Prev: health care
Next: adams speedline fast 10 driver
From: JayDEE65 on 17 Feb 2010 23:33 YAWN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
From: assimilate on 18 Feb 2010 00:34 On 17-Feb-2010, bknight(a)conramp.net wrote: > >Exactly Bobby, but the ideologues in the AGW crowd will have none of > >that! > >The science is settled they spew. But it is far from being settled. > > > > > My point is that the opinions voiced here are by people who don't have > access, nor understanding of the factors in the argument. that's a cop out Bobby. It isn't that complicated. -- bill-o
From: assimilate on 18 Feb 2010 00:36 On 17-Feb-2010, William Clark <wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> wrote: > > I know when someone is feeding me a line of BS and trying to steal money > > > > out of my wallet. Global Warming/Climate Change is BS and a money grab. > > Proof? And that means more than simplistic, blind prejudice. burden of proof is on the alarmists. -- bill-o
From: Jim Lovejoy on 18 Feb 2010 00:40 BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote in news:MPG.25e6607b46d44dee989bda(a)news.giganews.com: > In article <727b5345-da6d-4a98-a229-44c8c6f6a940 > @a5g2000yqi.googlegroups.com>, johnb505(a)gmail.com says... >> > >> > Have you been living in a cave since November? The "climatologists" >> > have not been involved in science, they have been caught advancing >> > political views and social engineering. As each new day passes the >> > revelations that the WWF, a student's master thesis and other rabid >> > environmentalist organizations have been used as references to >> > promote the catastrophic warming described in the IPCC reports. >> > But, you can ignore all of that and stick to your guns and ignore >> > all of this because you it doesn't fit your desired outcome. >> >> There are lots of climatologists in the world. The huge majority of >> them don't work at East Anglia Univ., and had nothing to do with the >> research that's been discredited or called into question. Atmospheric >> scientists have been studying this issue since the late '70s. The >> research you refer to probably represents a fraction of 1% of all >> their findings. > > What were all of these "climatologists" promoting in the mid to late > 70's? If you mean what was the majority opinion of those climatologists, it was global warming.
From: assimilate on 18 Feb 2010 00:41
On 17-Feb-2010, William Clark <wclark2(a)colnospamumbus.rr.com> wrote: > > You missed the point. If you are going to say that AGW is happening, > > you have to support it with proof. No one has to prove that it isn't > > happening. The burden of proof is on the one that makes the claim. > > That's how science works. > > The overwhelming preponderance of the evidence, which none of you > wingnuts either can, or bother to, read, is that there is a significant > contribution from AGW. That's the starting point, so now you can jump up > and down and stamp your feet again. A preponderance of lies, halve-truths, fudged data, and sanctimonious prigs like you who get a warm and fuzzy feeling when you think how much more intelligent and righteous you are than us commoners. -- bill-o |