 police will wander the earth telling
the poor and the dispossed how many dung chips they can put on their
cook fires. -- Captain Compassion.
Wherever I go it will be well with me, for it was well with me here, not
on account of the place, but of my judgments which I shall carry away
with me, for no one can deprive me of these; on the contrary, they alone
are my property, and cannot be taken away, and to possess them suffices
me wherever I am or whatever I do. -- EPICTETUS
"Civilization is the interval between Ice Ages." -- Will Durant.
"Progress is the increasing control of the environment by life.
--Will Durant
Joseph R. Darancette
daranc@NOSPAMverizon.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jeffrey Turner" |
|
| Title: Re: Warming a cold fact? |
27 Feb 2007 09:08:04 PM |
|
|
Captain Compassion wrote:
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 19:00:06 -0500, Jeffrey Turner
<jturner@localnet.com> wrote:
Jeffrey Turner wrote:
Captain Compassion wrote:
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a
revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
Oooh, the irony.
The Captain is pretending to be a revolutionary? rofl.
I suspect that the religious left will be burning folks at the stake
before this madness is over.
No steaks, they're all vegetarians.
--Jeff
--
Al Qaeda and the Taliban and the Salafist
movements in Algeria and Iraq are movements
outside the framework of Islam. Their
relationship with Islam resembles George
Bush's relationship with democracy.
--Nawaf Musawi, Hezbollah's foreign affairs chief
.
|
|
|
| User: "Desmond and Molly Jones" |
|
| Title: Re: Warming a cold fact? |
27 Feb 2007 09:38:29 PM |
|
|
In article <12u9sgofdljl3de@corp.supernews.com>, Jeffrey Turner at
jturner@localnet.com says...
Al Qaeda and the Taliban and the Salafist
movements in Algeria and Iraq are movements
outside the framework of Islam. Their
relationship with Islam resembles George
Bush's relationship with democracy.
--Nawaf Musawi, Hezbollah's foreign affairs chief
Just like Stalin was a communist.
Boosh has Abe and Ike rolling in their graves.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Warming a cold fact? |
28 Feb 2007 11:04:55 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 12:59:25 -0800, Captain Compassion
<daranc@NOSPAMcharter.net> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 14:04:42 -0500, Jeffrey Turner
<jturner@localnet.com> wrote:
Captain Compassion wrote:
Warming a cold fact?
By Richard W. Rahn
February 27, 2007
http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20070226-090438-1111r.htm
Do you think those who have reservations about whether man is creating
global warming should lose their jobs and be denied the right to
present their views?
Over the last few months, there has been a concerted effort to silence
those who have doubts about global warming and man's effect on the
climate. The Oregon State climatologist was fired for disagreeing with
the "conventional wisdom." A meteorologist with the weather channel
demanded that dissenting views not be broadcast. CNN, in particular,
has treated skeptics with great disdain.
He's already admitted he's not a scientist. Obviously, according to
the Moonie Times and reality-denying conservatives, that makes him
qualified to comment on the work of hundreds of scientists who have
actually studied the world's climate. What nonsense.
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a
revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
Hmmmm.... these are times of universal deceit - or at least the
American version. Bush lied and people died. 200 yrs from now folks
will say that Bush lied and the earth died. You might wish to be
careful about who's telling the truth and who's lying.
WB Yeats
.
|
|
|
| User: "Captain Compassion" |
|
| Title: Re: Warming a cold fact? |
28 Feb 2007 11:07:22 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 17:04:55 GMT, wrote:
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 12:59:25 -0800, Captain Compassion
<daranc@NOSPAMcharter.net> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 14:04:42 -0500, Jeffrey Turner
<jturner@localnet.com> wrote:
Captain Compassion wrote:
Warming a cold fact?
By Richard W. Rahn
February 27, 2007
http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20070226-090438-1111r.htm
Do you think those who have reservations about whether man is creating
global warming should lose their jobs and be denied the right to
present their views?
Over the last few months, there has been a concerted effort to silence
those who have doubts about global warming and man's effect on the
climate. The Oregon State climatologist was fired for disagreeing with
the "conventional wisdom." A meteorologist with the weather channel
demanded that dissenting views not be broadcast. CNN, in particular,
has treated skeptics with great disdain.
He's already admitted he's not a scientist. Obviously, according to
the Moonie Times and reality-denying conservatives, that makes him
qualified to comment on the work of hundreds of scientists who have
actually studied the world's climate. What nonsense.
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a
revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
Hmmmm.... these are times of universal deceit - or at least the
American version. Bush lied and people died. 200 yrs from now folks
will say that Bush lied and the earth died. You might wish to be
careful about who's telling the truth and who's lying.
The topic is global warming hysteria. Bush has no way to effect
earth's climate.
--
There may come a time when the CO2 police will wander the earth telling
the poor and the dispossed how many dung chips they can put on their
cook fires. -- Captain Compassion.
Wherever I go it will be well with me, for it was well with me here, not
on account of the place, but of my judgments which I shall carry away
with me, for no one can deprive me of these; on the contrary, they alone
are my property, and cannot be taken away, and to possess them suffices
me wherever I am or whatever I do. -- EPICTETUS
"Civilization is the interval between Ice Ages." -- Will Durant.
"Progress is the increasing control of the environment by life.
--Will Durant
Joseph R. Darancette
daranc@NOSPAMverizon.net
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jeffrey Turner" |
|
| Title: Re: Warming a cold fact? |
01 Mar 2007 11:22:30 AM |
|
|
Captain Compassion wrote:
On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 17:04:55 GMT, wrote:
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 12:59:25 -0800, Captain Compassion
<daranc@NOSPAMcharter.net> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 14:04:42 -0500, Jeffrey Turner
<jturner@localnet.com> wrote:
Captain Compassion wrote:
Warming a cold fact?
By Richard W. Rahn
February 27, 2007
http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20070226-090438-1111r.htm
Do you think those who have reservations about whether man is creating
global warming should lose their jobs and be denied the right to
present their views?
Over the last few months, there has been a concerted effort to silence
those who have doubts about global warming and man's effect on the
climate. The Oregon State climatologist was fired for disagreeing with
the "conventional wisdom." A meteorologist with the weather channel
demanded that dissenting views not be broadcast. CNN, in particular,
has treated skeptics with great disdain.
He's already admitted he's not a scientist. Obviously, according to
the Moonie Times and reality-denying conservatives, that makes him
qualified to comment on the work of hundreds of scientists who have
actually studied the world's climate. What nonsense.
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a
revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
Hmmmm.... these are times of universal deceit - or at least the
American version. Bush lied and people died. 200 yrs from now folks
will say that Bush lied and the earth died. You might wish to be
careful about who's telling the truth and who's lying.
The topic is global warming hysteria. Bush has no way to effect
earth's climate.
Sure. A politician who isn't full of hot air.
--Jeff
--
Al Qaeda and the Taliban and the Salafist
movements in Algeria and Iraq are movements
outside the framework of Islam. Their
relationship with Islam resembles George
Bush's relationship with democracy.
--Nawaf Musawi, Hezbollah's foreign affairs chief
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jerry Kraus" |
|
| Title: Re: Warming a cold fact? |
01 Mar 2007 03:10:34 PM |
|
|
On Mar 1, 11:22 am, Jeffrey Turner <jtur...@localnet.com> wrote:
Captain Compassion wrote:
On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 17:04:55 GMT, wrote:
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 12:59:25 -0800, Captain Compassion
<dar...@NOSPAMcharter.net> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 14:04:42 -0500, Jeffrey Turner
<jtur...@localnet.com> wrote:
Captain Compassion wrote:
Warming a cold fact?
By Richard W. Rahn
February 27, 2007
http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20070226-090438-1111r.htm
Do you think those who have reservations about whether man is creating
global warming should lose their jobs and be denied the right to
present their views?
Over the last few months, there has been a concerted effort to silence
those who have doubts about global warming and man's effect on the
climate. The Oregon State climatologist was fired for disagreeing with
the "conventional wisdom." A meteorologist with the weather channel
demanded that dissenting views not be broadcast. CNN, in particular,
has treated skeptics with great disdain.
He's already admitted he's not a scientist. Obviously, according to
the Moonie Times and reality-denying conservatives, that makes him
qualified to comment on the work of hundreds of scientists who have
actually studied the world's climate. What nonsense.
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a
revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
Hmmmm.... these are times of universal deceit - or at least the
American version. Bush lied and people died. 200 yrs from now folks
will say that Bush lied and the earth died. You might wish to be
careful about who's telling the truth and who's lying.
The topic is global warming hysteria. Bush has no way to effect
earth's climate.
Sure. A politician who isn't full of hot air.
--Jeff
--
Al Qaeda and the Taliban and the Salafist
movements in Algeria and Iraq are movements
outside the framework of Islam. Their
relationship with Islam resembles George
Bush's relationship with democracy.
--Nawaf Musawi, Hezbollah's foreign affairs chief- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Do global warming supporters have anything other than rhetoric to
offer in support of their contentions? You certainly don't.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jeffrey Turner" |
|
| Title: Re: Warming a cold fact? |
02 Mar 2007 07:39:06 PM |
|
|
Jerry Kraus wrote:
On Mar 1, 11:22 am, Jeffrey Turner <jtur...@localnet.com> wrote:
Captain Compassion wrote:
On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 17:04:55 GMT, wrote:
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 12:59:25 -0800, Captain Compassion
<dar...@NOSPAMcharter.net> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 14:04:42 -0500, Jeffrey Turner
<jtur...@localnet.com> wrote:
Captain Compassion wrote:
Warming a cold fact?
By Richard W. Rahn
February 27, 2007
http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20070226-090438-1111r.htm
Do you think those who have reservations about whether man is creating
global warming should lose their jobs and be denied the right to
present their views?
Over the last few months, there has been a concerted effort to silence
those who have doubts about global warming and man's effect on the
climate. The Oregon State climatologist was fired for disagreeing with
the "conventional wisdom." A meteorologist with the weather channel
demanded that dissenting views not be broadcast. CNN, in particular,
has treated skeptics with great disdain.
He's already admitted he's not a scientist. Obviously, according to
the Moonie Times and reality-denying conservatives, that makes him
qualified to comment on the work of hundreds of scientists who have
actually studied the world's climate. What nonsense.
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a
revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
Hmmmm.... these are times of universal deceit - or at least the
American version. Bush lied and people died. 200 yrs from now folks
will say that Bush lied and the earth died. You might wish to be
careful about who's telling the truth and who's lying.
The topic is global warming hysteria. Bush has no way to effect
earth's climate.
Sure. A politician who isn't full of hot air.
--Jeff
--
Al Qaeda and the Taliban and the Salafist
movements in Algeria and Iraq are movements
outside the framework of Islam. Their
relationship with Islam resembles George
Bush's relationship with democracy.
--Nawaf Musawi, Hezbollah's foreign affairs chief- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Do global warming supporters have anything other than rhetoric to
offer in support of their contentions? You certainly don't.
June 7, 2001
Panel Tells Bush Global Warming Is Getting Worse
By KATHARINE Q. SEELYE with ANDREW C. REVKIN
WASHINGTON, June 6 — A panel of top American scientists declared today
that global warming was a real problem and was getting worse, a
conclusion that may lead President Bush to change his stand on the issue
as he heads next week to Europe, where the United States is seen as a
major source of the air pollution held responsible for climate change.
In a much-anticipated report from the National Academy of Sciences, 11
leading atmospheric scientists, including previous skeptics about global
warming, reaffirmed the mainstream scientific view that the earth's
atmosphere was getting warmer and that human activity was largely
responsible.
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/07/science/07WARM.html?ex=1172984400&en=faa15d9b7365a3c8&ei=5070
--
The most extravagant idea that can arise
in a politician's head is to believe that
it is enough for a people to invade a
foreign county to make it adopt their laws
and their constitution. No one loves armed
missionaries... --Robespierre
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Warming a cold fact? |
02 Mar 2007 09:39:49 AM |
|
|
On 1 Mar 2007 13:10:34 -0800, "Jerry Kraus" <jkraus_1999@yahoo.com>
wrote:
On Mar 1, 11:22 am, Jeffrey Turner <jtur...@localnet.com> wrote:
Captain Compassion wrote:
On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 17:04:55 GMT, wrote:
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 12:59:25 -0800, Captain Compassion
<dar...@NOSPAMcharter.net> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 14:04:42 -0500, Jeffrey Turner
<jtur...@localnet.com> wrote:
Captain Compassion wrote:
Warming a cold fact?
By Richard W. Rahn
February 27, 2007
http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20070226-090438-1111r.htm
Do you think those who have reservations about whether man is creating
global warming should lose their jobs and be denied the right to
present their views?
Over the last few months, there has been a concerted effort to silence
those who have doubts about global warming and man's effect on the
climate. The Oregon State climatologist was fired for disagreeing with
the "conventional wisdom." A meteorologist with the weather channel
demanded that dissenting views not be broadcast. CNN, in particular,
has treated skeptics with great disdain.
He's already admitted he's not a scientist. Obviously, according to
the Moonie Times and reality-denying conservatives, that makes him
qualified to comment on the work of hundreds of scientists who have
actually studied the world's climate. What nonsense.
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a
revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
Hmmmm.... these are times of universal deceit - or at least the
American version. Bush lied and people died. 200 yrs from now folks
will say that Bush lied and the earth died. You might wish to be
careful about who's telling the truth and who's lying.
The topic is global warming hysteria. Bush has no way to effect
earth's climate.
Sure. A politician who isn't full of hot air.
--Jeff
--
Al Qaeda and the Taliban and the Salafist
movements in Algeria and Iraq are movements
outside the framework of Islam. Their
relationship with Islam resembles George
Bush's relationship with democracy.
--Nawaf Musawi, Hezbollah's foreign affairs chief- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Do global warming supporters have anything other than rhetoric to
offer in support of their contentions? You certainly don't.
Global warming supporters? It's not a matter of support but reality.
Science has now morphed into politics where the decisions as to what
to do will be discussed and debated. The vast majority of citizens and
scientists believe that warming is fact. The only debate is about
man's role in the process. Man's already created unbreathable air and
undrinkable water - what makes you think that he doesn't affect the
total environment?
WB Yeats
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jerry Kraus" |
|
| Title: Re: Warming a cold fact? |
02 Mar 2007 11:07:33 AM |
|
|
On Mar 2, 9:39 am, wrote:
On 1 Mar 2007 13:10:34 -0800, "Jerry Kraus" <jkraus_1...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
On Mar 1, 11:22 am, Jeffrey Turner <jtur...@localnet.com> wrote:
Captain Compassion wrote:
On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 17:04:55 GMT, wrote:
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 12:59:25 -0800, Captain Compassion
<dar...@NOSPAMcharter.net> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 14:04:42 -0500, Jeffrey Turner
<jtur...@localnet.com> wrote:
Captain Compassion wrote:
Warming a cold fact?
By Richard W. Rahn
February 27, 2007
http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20070226-090438-1111r.htm
Do you think those who have reservations about whether man is creating
global warming should lose their jobs and be denied the right to
present their views?
Over the last few months, there has been a concerted effort to silence
those who have doubts about global warming and man's effect on the
climate. The Oregon State climatologist was fired for disagreeing with
the "conventional wisdom." A meteorologist with the weather channel
demanded that dissenting views not be broadcast. CNN, in particular,
has treated skeptics with great disdain.
He's already admitted he's not a scientist. Obviously, according to
the Moonie Times and reality-denying conservatives, that makes him
qualified to comment on the work of hundreds of scientists who have
actually studied the world's climate. What nonsense.
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a
revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
Hmmmm.... these are times of universal deceit - or at least the
American version. Bush lied and people died. 200 yrs from now folks
will say that Bush lied and the earth died. You might wish to be
careful about who's telling the truth and who's lying.
The topic is global warming hysteria. Bush has no way to effect
earth's climate.
Sure. A politician who isn't full of hot air.
--Jeff
--
Al Qaeda and the Taliban and the Salafist
movements in Algeria and Iraq are movements
outside the framework of Islam. Their
relationship with Islam resembles George
Bush's relationship with democracy.
--Nawaf Musawi, Hezbollah's foreign affairs chief- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Do global warming supporters have anything other than rhetoric to
offer in support of their contentions? You certainly don't.
Global warming supporters? It's not a matter of support but reality.
Science has now morphed into politics where the decisions as to what
to do will be discussed and debated. The vast majority of citizens and
scientists believe that warming is fact. The only debate is about
man's role in the process. Man's already created unbreathable air and
undrinkable water - what makes you think that he doesn't affect the
total environment?
WB Yeats- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I suppose I'm a bit of an idealist, particularly with regard to
"science". To me, scientific fact should be clear, and untainted by
politics. There may be debate within the scientific community about
truth, but it shouldn't break down into a simple democratic vs.
republican, or left-wing vs right-wing issue, the way global warming
is. There appears to be far more politics than science in this
issue. Actually, I think this illustrates the broader problem of
science itself currently degenerating into more politics than truth.
I think the scientific method needs to be refined. That's a rather
vague statement, but it seems to fit the current situation.
Captain Compassion makes an excellent distinction between "hard-core
scientists" -- those interested in truth -- and "academics" --
effectively, university politicians interested exclusively in power
and control of ideas within the academic world. The question is, how
many hard-core scientists do we have left?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jeffrey Turner" |
|
| Title: Re: Warming a cold fact? |
02 Mar 2007 07:40:59 PM |
|
|
Jerry Kraus wrote:
On Mar 2, 9:39 am, wrote:
On 1 Mar 2007 13:10:34 -0800, "Jerry Kraus" <jkraus_1...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
On Mar 1, 11:22 am, Jeffrey Turner <jtur...@localnet.com> wrote:
Captain Compassion wrote:
On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 17:04:55 GMT, wrote:
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 12:59:25 -0800, Captain Compassion
<dar...@NOSPAMcharter.net> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 14:04:42 -0500, Jeffrey Turner
<jtur...@localnet.com> wrote:
Captain Compassion wrote:
Warming a cold fact?
By Richard W. Rahn
February 27, 2007
http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20070226-090438-1111r.htm
Do you think those who have reservations about whether man is creating
global warming should lose their jobs and be denied the right to
present their views?
Over the last few months, there has been a concerted effort to silence
those who have doubts about global warming and man's effect on the
climate. The Oregon State climatologist was fired for disagreeing with
the "conventional wisdom." A meteorologist with the weather channel
demanded that dissenting views not be broadcast. CNN, in particular,
has treated skeptics with great disdain.
He's already admitted he's not a scientist. Obviously, according to
the Moonie Times and reality-denying conservatives, that makes him
qualified to comment on the work of hundreds of scientists who have
actually studied the world's climate. What nonsense.
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a
revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
Hmmmm.... these are times of universal deceit - or at least the
American version. Bush lied and people died. 200 yrs from now folks
will say that Bush lied and the earth died. You might wish to be
careful about who's telling the truth and who's lying.
The topic is global warming hysteria. Bush has no way to effect
earth's climate.
Sure. A politician who isn't full of hot air.
--Jeff
--
Al Qaeda and the Taliban and the Salafist
movements in Algeria and Iraq are movements
outside the framework of Islam. Their
relationship with Islam resembles George
Bush's relationship with democracy.
--Nawaf Musawi, Hezbollah's foreign affairs chief- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Do global warming supporters have anything other than rhetoric to
offer in support of their contentions? You certainly don't.
Global warming supporters? It's not a matter of support but reality.
Science has now morphed into politics where the decisions as to what
to do will be discussed and debated. The vast majority of citizens and
scientists believe that warming is fact. The only debate is about
man's role in the process. Man's already created unbreathable air and
undrinkable water - what makes you think that he doesn't affect the
total environment?
WB Yeats- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I suppose I'm a bit of an idealist,
s/io/ealis/
particularly with regard to
"science". To me, scientific fact should be clear, and untainted by
politics.
So why are you trying to inject politics into science?
--Jeff
--
The most extravagant idea that can arise
in a politician's head is to believe that
it is enough for a people to invade a
foreign county to make it adopt their laws
and their constitution. No one loves armed
missionaries... --Robespierre
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jerry Kraus" |
|
| Title: Re: Warming a cold fact? |
03 Mar 2007 12:48:18 PM |
|
|
On Mar 2, 7:40 pm, Jeffrey Turner <jtur...@localnet.com> wrote:
Jerry Kraus wrote:
On Mar 2, 9:39 am, wrote:
On 1 Mar 2007 13:10:34 -0800, "Jerry Kraus" <jkraus_1...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
On Mar 1, 11:22 am, Jeffrey Turner <jtur...@localnet.com> wrote:
Captain Compassion wrote:
On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 17:04:55 GMT, wrote:
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 12:59:25 -0800, Captain Compassion
<dar...@NOSPAMcharter.net> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 14:04:42 -0500, Jeffrey Turner
<jtur...@localnet.com> wrote:
Captain Compassion wrote:
Warming a cold fact?
By Richard W. Rahn
February 27, 2007
http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20070226-090438-1111r.htm
Do you think those who have reservations about whether man is creating
global warming should lose their jobs and be denied the right to
present their views?
Over the last few months, there has been a concerted effort to silence
those who have doubts about global warming and man's effect on the
climate. The Oregon State climatologist was fired for disagreeing with
the "conventional wisdom." A meteorologist with the weather channel
demanded that dissenting views not be broadcast. CNN, in particular,
has treated skeptics with great disdain.
He's already admitted he's not a scientist. Obviously, according to
the Moonie Times and reality-denying conservatives, that makes him
qualified to comment on the work of hundreds of scientists who have
actually studied the world's climate. What nonsense.
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a
revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
Hmmmm.... these are times of universal deceit - or at least the
American version. Bush lied and people died. 200 yrs from now folks
will say that Bush lied and the earth died. You might wish to be
careful about who's telling the truth and who's lying.
The topic is global warming hysteria. Bush has no way to effect
earth's climate.
Sure. A politician who isn't full of hot air.
--Jeff
--
Al Qaeda and the Taliban and the Salafist
movements in Algeria and Iraq are movements
outside the framework of Islam. Their
relationship with Islam resembles George
Bush's relationship with democracy.
--Nawaf Musawi, Hezbollah's foreign affairs chief- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Do global warming supporters have anything other than rhetoric to
offer in support of their contentions? You certainly don't.
Global warming supporters? It's not a matter of support but reality.
Science has now morphed into politics where the decisions as to what
to do will be discussed and debated. The vast majority of citizens and
scientists believe that warming is fact. The only debate is about
man's role in the process. Man's already created unbreathable air and
undrinkable water - what makes you think that he doesn't affect the
total environment?
WB Yeats- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I suppose I'm a bit of an idealist,
s/io/ealis/
particularly with regard to
"science". To me, scientific fact should be clear, and untainted by
politics.
So why are you trying to inject politics into science?
--Jeff
--
The most extravagant idea that can arise
in a politician's head is to believe that
it is enough for a people to invade a
foreign county to make it adopt their laws
and their constitution. No one loves armed
missionaries... --Robespierre- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
It's impossible to discuss global warming without discussing
politics. That's the point.
Even highly controversial issues, in which the business community's
interests were radically affected -- e.g., lung cancer from tabacco,
cancer from asbestos, mad cow disease from infected cattle -- have
resulted in clear predictions and prompt and effective action. There
is no such concensus here. Just endless research, most of it at
public expense. Why do you think this issue is so popular with
scientists? They're paid to research it ad infinitum. It is a
research grant rainmaker. THEY LOVE IT!!!
If the disasterous consequences of global warming were clear, and the
solutions straightforward, there would be prompt action. They
aren't. All we have is debate and endless, pointless research. It is
a total waste of time and money, on pseudo-science.
Air quality IS a legitimate issue. Air pollution is bad for our
health, and for agricultural production. But it is not an apocalyptic
issue: a world-ending, sky-is-falling, attention grabbing issue of the
type that will get scientists money for their laboratories.
Scientists have cynically hooked their wagon to the Green-Party
environmental bandwagon simply to attract money to their
laboratories. The better ones are well aware that this is nonsense,
whatever they are saying publicly. Vague, general statements such as
"global warming is a real problem, and is getting worse," are not
science. And scientists know it. They could just as easily said
"Hemorrhoids are a real problem, and are getting worse." It would be
equally accurate, and equally meaningless.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jeffrey Turner" |
|
| Title: Re: Warming a cold fact? |
03 Mar 2007 10:25:15 PM |
|
|
Jerry Kraus wrote:
On Mar 2, 7:40 pm, Jeffrey Turner <jtur...@localnet.com> wrote:
Jerry Kraus wrote:
On Mar 2, 9:39 am, wrote:
On 1 Mar 2007 13:10:34 -0800, "Jerry Kraus" <jkraus_1...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
On Mar 1, 11:22 am, Jeffrey Turner <jtur...@localnet.com> wrote:
Captain Compassion wrote:
On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 17:04:55 GMT, wrote:
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 12:59:25 -0800, Captain Compassion
<dar...@NOSPAMcharter.net> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 14:04:42 -0500, Jeffrey Turner
<jtur...@localnet.com> wrote:
Captain Compassion wrote:
Warming a cold fact?
By Richard W. Rahn
February 27, 2007
http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20070226-090438-1111r.htm
Do you think those who have reservations about whether man is creating
global warming should lose their jobs and be denied the right to
present their views?
Over the last few months, there has been a concerted effort to silence
those who have doubts about global warming and man's effect on the
climate. The Oregon State climatologist was fired for disagreeing with
the "conventional wisdom." A meteorologist with the weather channel
demanded that dissenting views not be broadcast. CNN, in particular,
has treated skeptics with great disdain.
He's already admitted he's not a scientist. Obviously, according to
the Moonie Times and reality-denying conservatives, that makes him
qualified to comment on the work of hundreds of scientists who have
actually studied the world's climate. What nonsense.
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a
revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
Hmmmm.... these are times of universal deceit - or at least the
American version. Bush lied and people died. 200 yrs from now folks
will say that Bush lied and the earth died. You might wish to be
careful about who's telling the truth and who's lying.
The topic is global warming hysteria. Bush has no way to effect
earth's climate.
Sure. A politician who isn't full of hot air.
--Jeff
--
Al Qaeda and the Taliban and the Salafist
movements in Algeria and Iraq are movements
outside the framework of Islam. Their
relationship with Islam resembles George
Bush's relationship with democracy.
--Nawaf Musawi, Hezbollah's foreign affairs chief- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Do global warming supporters have anything other than rhetoric to
offer in support of their contentions? You certainly don't.
Global warming supporters? It's not a matter of support but reality.
Science has now morphed into politics where the decisions as to what
to do will be discussed and debated. The vast majority of citizens and
scientists believe that warming is fact. The only debate is about
man's role in the process. Man's already created unbreathable air and
undrinkable water - what makes you think that he doesn't affect the
total environment?
WB Yeats- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I suppose I'm a bit of an idealist,
s/io/ealis/
particularly with regard to
"science". To me, scientific fact should be clear, and untainted by
politics.
So why are you trying to inject politics into science?
--Jeff
--
The most extravagant idea that can arise
in a politician's head is to believe that
it is enough for a people to invade a
foreign county to make it adopt their laws
and their constitution. No one loves armed
missionaries... --Robespierre- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
It's impossible to discuss global warming without discussing
politics. That's the point.
Scientists do it all the time.
Even highly controversial issues, in which the business community's
interests were radically affected -- e.g., lung cancer from tabacco,
cancer from asbestos, mad cow disease from infected cattle -- have
resulted in clear predictions and prompt and effective action.
Prompt? You're living in an alternate universe.
There
is no such concensus here.
Wrong again.
Just endless research, most of it at
public expense. Why do you think this issue is so popular with
scientists? They're paid to research it ad infinitum. It is a
research grant rainmaker. THEY LOVE IT!!!
Maybe the ones living off of Exxon/Mobil's record profits. When Bush
sets up a panel from the National Academy of Sciences, including a
number of skeptics, they aren't being paid to lie that global warming
is happening.
If the disasterous consequences of global warming were clear, and the
solutions straightforward, there would be prompt action. They
aren't. All we have is debate and endless, pointless research. It is
a total waste of time and money, on pseudo-science.
Ah, now you're confusing policy with science. You want a pretty little
pill that won't be hard to swallow and will make global warming go away.
Since that isn't in the cards, you will deny that global warming is
happening.
Air quality IS a legitimate issue. Air pollution is bad for our
health, and for agricultural production. But it is not an apocalyptic
issue: a world-ending, sky-is-falling, attention grabbing issue of the
type that will get scientists money for their laboratories.
Scientists have cynically hooked their wagon to the Green-Party
environmental bandwagon simply to attract money to their
laboratories.
You're delusional. The Green Party is hardly overflowing with cash.
You don't seem to understand politics or science.
The better ones are well aware that this is nonsense,
The ones getting paid by Exxon/Mobil? Or the one or two others?
whatever they are saying publicly. Vague, general statements such as
"global warming is a real problem, and is getting worse," are not
science. And scientists know it. They could just as easily said
"Hemorrhoids are a real problem, and are getting worse." It would be
equally accurate, and equally meaningless.
Why don't you learn science, rather than listening to shills with a
fiduciary interest in denying global warming?
--Jeff
--
The most extravagant idea that can arise
in a politician's head is to believe that
it is enough for a people to invade a
foreign county to make it adopt their laws
and their constitution. No one loves armed
missionaries... --Robespierre
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jerry Kraus" |
|
| Title: Re: Warming a cold fact? |
04 Mar 2007 04:31:02 PM |
|
|
On Mar 3, 10:25 pm, Jeffrey Turner <jtur...@localnet.com> wrote:
Jerry Kraus wrote:
On Mar 2, 7:40 pm, Jeffrey Turner <jtur...@localnet.com> wrote:
Jerry Kraus wrote:
On Mar 2, 9:39 am, wrote:
On 1 Mar 2007 13:10:34 -0800, "Jerry Kraus" <jkraus_1...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
On Mar 1, 11:22 am, Jeffrey Turner <jtur...@localnet.com> wrote:
Captain Compassion wrote:
On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 17:04:55 GMT, wrote:
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 12:59:25 -0800, Captain Compassion
<dar...@NOSPAMcharter.net> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 14:04:42 -0500, Jeffrey Turner
<jtur...@localnet.com> wrote:
Captain Compassion wrote:
Warming a cold fact?
By Richard W. Rahn
February 27, 2007
http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20070226-090438-1111r.htm
Do you think those who have reservations about whether man is creating
global warming should lose their jobs and be denied the right to
present their views?
Over the last few months, there has been a concerted effort to silence
those who have doubts about global warming and man's effect on the
climate. The Oregon State climatologist was fired for disagreeing with
the "conventional wisdom." A meteorologist with the weather channel
demanded that dissenting views not be broadcast. CNN, in particular,
has treated skeptics with great disdain.
He's already admitted he's not a scientist. Obviously, according to
the Moonie Times and reality-denying conservatives, that makes him
qualified to comment on the work of hundreds of scientists who have
actually studied the world's climate. What nonsense.
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a
revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
Hmmmm.... these are times of universal deceit - or at least the
American version. Bush lied and people died. 200 yrs from now folks
will say that Bush lied and the earth died. You might wish to be
careful about who's telling the truth and who's lying.
The topic is global warming hysteria. Bush has no way to effect
earth's climate.
Sure. A politician who isn't full of hot air.
--Jeff
--
Al Qaeda and the Taliban and the Salafist
movements in Algeria and Iraq are movements
outside the framework of Islam. Their
relationship with Islam resembles George
Bush's relationship with democracy.
--Nawaf Musawi, Hezbollah's foreign affairs chief- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Do global warming supporters have anything other than rhetoric to
offer in support of their contentions? You certainly don't.
Global warming supporters? It's not a matter of support but reality.
Science has now morphed into politics where the decisions as to what
to do will be discussed and debated. The vast majority of citizens and
scientists believe that warming is fact. The only debate is about
man's role in the process. Man's already created unbreathable air and
undrinkable water - what makes you think that he doesn't affect the
total environment?
WB Yeats- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I suppose I'm a bit of an idealist,
s/io/ealis/
particularly with regard to
"science". To me, scientific fact should be clear, and untainted by
politics.
So why are you trying to inject politics into science?
--Jeff
--
The most extravagant idea that can arise
in a politician's head is to believe that
it is enough for a people to invade a
foreign county to make it adopt their laws
and their constitution. No one loves armed
missionaries... --Robespierre- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
It's impossible to discuss global warming without discussing
politics. That's the point.
Scientists do it all the time.
Even highly controversial issues, in which the business community's
interests were radically affected -- e.g., lung cancer from tabacco,
cancer from asbestos, mad cow disease from infected cattle -- have
resulted in clear predictions and prompt and effective action.
Prompt? You're living in an alternate universe.
There
is no such concensus here.
Wrong again.
Just endless research, most of it at
public expense. Why do you think this issue is so popular with
scientists? They're paid to research it ad infinitum. It is a
research grant rainmaker. THEY LOVE IT!!!
Maybe the ones living off of Exxon/Mobil's record profits. When Bush
sets up a panel from the National Academy of Sciences, including a
number of skeptics, they aren't being paid to lie that global warming
is happening.
If the disasterous consequences of global warming were clear, and the
solutions straightforward, there would be prompt action. They
aren't. All we have is debate and endless, pointless research. It is
a total waste of time and money, on pseudo-science.
Ah, now you're confusing policy with science. You want a pretty little
pill that won't be hard to swallow and will make global warming go away.
Since that isn't in the cards, you will deny that global warming is
happening.
Air quality IS a legitimate issue. Air pollution is bad for our
health, and for agricultural production. But it is not an apocalyptic
issue: a world-ending, sky-is-falling, attention grabbing issue of the
type that will get scientists money for their laboratories.
Scientists have cynically hooked their wagon to the Green-Party
environmental bandwagon simply to attract money to their
laboratories.
You're delusional. The Green Party is hardly overflowing with cash.
You don't seem to understand politics or science.
The better ones are well aware that this is nonsense,
The ones getting paid by Exxon/Mobil? Or the one or two others?
whatever they are saying publicly. Vague, general statements such as
"global warming is a real problem, and is getting worse," are not
science. And scientists know it. They could just as easily said
"Hemorrhoids are a real problem, and are getting worse." It would be
equally accurate, and equally meaningless.
Why don't you learn science, rather than listening to shills with a
fiduciary interest in denying global warming?
--Jeff
--
The most extravagant idea that can arise
in a politician's head is to believe that
it is enough for a people to invade a
foreign county to make it adopt their laws
and their constitution. No one loves armed
missionaries... --Robespierre- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
By "learn science", I assume you mean agree with whatever happens to
be the most popular view among professional scientists at a given
time. Thankyou, I'd rather think for myself. I realize that the
most
terrifying thing to the professional scientific community is
independant thought. It undermines their control, and their
livelihood. My apologies. I will continue to think for myself, as
will the majority of the population, the professional scientific
community's wishes notwithstanding.
Since, you seem to acknowledge, at any rate, that there is no clear
solution, even if you believe there is a problem, you confirm the
reason for this "problem's" popularity. It implies unending research
funding to find a "solution". This is fraud, and this is what
professional scientists are best at. A very straightforward solution
to ALL of our environmental and energy problems would be controlled
nuclear fusion. The professional physics community have spent 60
years and untold tens of billions failing miserably to make any
progress on this very necessary technology, whatsoever. Why not add
"global warming solutions" to the list of open-ended research
projects
that scientists can devote their careers to failing to solve? The
more the merrier. It's only money.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jeffrey Turner" |
|
| Title: Re: Warming a cold fact? |
06 Mar 2007 10:42:02 AM |
|
|
Jerry Kraus wrote:
On Mar 3, 10:25 pm, Jeffrey Turner <jtur...@localnet.com> wrote:
Jerry Kraus wrote:
On Mar 2, 7:40 pm, Jeffrey Turner <jtur...@localnet.com> wrote:
Jerry Kraus wrote:
On Mar 2, 9:39 am, wrote:
On 1 Mar 2007 13:10:34 -0800, "Jerry Kraus" <jkraus_1...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
On Mar 1, 11:22 am, Jeffrey Turner <jtur...@localnet.com> wrote:
Captain Compassion wrote:
On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 17:04:55 GMT, wrote:
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 12:59:25 -0800, Captain Compassion
<dar...@NOSPAMcharter.net> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 14:04:42 -0500, Jeffrey Turner
<jtur...@localnet.com> wrote:
Captain Compassion wrote:
Warming a cold fact?
By Richard W. Rahn
February 27, 2007
http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20070226-090438-1111r.htm
Do you think those who have reservations about whether man is creating
global warming should lose their jobs and be denied the right to
present their views?
Over the last few months, there has been a concerted effort to silence
those who have doubts about global warming and man's effect on the
climate. The Oregon State climatologist was fired for disagreeing with
the "conventional wisdom." A meteorologist with the weather channel
demanded that dissenting views not be broadcast. CNN, in particular,
has treated skeptics with great disdain.
He's already admitted he's not a scientist. Obviously, according to
the Moonie Times and reality-denying conservatives, that makes him
qualified to comment on the work of hundreds of scientists who have
actually studied the world's climate. What nonsense.
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a
revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
Hmmmm.... these are times of universal deceit - or at least the
American version. Bush lied and people died. 200 yrs from now folks
will say that Bush lied and the earth died. You might wish to be
careful about who's telling the truth and who's lying.
The topic is global warming hysteria. Bush has no way to effect
earth's climate.
Sure. A politician who isn't full of hot air.
--Jeff
--
Al Qaeda and the Taliban and the Salafist
movements in Algeria and Iraq are movements
outside the framework of Islam. Their
relationship with Islam resembles George
Bush's relationship with democracy.
--Nawaf Musawi, Hezbollah's foreign affairs chief- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Do global warming supporters have anything other than rhetoric to
offer in support of their contentions? You certainly don't.
Global warming supporters? It's not a matter of support but reality.
Science has now morphed into politics where the decisions as to what
to do will be discussed and debated. The vast majority of citizens and
scientists believe that warming is fact. The only debate is about
man's role in the process. Man's already created unbreathable air and
undrinkable water - what makes you think that he doesn't affect the
total environment?
WB Yeats- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I suppose I'm a bit of an idealist,
s/io/ealis/
particularly with regard to
"science". To me, scientific fact should be clear, and untainted by
politics.
So why are you trying to inject politics into science?
--Jeff
--
The most extravagant idea that can arise
in a politician's head is to believe that
it is enough for a people to invade a
foreign county to make it adopt their laws
and their constitution. No one loves armed
missionaries... --Robespierre- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
It's impossible to discuss global warming without discussing
politics. That's the point.
Scientists do it all the time.
Even highly controversial issues, in which the business community's
interests were radically affected -- e.g., lung cancer from tabacco,
cancer from asbestos, mad cow disease from infected cattle -- have
resulted in clear predictions and prompt and effective action.
Prompt? You're living in an alternate universe.
There
is no such concensus here.
Wrong again.
Just endless research, most of it at
public expense. Why do you think this issue is so popular with
scientists? They're paid to research it ad infinitum. It is a
research grant rainmaker. THEY LOVE IT!!!
Maybe the ones living off of Exxon/Mobil's record profits. When Bush
sets up a panel from the National Academy of Sciences, including a
number of skeptics, they aren't being paid to lie that global warming
is happening.
If the disasterous consequences of global warming were clear, and the
solutions straightforward, there would be prompt action. They
aren't. All we have is debate and endless, pointless research. It is
a total waste of time and money, on pseudo-science.
Ah, now you're confusing policy with science. You want a pretty little
pill that won't be hard to swallow and will make global warming go away.
Since that isn't in the cards, you will deny that global warming is
happening.
Air quality IS a legitimate issue. Air pollution is bad for our
health, and for agricultural production. But it is not an apocalyptic
issue: a world-ending, sky-is-falling, attention grabbing issue of the
type that will get scientists money for their laboratories.
Scientists have cynically hooked their wagon to the Green-Party
environmental bandwagon simply to attract money to their
laboratories.
You're delusional. The Green Party is hardly overflowing with cash.
You don't seem to understand politics or science.
The better ones are well aware that this is nonsense,
The ones getting paid by Exxon/Mobil? Or the one or two others?
whatever they are saying publicly. Vague, general statements such as
"global warming is a real problem, and is getting worse," are not
science. And scientists know it. They could just as easily said
"Hemorrhoids are a real problem, and are getting worse." It would be
equally accurate, and equally meaningless.
Why don't you learn science, rather than listening to shills with a
fiduciary interest in denying global warming?
--Jeff
--
The most extravagant idea that can arise
in a politician's head is to believe that
it is enough for a people to invade a
foreign county to make it adopt their laws
and their constitution. No one loves armed
missionaries... --Robespierre- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
By "learn science", I assume you mean agree with whatever happens to
be the most popular view among professional scientists at a given
time.
No. You don't have a clue about how science works or what's involved
so you listen to charlatans about scientific issues.
Thankyou, I'd rather think for myself.
Tell me when you're ready to start.
I realize that the most
terrifying thing to the professional scientific community is
independant thought.
More nonsense about science.
It undermines their control, and their
livelihood. My apologies. I will continue to think for myself, as
will the majority of the population, the professional scientific
community's wishes notwithstanding.
Sounds like you're talking about a religious priesthood, not the
scientific community.
Since, you seem to acknowledge, at any rate, that there is no clear
solution, even if you believe there is a problem, you confirm the
reason for this "problem's" popularity. It implies unending research
funding to find a "solution". This is fraud, and this is what
professional scientists are best at. A very straightforward solution
to ALL of our environmental and energy problems would be controlled
nuclear fusion. The professional physics community have spent 60
years and untold tens of billions
C'mon, tell us.
failing miserably to make any
progress on this very necessary technology, whatsoever. Why not add
"global warming solutions" to the list of open-ended research
projects
that scientists can devote their careers to failing to solve? The
more the merrier. It's only money.
It's only nonsense you're spouting. Come back when you have real
facts and figures.
--Jeff
--
The most extravagant idea that can arise
in a politician's head is to believe that
it is enough for a people to invade a
foreign county to make it adopt their laws
and their constitution. No one loves armed
missionaries... --Robespierre
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jerry Kraus" |
|
| Title: Re: Warming a cold fact? |
06 Mar 2007 11:57:46 AM |
|
|
By "learn science", I assume you mean agree with whatever happens to
be the most popular view among professional scientists at a given
time.
No. You don't have a clue about how science works or what's involved
so you listen to charlatans about scientific issues.
Thankyou, I'd rather think for myself.
Tell me when you're ready to start.
I realize that the most
terrifying thing to the professional scientific community is
independant thought.
More nonsense about science.
It undermines their control, and their
livelihood. My apologies. I will continue to think for myself, as
will the majority of the population, the professional scientific
community's wishes notwithstanding.
Sounds like you're talking about a religious priesthood, not the
scientific community.
Since, you seem to acknowledge, at any rate, that there is no clear
solution, even if you believe there is a problem, you confirm the
reason for this "problem's" popularity. It implies unending research
funding to find a "solution". This is fraud, and this is what
professional scientists are best at. A very straightforward solution
to ALL of our environmental and energy problems would be controlled
nuclear fusion. The professional physics community have spent 60
years and untold tens of billions
C'mon, tell us.
failing miserably to make any
progress on this very necessary technology, whatsoever. Why not add
"global warming solutions" to the list of open-ended research
projects
that scientists can devote their careers to failing to solve? The
more the merrier. It's only money.
It's only nonsense you're spouting. Come back when you have real
facts and figures.
--Jeff
--
The most extravagant idea that can arise
in a politician's head is to believe that
it is enough for a people to invade a
foreign county to make it adopt their laws
and their constitution. No one loves armed
missionaries... --Robespierre- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Fair enough. Here's the latest scam nuclear fusion project. A mere
13 billion dollars. But it will create "10,000 jobs"!!! Yes, we
know. No specific predictions of practical applications. Vague
predictions of developments by mid-21st century. Possibly. "If the
project is successful" FOR 13 BILLION DOLLARS!!?? "IF THE PROJECT
IS SUCCESSFUL"!!!!!???
http://www.wanttoknow.info/050629nuclearfusionreactor
This is the kind of garbage that the global warming scientist-frauds
wish to sponsor. It's called tenure. Job Security. Pure Scamming.
By the way, this is not a right-wing view. Greenpeace thoroughly
agrees with it.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4629239.stm
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jerry Kraus" |
|
| Title: Re: Warming a cold fact? |
06 Mar 2007 11:54:24 AM |
|
|
On Mar 6, 10:42 am, Jeffrey Turner <jtur...@localnet.com> wrote:
Jerry Kraus wrote:
On Mar 3, 10:25 pm, Jeffrey Turner <jtur...@localnet.com> wrote:
Jerry Kraus wrote:
On Mar 2, 7:40 pm, Jeffrey Turner <jtur...@localnet.com> wrote:
Jerry Kraus wrote:
On Mar 2, 9:39 am, wrote:
On 1 Mar 2007 13:10:34 -0800, "Jerry Kraus" <jkraus_1...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
On Mar 1, 11:22 am, Jeffrey Turner <jtur...@localnet.com> wrote:
Captain Compassion wrote:
On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 17:04:55 GMT, wrote:
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 12:59:25 -0800, Captain Compassion
<dar...@NOSPAMcharter.net> wrote:
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 14:04:42 -0500, Jeffrey Turner
<jtur...@localnet.com> wrote:
Captain Compassion wrote:
Warming a cold fact?
By Richard W. Rahn
February 27, 2007
http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20070226-090438-1111r.htm
Do you think those who have reservations about whether man is creating
global warming should lose their jobs and be denied the right to
present their views?
Over the last few months, there has been a concerted effort to silence
those who have doubts about global warming and man's effect on the
climate. The Oregon State climatologist was fired for disagreeing with
the "conventional wisdom." A meteorologist with the weather channel
demanded that dissenting views not be broadcast. CNN, in particular,
has treated skeptics with great disdain.
He's already admitted he's not a scientist. Obviously, according to
the Moonie Times and reality-denying conservatives, that makes him
qualified to comment on the work of hundreds of scientists who have
actually studied the world's climate. What nonsense.
"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
