‘Living proof’
Regarding syndicated columnist George Will’s Rocky Mountain News column of April 29, “Apocalyptic Dust Bowl era was the real thing”: If this 1930s event occurred today, the proponents of catastrophic events happening because of global warming would have undeniable “living proof” that our robust activity since the Industrial Revolution caused global warming which caused the dust bowl to occur.
Richard E. Bennett, Denver
I wish I knew what your point is, Mr. Bennett. I expect you are aware that the man contributed significantly to the dust bowl because of farming practices. Man did not cause the dust bowl, but contributed to it. Man does not cause global warming, but contributes to it. Governments, corporations, the population, even religions are falling in behind the scientists in droves, and not because they are getting more grant money. The contrast between what so many forum posters say and what most of the rest of the world says is deafening.
Are you really so slow that you don't understand his point?
So quit breathing, Truth. You're contributing to global warming. No, hurry up and get in line or you'll lose your spot.
So, because others in the world say something, that makes it correct? If I recall, most people thought the world was flat at one time.
Nope, no debate here. "We've reached concensus on this so just shut up about it, will you?"
Posted by RU Serious on May 14, 2007 10:52 AMAre you really so slow that you don't understand his point?
So quit breathing, Truth. You're contributing to global warming. Now, hurry up and get in line or you'll lose your spot.
So, because others in the world say something, that makes it correct? If I recall, most people thought the world was flat at one time.
Nope, no debate here. "We've reached concensus on this so just shut up about it, will you?"
Posted by RU Serious on May 14, 2007 10:52 AMYou truth: Sadly I must confess to a bit of levity reproach to your post creates revealing that within me there must exist a bit of sadism. I will purge myself of the comfort. Me, your friendly deicide intelligent enough to be an atheist but not sufficiently courages to be one of those guys all dressed up with nowhere to go.
Posted by Richard Grimes Risen Ape r22037@yahoo.com (ffrf.org) on May 14, 2007 11:07 AMKeith: You have been labeled as follows by the commentator. You need to clean up your act. We do not want to lose you. I will remain anonymous.
The insufferable Keith (can he be more than 14 years old?) has included you among the commenters he accuses of being prostitutes -- as long as he keeps his language clean, I'm leaving those comments, but if you think it is worth objecting to, let me know.
Keith: You have been labeled as follows by the commentator. You need to clean up your act. We do not want to lose you. I will remain anonymous.
The insufferable Keith (can he be more than 14 years old?) has included you among the commenters he accuses of being prostitutes -- as long as he keeps his language clean, I'm leaving those comments, but if you think it is worth objecting to, let me know.
And yet more scientists are getting the word out about the truth behind the IPCC and their motivations:
As Richard Kerr, Science magazine's man on global warming remarked, "Climate modelers have been 'cheating' for so long it's become almost respectable."
The consequence? As with the arms spending spiral powered by the Cold War merchants of fear, vast amounts of money will be uselessly spent on programs that won't work against an enemy that doesn't exist. Meanwhile, real and curable environmental perils are scanted or ignored. Hysteria rules the day, drowning urgently needed environmental cleanup in our backyard while smoothing the way for the nuclear industry to reap its global rewards.
KW,
I read that piece, and it sounded more improbable than the GW theories.
If the author was interested in shedding light, he did not. It was pure advocacy and thinly veiled.
Posted by Charles B on May 14, 2007 05:40 PM10:52 AM: "Are you really so slow that you don't understand his point?"
So, 10:52AM easily understood Mr. Bennet's point? Here is 10:52AM's explanation of that point:
Do you agree with 10:52AM?
I've taken 10:52AM's request that I quit breathing under advisement and I will have a reply for him after I catch my breath.
Posted by Truth on May 14, 2007 07:02 PMThat's ok Charles B. You're entitled to your opinion.
Posted by KW on May 15, 2007 08:47 AMKW,
You are correct. Scientists who were not heard from early on are now getting the word out about the fraud that is the IPCC report. For some reason, most of us usually tend to believe what we hear first. Unfortunately, a lie can travel half way across the world before truth puts its’ shoes on.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4499562022478442170&q=The+Great+Global+Warming+Swindle
The above link will take you to a site that the we-must-stop-global-warming crowd doesn’t want you to see. It's a bit lengthy - 1 hr and 14 minutes.
Posted by Pat on May 16, 2007 02:54 PM