I see you've been reading the junk science
Posted By: Aunt Louise on 2009-03-27
In Reply to: Touchy, aren't we.....LOL (sm) - Just the big bad
mags, watching AL Gore movies. You really are being disingenous here. There are 692 scientists who have declared that global warming is the biggest hoax ever perpetrated on humanity. Now, we are talking scientists with pedigress a mile long after their names. You make that insidious claim that the ice caps are melting, and yes, they are, like they usually do, but you neglect to speak to the fact that as they melt, bigger ice caps form that are not melting.
If you have the intelligence to read the report on Fox News, you will see that this is a UN initiative that has been in the works for years. It goes right along with their plan to strip property rights, huddle the masses in "villages," and only those in power will be the land owner barons.
Law of Logical Argument - Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
S/l you've been reading BMW press releases....
I was being facetious ...
Sure it would be great for emissions if the world drove hydrogen vehicles - but have you checked the cost of maintaining the hydrogen vehicle? The cost of replacing a fuel cell battery?
Where does hydrogen come from? Water, natural gas, plants, coal, other fossil fuels are big sources - all expensive and coveted, and potentially in short supply. To produce no pollution it must be pure hydrogen - and you must have enough electricity to separate the hydrogen from say water, without using fossil fuels. The electrical generating capacity in the country will have to double in order to take on the demands of transportation, and then it will all have to convert from fossil fuels to renewable sources.
A lot of sacrifice of comfort and convenience will have to take place - I'm willing do it, how about the rest of the world?
The DOE is funding a billion to produce a hydrogen car - but it will be years away and the expense out of reach for most folks. Recently Obama's cut hydrogen fuel cell funding in the 2010 budget. Such vehicles for now anyway will remain the toys of celebrities and folks who can afford one to run around the neighborhood.
Also, factor in the cost of extracting and producing hydrogen, and the fact that the rest of the car from tires to dashboard, and almost everything we touch in the modern world, is produced from oil - a hydrogen car will do little to reduce pollution. The main problem with hydrogen-powered fuel cells involves the storage and distribution of hydrogen - which no one has answered yet, not on the scale of the masses. And who will build the refueling stations if there are no customers? Who will buy the vehicle if there is no where to refuel? Or if you can plug your care in your garage - is that coal firing the electric plant?
Have you seen the Mini Cooper? It is 5-1/2 feet wide and 4-1/2 feet in height. There's a reason it's called mini.
The best way to stop pollution is curb consumption - and that doesn't seem to be on the political agenda in any nation.
I've been reading up on your illness. I apologize. I realize now how truly ill you all are. I wi
pray for your souls. Seriously. I'm not laughing, and I'm not joking because I truly feel sorry for you. I won't answer you any more because that seems to only make you sicker.
Religious Addiction: a mental illness with deadly social consequences.
by TrysDan Roberts
I do believe there is a Great Spirit responsible for the creation of the universe, but unfortunately, there have been those who have been the victims of the exploitation of this higher power.
When George W. Bush and the Christian Reich took control of the most powerful country in the world, The United States of America, a very dangerous virus began spreading throughout the country.
The virus: Christian Fascism.
This lethal threat to democracy is now infecting the world, ie...the invasion and occupation of Iraq.
To understand the Right Wing Zealots, it is important to acquire an understanding of what it means to be a religious addict. The following identifies important signs of religious addiction:
SYMPTOMS OF RELIGIOUS ADDICTION as written by Paschal Baute
Paschal Baute is a co-founder and facilitator of the Spiritual Growth Network of Kentucky. He is an organizational psychologist working with leadership and team development and personnel screening. His business web page will be found at www.paschalbaute.com
• Inability to think, doubt, or question religious information and/or authority
• Black-and-white, good/bad, either/or simplistic thinking: one way or the other
• Shame-based belief that you aren't good enough or you aren't doing it right
• Magical thinking that God will fix you/ do it all, without serious work on your part
• Scrupulosity: rigid obsessive adherence to rules, codes of ethics, or guidelines
• Uncompromising judgmental attitudes: readiness to find fault or evil out there
• Compulsive or obsessive praying, going to church or crusades, quoting scripture
• Unrealistic financial contributions
• Believing that sex is dirty; believing our bodies or physical pleasures are evil
• Compulsive overeating and/or excessive fasting
• Conflict and argumentation with science, medicine, and education
• Progressive detachment from the real work, isolation and breakdown of relationships
• Psychosomatic illness: back pains, sleeplessness, headaches, hypertension
• Manipulating scripture or texts, feeling specially chosen, claiming to receive special messages from God
• Maintaining a religious high, trance-like state, keeping a happy face (or the belief that one should...) (1.) © Paschal Baute 1993
Condensed 'Characteristics of a Religious Addictive System.' Dr. Thomas Edgington is the principle author and contributed 90% of the following:
• God is seen as impersonal and vindictive: members tend to have a grace- deficit theology. (Their religion and experience are based totally on fear, not on relief.)
• Emphasis on theological correctness to the neglect of relationships and of loving others.
• Demonstrates a spiritual arrogance [considers those from outside as less spiritual].
• You will hear comments like I pride myself on my humility.
• Majors on minor theological issues and ignores or minimizes major ones.
• Scripture is said to be of primary importance, but in reality it is the leader's interpretation of Scripture that has primary importance.
• Traditions often overrule Biblical truth.
• Scripture is often misquoted, used out of context, or is degraded to the level of trite, pat answers in order to prove a point or to exact obedience to a system.
• Intellectual development is limited to what fits the system; we think the way we do because we are right; the thoughts and opinions of others are not considered.
• Dogmatism is common: the point under discussion is often explained by the quotation of a Bible verse, again, usually out of context.
• Members attempt to impose their personal opinions upon outsiders or upon those still within the system but under suspicion.
• There is a lack of objective accountability: leadership is accountable to itself ONLY. [Often explains why the religious fear and despise psychology... fear of exposure by outsider]
• Leadership is viewed as infallible and beyond reproach.
• Undue/over-emphasis upon submission to authority.
• Expression of certain emotions, particularly anger, is seen as unspiritual.
• Low self image, hyperactive conscience, undue guilt, and an inability to forgive, either others or oneself is very common.
• Communication often centers around theological issues; personal issues are rarely discussed. When they are, two phenomena find expression: shredding people,setting up and knocking down straw men.
• Interpersonal intimacy is often lacking.
• Poor ability to relate to hurting people; offers pat answers instead of demonstrating loving care (2.)
Religious Addiction preys on the Weak and Vulnerable
After reading and processing the above characteristics of a religious addict, it is very to easy to find incidents of religious addictions since George W. Bush took power:
A while ago, I was watching the news stories about the Ten Commandments Monument being removed from a Government building in the United States. As I watched the protests, I thought how twisted right wing Christian zealots are; the way they whined and moaned lying on the ground reminded me of a religious addicted cult. There is so much hate and mental defects within the Christian Coalition. It is scary.
It is important for all countries to separate government from Organized Religion. Christian Right Wing Organized Religion is a very dangerous political institution. They have decided how people should live and those choosing a different way of life are viewed as deviant or enemies.
When looking at two men, George W. Bush and Mel Gibson, it is easy to see how dangerous Religious addiction can be to the rest of the population. Both these men are recovered drug addicts and drunks. What lead to their recovery was replacing their chemical addictions with Christian addiction. Like a cult, Christian Extremists target people when they are at their weakest; both men have weak minds which made them easy prey. They should not be respected, but looked at as very weak little creatures.
As President of the United States, the mentally feeble man, George W. Bush, has been given the power to flex his religious addicted muscles: supported challenging affirmative action, proposal to ban gay marriage, increase funding to religious groups that help alcoholics and drug addicts recover, invading and taking over Iraq, funding the promotion marriage (push women in the kitchen, barefoot and pregnant, eh Georgie?)
The Christian Right seeks to oppress those who don't conform to their way of life. In order for society to evolve, Right Wing Religion must be kept out of positions of political power.
Religious addicted Mel Gibson is now a right wing fundamentalist. He believes he knows God personally, and has a whole lot of money, giving him the power to push his beliefs on the rest of us. There is nothing more dangerous than a rich right wing fundamentalist. About Mel Gibson's movie, The Passion of the Christ, Movie Reviewers and News Commentators did not have the courage to give Mel Gibson's movie a real review. It is probably like during the invasion of Iraq; people who spoke against it were intimidated, and the media was very biased toward the bullies.
Religious addiction is a serious mental illness in our society. Religious addicts, when given power, have the ability to do some serious damage to the world and its species.
Religious Addiction: a mental illness with deadly social consequences.
Endnotes:
1. Paschal Baute, Symptons of Religious Addiction http://www.lexpages.com/SGN/paschal/religious_addiction.html
2. Dr. Thomas Edgington, Characteristics of a Religious Addictive System. Nimbus.org http://www.nimbus.org/Academics/ReligiousAddiction.html
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Symptons of Religious Addiction by Paschal Baute
http://www.lexpages.com/SGN/paschal/religious_addiction.html
Retrieved April, 1st 2004
Characteristics of a Religious Addictive System. Nimbus.org
http://www.nimbus.org/Academics/ReligiousAddiction.html
Retrieved April, 1st 2004
Copyright 2004 © TrysDan Roberts
I've been reading up on you creatures. Never even knew you existed before
reading this thread. (Haven't been visiting these boards that long). You seem to proudly wear the title like some kind of badge. From what I've read, those of your ilk are involved in all sorts of deceptive practices. Doesn't sound like much to be proud of, but it explains a lot regarding your frequent aversion to the truth and your relentless intrusion on this board.
I read an interesting article about you entitled, God Sees The Freepers. http://www.apj.us/20010609GodFreepers.html
Indeed.
MY LAST POST TO YOU.
Where does this junk come from?
See conservative board:
The American left is dancing on the graves of the New Orleans dead
I am really irritated by this, and that's putting it mildly.
There you go with that Fox junk again......
It's only the women who have dared to say anything and we all know what happens to them.
Like I posted elsewhere, those in our church who have lived it and raised in it will tell you that the men are silent out of fear for their own lives, not really for the females in their families.
They have watched female family members beaten in the name of "Allah" and beaten to death I might add.
BTW, I spend very little time watching Fox, let alone the other garbage news media ran by cowards in this country....
You honestly believe the junk you spew
wholeheartedly. You can't believe that even some liberals may be offended at your far leftist projectile vomiting. You are paranoid of anyone who isn't patting your back and affirming you every step of the way. You aren't a mainstream liberal. I know you're not, because I have shared some of your pukings with some liberal acquaintances of mine (yep, believe it or not I pal around with some liberals), and they classify you as a wacko. I read where you are from California. Well, you are probably pretty affirmed in California, but in most of the rest of the country you are far out of the liberal mainstream.
Yeah, the junk in that stimulus is really
nm
What's worse than cigarettes and junk food
is when family members and other private American citizens are forced to personally purchase and send BODY ARMOR to the troops because your precious God Bush doesn't care enough about them to supply them with adequate equipment that might help KEEP THEM ALIVE. But to you CONS, the only good soldier is A DEAD ONE. That's the difference between you and us: We want them to stay ALIVE.
Believe it or not, you are less important to me than I am to you. Your words are wasted on me, because I don't possess one iota of respect for you and those of your ilk. You simply aren't worthy of it.
If you find this board so objectionable, I can't understand why you continue to impose your presence here. There is a CON board for your use and convenience. Instead, you come here and impose your views on people who are of a different political ideology and then stomp your foot and whine and sigh and complain when they refuse to let you control them. You're beginning to find out just how difficult it's going to be for you to control all Americans. It just ain't gonna happen. We don't want you imposing on our religious beliefs, we don't want you in our bedrooms, and we'll decide birth and death issues, as well as stem cell issues, and any other PERSONAL issues independently, without CON control, interference and intervention.
You said you're leaving. Time will tell what you're really made of and whether you're being honest and truly do leave or whether, like a true Bushie, you're NOT telling the truth. My guess is not.
Smoking is way worse than junk food.......nm
xxx
Obama=well-rehearsed car salesman selling junk.
nm
Science? Guess we don't need it any more....
Poll: Give Bible story of creation equal time
Laurie Goodstein, New York Times
August 31, 2005 RELI0831
In a finding that is likely to intensify the debate over what to teach students about the origins of life, a poll released Tuesday found that nearly 66 percent of Americans say that creationism should be taught alongside evolution in public schools.
The poll found that 42 percent of respondents hold strict creationist views, agreeing that living things have existed in their present form since the beginning of time.
In contrast, 48 percent said they believed that humans had evolved over time; of those, 18 percent said that evolution was guided by a supreme being, and 26 percent said it occurred through natural selection.
In all, 64 percent said they were open to the idea of teaching creationism in addition to evolution, while 38 percent favored replacing evolution with creationism.
The poll was conducted July 7 to 17 by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life and the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. The questions about evolution were asked of 2,000 people; the margin of error is 2.5 percentage points.
The poll showed 41 percent of Americans want parents to have the primary say over how evolution is taught, compared with 28 percent who say teachers and scientists should decide and 21 percent who say school boards should.
Asked whether they believed creationism should be taught instead of evolution, 38 percent were in favor, and 49 percent were opposed. Those who believe in creationism said they were very certain of their views (63 percent), compared to those who believe in evolution (32 percent).
The poll also asked about religion and politics, among other things. Respondents agreed in nearly equal numbers that nonreligious liberals have too much control over the Democratic Party (44 percent agreed), and that religious conservatives have too much control over the Republican Party (45 percent agreed).
ARROGANT? The Decider had that down to a science!
Landing on that aircraft carrier with his fake package - hahahahaha - Mission Accomplished all right! See ya in the soup kitchen!
A "theory" is not SCIENCE anymore than the
theory of evolution is science. Science is a repeated study in the laboratory that produces the same result over and over.
Gravity is not a theory. You jump 100 floors, you die. Repeated over and over with same results, inside and outside the laboratory.
So much for your public education.
facts, evidence, science, and reason
Hasn't worked so well lately, has it?
This is not rocket science. If Americans have access to
it creates a win/win situation for us all. If they open that plan to such a broad base, they would be able to essentially write their own ticket in terms of policy and coverage. As the plan stands now, it is perfectly acceptable, affordable and offers broad choice.
If McCain and his supporters want to wallow around in the politics of nay-saying, fear and hate, no problem. Go for it, but don't expecct Americans who are ready for change and are looking forward instead of backwards in terms of policy to buy into all hat negativity. That's the Bush world mentality and those days are numbered now down to less than 100.
It doesn't take rocket science to figure out....
the crap you are posting is just that, crap.
Apparently you don't understand statistics or science. Get educated, please!!
It's not scientifically sound to make pseudo-scientific statements about U.S. obesity based on a television program you saw that featured some obese people in it. But it seems when it comes to scientific fact, statistics or the truth - you CONS don't have a clue.
Rankings: Obesity Rates Grew In Every State But Oregon
Mississippi Ranked Heaviest State
POSTED: 8:29 am PDT August 23, 2005
UPDATED: 9:34 am PDT August 23, 2005
The obesity epidemic isn't winding down -- in fact, it's expanding, according to state rankings released Tuesday by Trust for America's Health, a nonprofit health advocacy group.
Obesity rates continued to rise last year in every state but Oregon. Mississippi ranked as the heaviest state, Colorado as the least heavy, according to the report, titled F as in Fat: How Obesity Policies are Failing in America, 2005.
The rankings are based on averages of three years of data from 2002 to 2004 from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Hawaii was not included in the report.
About 64.5 percent of adult Americans are either overweight or obese. The report found that more than 25 percent of adults in 10 states are obese, including in Mississippi, Alabama, West Virginia, Louisiana, Tennessee, Texas, Michigan, Kentucky, Indiana and South Carolina.
From the Christian Science Monitor earlier this year
|
from the March 16, 2005 edition - http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0316/p16s01-lire.html
For evangelicals, a bid to 'reclaim America'
The Center aims to increase its 500,000-strong e-mail army to 1 million, and to encourage Christians to run for office. It has plans for 12 regional offices and activists in all 435 US House districts. And a new lobbying arm in Washington will target judicial nominations and the battle over marriage.
If they don't vote our way, we'll change their view one way or another, executive director Gary Cass tells the group. As a California pastor, Dr. Cass spearheaded efforts to close abortion clinics and recruit Christians to seek positions on local school boards. We're going to take back what we lost in the last half of the 20th century, he adds.
For the faithful who gathered in Florida last month, the goal is not just to convert individuals - but to reshape US society.
By Jane Lampman | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor
FORT LAUDERDALE, FLA. - For the Reback daughters, the big attraction was the famous Ten Commandments monument, brought to Florida on tour after being removed from the Alabama judicial building as unconstitutional. The youngsters - dressed in red, white, and blue - clustered proudly around the display.
For more than 900 other Christians from across the US, the draw at Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church last month was a national conference aimed at reclaiming America for Christ. The monument stood as a potent symbol of their hopes for changing the course of the nation.
We have God-sized problems in our country, and only God can solve them, Richard Land, a prominent leader of the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC), told the group.
Their mission is not simply to save souls. The goal is to mobilize evangelical Christians for political action to return society to what they call the biblical worldview of the Founding Fathers. Some speak of restoring a Christian nation. Others shy from that phrase, but agree that the Bible calls them not only to evangelize, but also to transform the culture.
In material given to conference attendees, the Rev. D. James Kennedy, Coral Ridge pastor wrote: As the vice-regents of God, we are to bring His truth and His will to bear on every sphere of our world and our society. We are to exercise godly dominion and influence over our neighborhoods, our schools, our government ... our entertainment media, our news media, our scientific endeavors - in short, over every aspect and institution of human society.
This is the 10th conference to spread this cultural mandate among Christians, and although the church's pastor couldn't speak due to illness, others presented the message intended to rouse the conservative faithful, eager to capitalize on gains won during the November election.
This melding of religion and politics, Christianity and patriotism, makes many uneasy, particularly those on the other side of the so-called culture war, who see a threat to the healthy discourse of a pluralistic society.
This is an effort to impose a particular far-right religious view, and political and social policies that result from that, on others, says Elliot Mincberg of People for the American Way, a group that advocates for a diverse society. There's nothing wrong with trying to convince others to adopt their views, but [Dr. Kennedy's] effort is also to use the levers of government to force changes.
An energetic pastor who built Coral Ridge into a 10,000-member megachurch with far-reaching radio and TV audiences, the Rev. Dr. Kennedy regularly calls the US a Christian nation that should be governed by Christians. He has created a Center for Christian Statesmanship in Washington that seeks to evangelize members of Congress and their staffs, and to counsel conservative Christian officeholders.
Some critics suggest these views reflect far-right Presbyterian thinking, some of which extends to the realm of theocracy, the belief that God - or His representatives - should govern the state.
Frederick Carlson, author of Eternal Hostility: the Struggle between Theocracy and Democracy, says that if Kennedy is not a theocrat, he is certainly a dominionist, one who supports taking over and dominating the political process.
Kennedy is not in the theocratic camp, says John Aman, Coral Ridge spokesman. He does believe that Christians should not sequester themselves inside their stained-glass ghettoes, but seek to be 'salt and light' - apply biblical moral truth and the Gospel - to every area of society.
It's apparent that those who've traveled here from 40 states are eager to do just that. Many of them say they are most motivated by signs of moral decline in America, concern for their children's future, and what they see as an effort to keep God and religious speech out of public life.
The country is getting further away from Christian values, and we're being stifled, says Debbie Mochle-Young, of Santa Monica, Calif. Other nationalities are coming to live here and say, 'We want our beliefs,' but they don't let you have yours. Nathan Lepper, an Air Force retiree active in politics in Florida, says he has a personal passion to help America turn back to its moral and ethical bases.
Some are already involved in their communities - in antiabortion actions, in trying to prevent removal of feeding tubes from Terri Schiavo, or in efforts to oppose same-sex marriage by defining marriage as only between a man and a woman.
Gabriel Carpenter, from Dryden, N.Y., works at a local crisis pregnancy center and is a coordinator for the now-required sexual abstinence program in New York public schools. He and his wife, Penelope, say they hope to learn more about how to share America's Christian heritage with others.
Christianity and patriotism are interwoven throughout the gathering, from Christian and American flags marched into the sanctuary, to red, white, and blue banners festooning the church complex, to a rousing patriotic concert. Several speakers emphasize the idea that America's founders were largely Christian and that their intent was to establish a biblically based nation. (No mention is made of other influences on the Founding Fathers, such as Englightenment thinkers or issues of freedom of conscience.)
David Barton, a leading advocate for emphasizing Christianity in US history, deftly selects quotes from letters and historical documents to link major historical figures such as George Washington to a Christian vision, and to suggest that the courts and scholars in the last century have deliberately undermined the original intent of the Founding Fathers.
Critics, including historians and the Baptist Joint Committee, challenge the accuracy of some of Mr. Barton's work, including what he calls the myth of separation of church and state.
In Blessed Assurance: A History of Evangelicalism in America, religious historian Randall Balmer of Columbia University writes that a contrived mythology about America's Christian origins has been a factor in the reentry of evangelicals into political life, helping sustain the conservative swing in American politics. Barton and others say they are recapturing truths hidden behind a secularist version of history, while critics say they are producing revisionist history that cherry-picks facts and ignores historical evidence.
But Barton is clearly a favorite speaker, with a theme buttressing the identity and purpose of those eager to reform the country. And there's plenty for them to do. Coral Ridge's Center for Reclaiming America is building a grass-roots alliance around five issues: the sanctity of life, religious liberty, pornography, the homosexual agenda, and creation vs. evolution.
The Center aims to increase its 500,000-strong e-mail army to 1 million, and to encourage Christians to run for office. It has plans for 12 regional offices and activists in all 435 US House districts. And a new lobbying arm in Washington will target judicial nominations and the battle over marriage.
If they don't vote our way, we'll change their view one way or another, executive director Gary Cass tells the group. As a California pastor, Dr. Cass spearheaded efforts to close abortion clinics and recruit Christians to seek positions on local school boards. We're going to take back what we lost in the last half of the 20th century, he adds.
Taking back is a major theme - taking back the schools, the media, the courts.
It's time to take back the portals of power, and particularly those of commerce, because commerce controls all the gates - to government, the courts, and so on, says businessman Michael Pink in a workshop. Recounting his own business success based on in-depth Bible study, Mr. Pink says he's now urging wealthy Christian businessmen to start using their earnings to purchase such prizes as ABC and NBC.
Interspersed between worshipful singing, prominent activist leaders tout recent successes. Alan Sears of the Alliance Defense Fund, who has led the charge in the states against same-sex marriage, talks of victories in Ohio and California and the phalanx of 800 lawyers now trained for the fight across the US. Tim Wildmon of the American Family Association highlights growing impact on the entertainment industry, from spurring FCC regulatory actions against broadcast indecency to causing major companies to pull their ads from TV programs.
Yet it's the most combative language that brings the crowd to its feet in applause: Judicial activists are running rampant and a God-free country is their goal.... All means to turn the tide must be considered, including their removal, urges the Rev. Rick Scarborough, founder of Vision America, which mobilizes patriot pastors across the US.
SBC's Dr. Land, credited with helping to turn out evangelical voters in the 2004 election, says Kennedy's conferences have an impact: No one has been more important in helping Christians of every denominational persuasion understand first, their evangelistic responsibility ... and then their responsibility to be salt and light in the world.
Others suggest that among evangelicals as a whole - whose numbers are estimated to represent at least 25 percent of the US population - the appeal and influence of such religio-political activism are limited.
This is more right wing and religiously politicized than the majority of evangelicals, says Christian Smith, professor of sociology at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Most would not make the kind of 'take back America' statements in such an overt way.
In an in-depth national study published in 2000 under the title, Christian America? What Evangelicals Really Want, Dr. Smith explored the views of a remarkably diverse group, with many holding conflicted views on political involvement and the issues and methods of activists.
Still, the 2004 election confirmed a growing mobilization of conservative Christians. And in a recent Barna survey of American pastors about their choice for the most trusted spokesperson for Christianity, Dr. Kennedy made the top 10, sharing the final spot with three others, including Christian broadcaster Pat Robertson and President Bush, each winning the vote of 4 percent of the clergy.
www.csmonitor.com | Copyright © 2005 The Christian Science Monitor. All rights reserved.
For permission to reprint/republish this article, please email Copyright |
|
Religious "voodoo?" Science has documented and shown that....sm
life begins at conception, those cells are living, have their code, and I have seen my own children on ultrasound as early as 8 weeks (with high risk pregnancies) fully formed, moving all extremities, trying to suck their thumbs, kicking, tiny heart beating away, with everything that you or I have, only inside the womb. Now if you wish to believe that a woman can do with THAT as she wants, so be it, I still have to stand with the pro-choice crowd not because I believe in abortion or that it is okay and not murdering a human being, but because I can see the instances where a woman would be justified in her actions, and let her make her own peach and atonement with God, as we all will. Science more and more is proving out what has been in the Bible all along. I do not think that was a fair or rational characterization of "religion," and it was hurtful and inflammatory. Choose to be atheist or agnostic, Christianity is not "voodoo."
I did not say they said global warming as a general theory was not good science...
but that Gore's version in his movie was not good science. And I said it was debunked...but that they said it was bunk.
Here's one....an interview with a noted scientist in the field:
Reid Bryson, known as the father of scientific climatology, considers global warming a bunch of hooey.
The UW-Madison professor emeritus, who stands against the scientific consensus on this issue, is referred to as a global warming skeptic. But he is not skeptical that global warming exists, he is just doubtful that humans are the cause of it.
There is no question the earth has been warming. It is coming out of the "Little Ice Age," he said in an interview this week.
"However, there is no credible evidence that it is due to mankind and carbon dioxide. We've been coming out of a Little Ice Age for 300 years. We have not been making very much carbon dioxide for 300 years. It's been warming up for a long time," Bryson said.
The Little Ice Age was driven by volcanic activity. That settled down so it is getting warmer, he said. Humans are polluting the air and adding carbon dioxide to the atmosphere, but the effect is tiny, Bryson said. "It's like there is an elephant charging in and you worry about the fact that there is a fly sitting on its head. It's just a total misplacement of emphasis," he said. "It really isn't science because there's no really good scientific evidence."
Just because almost all of the scientific community believes in man-made global warming proves absolutely nothing, Bryson said. "Consensus doesn't prove anything, in science or anywhere else, except in democracy, maybe." Bryson, 87, was the founding chairman of the department of meteorology at UW-Madison and of the Institute for Environmental Studies, now known as the Gaylord Nelson Institute for Environmental Studies. He retired in 1985, but has gone into the office almost every day since. He does it without pay.
"I have now worked for zero dollars since I retired, long enough that I have paid back the people of Wisconsin every cent they paid me to give me a wonderful, wonderful career. So we are even now. And I feel good about that," said Bryson.
So, if global warming isn't such a burning issue, why are thousands of scientists so concerned about it? "Why are so many thousands not concerned about it?" Bryson shot back.
"There is a lot of money to be made in this," he added. "If you want to be an eminent scientist you have to have a lot of grad students and a lot of grants. You can't get grants unless you say, 'Oh global warming, yes, yes, carbon dioxide.'"
Speaking out against global warming is like being a heretic, Bryson noted. And it's not something that he does regularly. "I can't waste my time on that, I have too many other things to do," he said.
But if somebody asks him for his opinion on global warming, he'll give it. "And I think I know about as much about it as anybody does."
Up against his students' students: Reporters will often call the meteorology building seeking the opinion of a scientist and some beginning graduate student will pick up the phone and say he or she is a meteorologist, Bryson said. "And that goes in the paper as 'scientists say.'"
The word of this young graduate student then trumps the views of someone like Bryson, who has been working in the field for more than 50 years, he said. "It is sort of a smear."
Bryson said he recently wrote something on the subject and two graduate students told him he was wrong, citing research done by one of their professors. That professor, Bryson noted, is probably the student of one of his students.
"Well, that professor happened to be wrong," he said. "There is very little truth to what is being said and an awful lot of religion. It's almost a religion. Where you have to believe in anthropogenic (or man-made) global warming or else you are nuts."
While Bryson doesn't think that global warming is man-made, he said there is some evidence of an effect from mankind, but not an effect of carbon dioxide. For example, in Wisconsin in the last 100 years the biggest heating has been around Madison, Milwaukee and in the Southeast, where the cities are. There was a slight change in the Green Bay area, he said. The rest of the state shows no warming at all.
"The growth of cities makes it hotter, but that was true back in the 1930s, too," Bryson said. "Big cities were hotter than the surrounding countryside because you concentrate the traffic and you concentrate the home heating. And you modify the surface, you pave a lot of it."
Bryson didn't see AL Gore's movie about global warming, "An Inconvenient Truth." "Don't make me throw up," he said. "It is not science. It is not true."
Another:
One of the world's leading meteorologists has described the theory that helped Al Gore win a share of the Nobel prize "ridiculous".
Dr William Gray, a pioneer in the science of seasonal hurricane forecasts, spoke to a packed lecture hall at UNC Charlotte and said humans are not responsible for the warming of the earth.
"We're brainwashing our children," said Gray, 78, a longtime professor at Colorado State University. "They're going to the Gore movie (An Inconvenient Truth) and being fed all this. It's ridiculous."
Gray, whose annual forecasts of the number of tropical storms and hurricanes are widely publicised, said instead that a natural cycle of ocean water temperatures - related to the amount of salt in ocean water - is responsible for the global warming that he acknowledges has taken place.
However, he said, that same cycle means a period of global cooling will begin soon and last for several years.
"We'll look back on all of this in 10 or 15 years and realise how foolish it was," Gray said.
"The human impact on the atmosphere is simply too small to have a major effect on global temperatures," Gray said.
He said his beliefs have made him an outsider in popular science.
"It bothers me that my fellow scientists are not speaking out against something they know is wrong," he said. "But they also know that they'd never get any grants if they spoke out. I don't care about grants."
Seeing a link here? They want grants, they have to buy into global warming. Hellooo. Follow the money.
This is from Newsvine (owned by MSNBC, home of Chris Matthews...biased yes, but in your favor), about the "consensus of scientists" who buy into Gore's theory:
Article Source: dailytech.comworld-news, global-warming, study, scientists - of 528 total papers on climate change, only 38 (7%) gave an explicit endorsement of the consensus. If one considers "implicit" endorsement (accepting the consensus without explicit statement), the figure rises to 45%. However, while only 32 papers (6%) reject the consensus outright, the largest category (48%) are neutral papers, refusing to either accept or reject the hypothesis. This is no "consensus."
Here is another: the scientists quoted are not conservatives.
Gore Slams Global Warming Critics
Reprint Information
Book on Katie Couric Makes Waves
In twin appearances last night former Vice President Al Gore dismissed critics of his global warming theory as a small minority not credible in their opposition.
In an unprecedented, uninterrupted eight-minute monologue on Keith Olbermann’s "Countdown," Gore characterized those scientists who dispute the reality of global warming as part of a lunatic fringe.
Later, on Charlie Rose’s show, Gore went further. Asked by Rose "Do you know any credible scientist who says ‘wait a minute – this hasn’t been proven,’ is there still a debate?” Gore replied, "The debate’s over. The people who dispute the international consensus on global warming are in the same category now with the people who think the moon landing was staged on a movie lot in Arizona.”
NOTE: Again with the consensus...as stated above, the consensus he claims does not exist.
This flies in the face of such challengers as professor Bob Carter of the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University, in Australia who said: "Gore's circumstantial arguments are so weak that they are pathetic. It is simply incredible that they, and his film, are commanding public attention."
Famed climatologist and internationally renowned hurricane expert Dr. William Gray of the atmospheric-science department at Colorado State University went even further, calling the scientific "consensus" on global warming "one of the greatest hoaxes ever perpetrated on the American people." For speaking the truth he has seen most of his government research funding dry up, according to the Washington Post.
Neither Gray nor Dr. Carter believe that the moon landing was staged on a movie set in Arizona.
Nor does famed Oxford professor David Bellamy who sniffs that Gore’s theory is "Poppycock!"
Writing in Britain's Daily Mail last July 9, Dr. Bellamy charged that "the world's politicians and policy makers ... have an unshakeable faith in what has, unfortunately, become one of the central credo of the environmental movement. Humans burn fossil fuels, which release increased levels of carbon dioxide – the principal so-called greenhouse gas – into the atmosphere, causing the atmosphere to heat up.
"They say this is global warming: I say this is poppycock. Unfortunately, for the time being, it is their view that prevails.
"As a result of their ignorance, the world's economy may be about to divert billions, nay trillions of pounds, dollars and rubles into solving a problem that actually doesn't exist. The waste of economic resources is incalculable and tragic."
Wrote Dr. Bellamy "It has been estimated that the cost of cutting fossil fuel emissions in line with the Kyoto Protocol would be [$1.3 trillion]. Little wonder, then, that world leaders are worried. So should we all be.
"If we signed up to these scaremongers, we could be about to waste a gargantuan amount of money on a problem that doesn't exist – money that could be used in umpteen better ways: Fighting world hunger, providing clean water, developing alternative energy sources, improving our environment, creating jobs.
"The link between the burning of fossil fuels and global warming is a myth. It is time the world's leaders, their scientific advisers and many environmental pressure groups woke up to the fact."
In agreement with Dr. Bellamy were a host of other respected climatologists including the 19,000 who have signed a declaration that rejects Gore’s accusation that the rise of greenhouse gasses is caused by mankind’s use of fossil fuels. As has been pointed out, previous ice ages have been preceded by a rise on CO2 levels long before there were humans or fossil fuels or backyard barbecues.
Commenting on the scientists who support Gore’s thesis, Dr. Carter one of hundreds of highly qualified non-governmental, non-industry, non-lobby group climate experts who contest the hypothesis that human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) are causing significant global climate change, says, "‘Climate experts’ is the operative term here. Why? Because of what Gore's ‘majority of scientists’ think is immaterial when only a very small fraction of them actually work in the climate field.
Carter does not pull his punches about Gore's activism, "The man is an embarrassment to U.S. science and its many fine practitioners, a lot of who know, but feel unable to state publicly, that his propaganda crusade is mostly based on junk science."
In April, 60 of the world's leading experts in the field asked Canada’s Prime Minister Harper to order a thorough public review of the science of climate change, something that has never happened in Canada. Considering what's at stake – either the end of civilization, if you believe Gore, or a waste of billions of dollars, if you believe his opponents – it seems like a reasonable request, wrote Tom Harris in the Canada Free Press.
According to Harris, a mechanical engineer, former University of Winnipeg climatology professor Dr. Tim Ball notes that even among that fraction, many focus their studies on the impacts of climate change; biologists, for example, who study everything from insects to polar bears to poison ivy. "While many are highly skilled researchers, they generally do not have special knowledge about the causes of global climate change," explains Ball. "They usually can tell us only about the effects of changes in the local environment where they conduct their studies."
Adds Ball, among experts who actually examine the causes of change on a global scale, many concentrate their research on designing and enhancing computer models of hypothetical futures. "These models have been consistently wrong in all their scenarios," asserts Ball. "Since modelers concede computer outputs are not predictions but are in fact merely scenarios, they are negligent in letting policy-makers and the public think they are actually making forecasts."
Canada's new conservative prime minister, Stephen Harper, has been urged by more than 60 leading international climate change experts to review the global warming policies he inherited from his predecessor.
In an open letter that includes five British scientists among the 60 leading international climate change experts who signed the letter, the experts praise Harper’s commitment to review the controversial Kyoto Protocol on reducing emissions harmful to the environment. "Much of the billions of dollars earmarked for implementation of the protocol in Canada will be squandered without a proper assessment of recent developments in climate science," they wrote in the Canadian Financial Post last week.
They emphasized that the study of global climate change is, in Harper's own words, an "emerging science" and added: "If, back in the mid 1990s, we knew what we know today about climate, Kyoto would almost certainly not exist, because we would have concluded it was not necessary." Despite claims to the contrary, there is no consensus among climate scientists on the relative importance of the various causes of global climate change, they wrote.
"'Climate change is real' is a meaningless phrase used repeatedly by activists to convince the public that a climate catastrophe is looming and humanity is the cause. Neither of these fears is justified.
"Global climate changes all the time due to natural causes and the human impact still remains impossible to distinguish from this natural 'noise.'"
The letter is the latest effort by climate change skeptics to counter Gore's demonstrably false claims that there is a consensus that human activity is causing alleged global warming.
Listening to Al Gore makes one wonder if he is the one who believes that "the moon landing was staged on a movie set in Arizona.”
'Bout time, too! This science shows such great promise in
N/M
Are you reading the same thing I am reading? sm
Did you read Mein Kampf? Would that be good enough evidence for you, because he wrote about it in there. Good grief, you people won't admit when you are wrong and frankly, that is pretty darned frightening!
Can't chew gum. Would've if I could've.
Even got hypnotized. Supposedly guaranteed to quit. Lasted 5 hours. Thank heavens I never smoked anything stronger. 
I'm not reading it and here's why. SM
*Breaking News from the Progressive Community* is not exactly unbiased now is it?
Yes, and while you are reading it...
look very closely at "here is where things get murky. Bill CLinton, Sandy Berger, and Richard Clarke all denied..."
Good grief. Bill Clinton committed felony perjury. Yes, i am going to believe him...NOT. Sandy "socks" Berger...am I going to believe him...not hardly. Richard Clarke...you have GOT to be kidding. The man who confessed that HE was the one who first outed Valerie Plame.
Factcheck.org left a lot out of their fact checking. And saying it doesn't matter anyway because they couldn't prove he had not done anything wrong yet...the three above obviously aren't concerned about truth. Fact remains, he had the chance, he did not take it, and if bin laden had been in jail or a CIA prison somewhere he could not have plotted and financed 9-11.
Nice try, but I don't buy it. Didn't then, don't now.
Okay, Sam, I did some reading....
I read your response and I thought maybe I don't know the difference so I went looking and everything I can find makes those two out to be the same thing...
**McCain has made opposition to pork-barrel spending a central theme of his 2008 campaign. "Earmarking deprives federal agencies of scarce resources, at the whim of individual members of Congress," McCain has said.
**Three times in recent years, McCain's catalogs of "objectionable" spending have included earmarks for this small Alaska town, requested by its mayor at the time -- Sarah Palin.
**"So while Sen. McCain was going after cutting earmarks in Washington," said Steve Ellis of Taxpayers for Common Sense, "Gov. Palin was going after getting earmarks."
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-earmarks3-2008sep03,0,2482434.story
Now, I am sorry, but to me they are the same thing. Again, as I have said before, I am not being hateful - I am truly trying to grasp what the difference is.
Reading what he says is..
more enjoyable than listening to him. I sometimes want to listen to what he has to say, but he sounds so whiney and preachy I can't stand it. He's kind of way out there, but I do see his point on some things. So, thanks for posting the link.
And yet....there you are reading...LOL.
You guys are so petty its ridiculous.
Oh, believe you me not into reading about her
I saw this on CNN's front page as I scanned over some stories. Let me explain why you think she scares the loonies. Anyone who does not seem to have the intelligence of a dingbat and yet has people voting for her because of her looks, her clothing, whatever the cause was, now that is the scary part.I answered email from lady in Tennessee, a bible-thumping rightwinged holy-roller and she was almost scary in her adoration of Palin. From her first news interviews (well, the 1 or 2 that she actually did, the camp tried to keep her under lock and key) I certainly thought what in the world was that old white only mostly repubs trying to do. I never thought she was any kind of political heavy and now with her tit and TAT back and forth with her almost son-in-law, just proves it even further. I fully think before long they will be more at each other's throats with lawsuits and what have you. Just sitting back watching the implosion.
Have you not been reading? NO I SM
DO NOT SUPPORT my son in this lifestyle. I made that plain. If there are kids who have been killed by homosexuals and not getting any press, that is the fault of the press, not your fault or mine. I agree there is an agenda to push homosexuality down our throats. I don't want it. By the same token, AGAIN, there are homosexuals being killed because they are homosexuals. Are the kids being killed because they are kids or because the sickos (whether straight or homosexuals) just want to kill them, anybody, child adult whatever.
I do not say anything because I have a son who is homosexual, he knows how I feel and his father and I make no bones about it so you have no right to even come across like that lady. I do not have my head in the sand. I believe my son is committing a sin. He does not bring that lifestyle around his father and I or the rest of his family.
Hmmmmmmm let me guess, you are one of the parents who would disown your child because he was gay? Would you disown him for any other sin or would you tell him you don't want taht around you and make sure he knows exactly how you feel.
You are a hippocrit Patty!
I cannot believe that I'm reading such
ignorance as I am from some of you people. You talk about how torturing terrorists is serious and how horrible. Poor wittle terrorists.....tear. Yet you seem to forget that these terrorists want YOU dead and would sooner cut your head off than look at you. Give me a break and spare me your pathetic comments. I'm done talking to you terrorist sympathizers. God forbid any of these terrorists should bomb any place you are at because you might think differently when you are being blown up...that is if you have the time to think about it. Goodnight. I'm tired of this BS.
Actually, the way I am reading it is the media is DOING it. SM
Looking for some dirt. That's the way I read the article. Time will tell I guess.
reading my mind too?
LMAO! Nope, I dont care, not at all, LOL, gee you are able to read peoples minds too, hun? Attack number one trillion against gt, LOL.
Yes! Reading your posts is EXACTLY like that!
How insightful of you (as opposed to your customary *incitefulness*).
Try reading this site. SM
You might also learn what actions of the prostestors during VN had on the soldiers who fought there then, just as they are now.
I am looking forward to reading
Stephen Colbert's book "I am America and so can you." I got a little preview this morning on Tim Russert. It promises to be a delicious, laugh-out-loud satire.
to mtstudent. I have been reading
your posts with interests and I can't help but feel this is way more personal than just principle. I guess I am partly to blame if someone close to you has gone to jail for breaking the law, because I am one of those wanting stricter laws or at least enforcement of the ones we have. and I don't want to see any more cops punished for upholding the laws. I regret it and cringe everytime I hear one of them is no better than than those he arrests because it makes it hard on the plentiful good cops out there. It has not escaped my attention that you repeatedly refer to the "poor black men". Excuse me? I am afraid blacks don't hold the title to this one. There are plenty of poor men and women in jail. I do feel sorry for a lot of them - I also feel sorry for people who did not have enough sense to stay away from drugs and screwed up their lives and for especially for those families who have tried to help them and failed at great price. I also feel sorry for the children they leave behind without parenting or for the lack of parenting they themselves may not have had. I also feel sorry for people with maxed out credit card debt who can't seem to claw their way back out. I was almost one of them, but never again. We thought back in the 60's that education about sex, birth control and drugs was the answer and apparently, we were dead wrong. I just don't see any improvement at all. Noted the comments about abortion and such on this very board, but no one brings up the fact some people don't want abortion or birth control, because it is a pay raise everytime they have another kid. I am afraid that is our fault as a society even though we thought they needed help at the time, it apparently has bred a whole nother way of thinking that was unforeseen and had led to apathy, laziness and greed. Yeah, I know it helped plenty, but there are certainly plenty of stories about single mother who raised 6 to 8 kids alone working 2 to 3 jobs and ended up with a houseful of lawyers and doctors and such. I know one such woman myself with 8 kids who has never been on welfare. It is a matter of pride with her and I applaud her for it. Honestly, I don't know how she did it when their father either was on the street dealing or in jail. In fact, she had to buy groceries as needed because he would break in and steal food from their kids. It just kinda bothers me you seem to have sympathy for only the poor black men of this country and I can only surmise there is a far more personal event going on here. I am sorry for your personal misery, but we have to get a handle on the drugs in this country instead of building them a highway from Mexico to deliver them on.
Are you reading the tabloids? You
can't possibly believe that story...and if you do, it just proves how gullible many people are.
Exactly what I said below......smut reading
xx
It's too bad you stopped reading...sm
Sam brings up valid, positive points, and those on the left turn her off, rather than listen to the truth, because it comes from her.
She isn't bitter at all. It always sounds like the left is, when dealing with her, rather than listen to the truth, even when you expounded so much on the facts. If the facts bear up the right, they must not be facts, are therefore ignored.
Anything of substance she's reading from the
She is very nervous obviously.
after reading this, I qualify what I said above...
Obama is not a communist YET. He is in the socialist stage.
A course in reading comprehension
would not be a bad thing. Read all my posts and I have said I would rather take a chance on Obama than McCain. Furthermore, I had said that I would vote AGAINST McCain, never FOR Obama. Think what you want. I don't deal in smoke screens. I say what I mean and mean what I say. Again, I would prefer an Obama administration over a McCain administration....true. What I would really like to see is a Lou Dobbs type person, a voice of reason in the White House. Count on it........I will write in Lou Dobbs and I KNOW that is a wasted vote but I am voting my conscience......the best any of us can do.
No the election has not been held. Bad times ahead either way.........McCain has incited hatred of Obama..........if McCain wins....think Black Power and how unhappy they're going to be. A no win situation. I FEAR blood shed either way.
So there ya go..........any questions?
Reading comprehension
I SAID see how rumors get started. Draw your own conclusions. When references are cited, yes, I believe them once I have checked them out.
VOTING FOR LOU DOBBS!!!!!
what part of reading don't you get?
xx
I have been reading this post with
interest; amazing how we can agree on a lot of points. The comment from gp about old time democrats is often heard here, the trouble is that the parties have more or less changed places. The image of a guntoting bible thumping redneck used to be a bubba in his pickup who was a democrat, now it is a republican. From what I have been listening to the last year or so on late night and daytime radio, you are right, we are all screwed. supposedly, there are 350,000 UN troups already in place here. I believe they will be used to gather up all the guns. After that, we are sitting ducks like Australia, whose crime rate escalated over 300% the first year alone. We already have states who have made it against the law to defend yourself or children in your own home. Amazing. We have not been involved enough the last 20-30 years with our children's education, happily leaving it to others who mostly happen to be liberals. I understand a religious person can never hope to attain a spot somewhere like the Smithsonian; they are all agnostics now. Just saying what I have heard; can't verify. I am very afraid the wagons have already been circled and we just did not know we were in the center. Starting to suspect stronger each day that the whole election is a set up that goes back decades; they were just waiting for the star of the show to come along (Obama), not even that sure about McCain anymore. Furious over the bailout. Think how Clinton pardoned Ayers, how much he and O reportedly can't stand each other, yet he and H are out campaigning for him for the Party, of course. Death penalty: I suspect a lot more of us would be happy with Life meaning life imprisonment as opposed to death sentence, if it were really a life sentence and not a few years instead. Well, this election is almost over; my hopes are not very high given all the current events. Like an old friend used to say, "I just don't know what's to become of us all". Keep up the interesting posts, ladies.
Try reading up on a subject
See post under sam's blather.
I loved reading that
I still don't understand why Obama singled out Pennsylvanians with those statements. Does anybody know why who follows this stuff "religiously" (dare I use the word)?
Reading your posts
I do not see the intelligence, much less the literacy.
and why was that worth reading?
I got nothing from that except that it is one more person who does not like Obama.
There was nothing in there that was not just one person's personal viewpoint - an obvious McCain supporter.
Me too! That was great reading. nm
x
|
