PDA

View Full Version : Al Gore, arrested!!!!



JimboX
07-04-2007, 08:10 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/07/04/gore.son.arrest.ap/index.html

LAGUNA NIGUEL, California (AP) -- Al Gore's son was arrested early Wednesday on suspicion of possessing marijuana and prescription drugs after deputies pulled him over for speeding, authorities say.

Al Gore III, 24, was driving a blue Toyota Prius about 100 mph on the San Diego Freeway when he was pulled over about 2:15 a.m., Sheriff's Department spokesman Jim Amormino said.

The deputies said they smelled marijuana and searched the car, Amormino said. They found less than an ounce of marijuana along with Xanax, Valium, Vicodin and Adderall, which is used for attention deficit disorder, he said.

"He does not have a prescription for any of those drugs," Amormino said.

Gore was released from the men's central jail in Santa Ana after posting $20,000 bail. Amormino said Gore had yet to hire an attorney.

Kalee Kreider, a spokeswomen for his parents, did not immediately return phone messages to The Associated Press on Wednesday.

The son of the former vice president and Democratic presidential nominee also was pulled over and arrested for pot possession in December 2003, in Bethesda, Maryland, while he was a student at Harvard University.
advertisement

He completed substance abuse counseling as part of a pretrial diversion program to settle those charges.

The youngest of Al and Tipper Gore's four children and their only son, Gore lives in Los Angeles and is an associate publisher of GOOD, a magazine about philanthropy aimed at young people.

http://i.l.cnn.net/cnn/2007/POLITICS/07/04/gore.son.arrest.ap/art.gore.jnr.ap.jpg

Ray G.
07-04-2007, 08:12 PM
Heh.

Ben
07-04-2007, 08:14 PM
Now all he has to do is find Jesus, and he can be president!

YC Comics!
07-04-2007, 08:14 PM
well.....the carbon emissions on marijuana can't be that great.........

Brad N.
07-04-2007, 08:14 PM
Thanks for the misleading title.

Bill!
07-04-2007, 08:16 PM
Must have been a slow news day.

YC Comics!
07-04-2007, 08:16 PM
Thanks for the misleading title.

it's not misleading. Al Gore was arrested. So what if it was Al Gore III. Everyone knows those roman numerals are just for show.

Mister Mets
07-04-2007, 08:17 PM
Thanks for the misleading title.
Yeah, I totally expected Al Gore I to be arrested.

Shame since he's been dead about nine years.

Ben
07-04-2007, 08:18 PM
Now Al Gore's gonna have to run for president, so he can pardon his son!

~Hernandez~
07-04-2007, 08:26 PM
Its all Ozzy Osbournes fault.

KHAN!
07-04-2007, 08:44 PM
I wish it was the former Vice President.

The fucker had the gall to say that Bush "played on all our fears" but yet puts out a fucking movie that attempts to scare people into "going green" through scare tactic scenarios that are highly unlikely if not impossible that it would even happen, all to accept all these kneejerk "environmental" ideas like Ethanol fuel or Compressed Flourescent lightbulbs that don't help the situation, but can also make things worse, like the lightbulbs and the fact that they contain Mercury.

I'm so glad he got beat in 2000

Ben
07-04-2007, 08:45 PM
I wish it was the former Vice President.

The fucker had the gall to say that Bush "played on all our fears" but yet puts out a fucking movie that attempts to scare people into "going green" through scare tactic scenarios that are highly unlikely if not impossible that it would even happen, all to accept all these kneejerk "environmental" ideas like Ethanol fuel or Compressed Flourescent lightbulbs that don't help the situation, but can also make things worse, like the lightbulbs and the fact that they contain Mercury.

I'm so glad he got beat in 2000So you're the new gimmick poster? That's good. There was a serious lack of ignorance on this board.

King of Mars
07-04-2007, 08:46 PM
well.....the carbon emissions on marijuana can't be that great.........Yeah, but he was using recycled rolling papers.

Ryan F
07-04-2007, 08:47 PM
At least he was driving a Prius. :)

Bill!
07-04-2007, 08:49 PM
I wish it was the former Vice President.

The fucker had the gall to say that Bush "played on all our fears" but yet puts out a fucking movie that attempts to scare people into "going green" through scare tactic scenarios that are highly unlikely if not impossible that it would even happen, all to accept all these kneejerk "environmental" ideas like Ethanol fuel or Compressed Flourescent lightbulbs that don't help the situation, but can also make things worse, like the lightbulbs and the fact that they contain Mercury.

I'm so glad he got beat in 2000

:blah:

Dumbest post ever.

Ben
07-04-2007, 08:51 PM
:blah:

Dumbest post ever.
Anytime a scientist comes to a potentially scary, kneejerk conclusion, he's using "scare tactics." Can't you see the hypocrisy?

AAlgar
07-04-2007, 08:54 PM
Anytime a scientist comes to a potentially scary, kneejerk conclusion, he's using "scare tactics." Can't you see the hypocrisy?

That's what the sheriffs always say in those horror movies, and they're always right, aren't they?

I assume they must be, even though I usually turn those movies off after about half an hour.

Ben
07-04-2007, 08:56 PM
That's what the sheriffs always say in those horror movies, and they're always right, aren't they?

I assume they must be, even though I usually turn those movies off after about half an hour.We never really plan on watching the whole movie, though, do we? :heybaby::heart::moon:

The Hodag
07-04-2007, 08:57 PM
The fucker had the gall to say that Bush "played on all our fears" but yet puts out a fucking movie that attempts to scare people into "going green"...

Al Gore's manipulation might make businesses more responsible. George Bush's manipulation got us into an irresponsible war that's killed thousands and not only undone the worldwide goodwill the United States received after 9-11, but reversed it to the point that we're once again the world's punching bag.

One of these things is more galling than the other.

AAlgar
07-04-2007, 08:58 PM
We never really plan on watching the whole movie, though, do we? :heybaby::heart::moon:

I'm confused. The animated pixels in the body of your post would seem to imply that you desire some sort of homosexual contact with me.

Yet the animated pixels in your signature seem to signify a sense of sarcasm or irony which would negate such an advance.

DO YOU WANT ME OR NOT?

Ben
07-04-2007, 09:01 PM
I'm confused. The animated pixels in the body of your post would seem to imply that you desire some sort of homosexual contact with me.

Yet the animated pixels in your signature seem to signify a sense of sarcasm or irony which would negate such an advance.

DO YOU WANT ME OR NOT?I DON'T KNOW!!!

KAK
07-04-2007, 09:56 PM
What a loser

Bedlam66
07-04-2007, 10:53 PM
I wish it was the former Vice President.

The fucker had the gall to say that Bush "played on all our fears" but yet puts out a fucking movie that attempts to scare people into "going green" through scare tactic scenarios that are highly unlikely if not impossible that it would even happen, all to accept all these kneejerk "environmental" ideas like Ethanol fuel or Compressed Flourescent lightbulbs that don't help the situation, but can also make things worse, like the lightbulbs and the fact that they contain Mercury.

I'm so glad he got beat in 2000
Look ma it's a moron.

Albert
07-04-2007, 10:57 PM
I wish it was the former Vice President.

The fucker had the gall to say that Bush "played on all our fears" but yet puts out a fucking movie that attempts to scare people into "going green" through scare tactic scenarios that are highly unlikely if not impossible that it would even happen, all to accept all these kneejerk "environmental" ideas like Ethanol fuel or Compressed Flourescent lightbulbs that don't help the situation, but can also make things worse, like the lightbulbs and the fact that they contain Mercury.

I'm so glad he got beat in 2000

http://homepage.mac.com/aalgar/pics/misc/scream.jpg

WillieLee
07-04-2007, 11:17 PM
Look ma it's a

Banning offense. You might want to change it to be polite.

Bill Nolan
07-05-2007, 03:43 AM
This is hardly III's first offense. And it would seem to be as newsworthy, to me, as the Bush twins foibles. "Junior" has hardly removed himself from the public eye, afterall, with all his silly concert and movie grandstanding lately.

dEnny!
07-05-2007, 03:47 AM
:blah:

Dumbest post ever.

Why? Instead of insulting, DISCUSS!

Zeppe
07-05-2007, 04:31 AM
Prius' can go 100 mph????

AAlgar
07-05-2007, 04:32 AM
Why? Instead of insulting, DISCUSS!

Wow, there's a chestnut I haven't heard in a long time.

Thomas Mauer
07-05-2007, 04:37 AM
Anytime a scientist comes to a potentially scary, kneejerk conclusion, he's using "scare tactics." Can't you see the hypocrisy?

Feh, those NASA people and their newfangled science studies saying it's the point of no return in 10 years if we don't do anything now just want more money from the government!

Ethan Van Sciver
07-05-2007, 05:10 AM
Feh, those NASA people and their newfangled science studies saying it's the point of no return in 10 years if we don't do anything now just want more money from the government!

10 years from now it'll be something else. It always is.

Poor Al Gore the 3rd. I guess it's "rehab" and a public apology for him.

badpoet
07-05-2007, 05:22 AM
10 years from now it'll be something else. It always is.

Poor Al Gore the 3rd. I guess it's "rehab" and a public apology for him.

Just once I'd love to hear someone say "I fucked up but I don't owe anyone a public apology."

But the most important part of the story has been completely ignored by this board and I'm really disappointed. Who the fuck knew a Prius could hit 100??? HYBRID POWER!

Ray G.
07-05-2007, 05:23 AM
Everyone here hopes he gets the absolute max, right? Otherwise it's celebrity justice! :crazy:

Ethan Van Sciver
07-05-2007, 05:24 AM
I like this picture.
http://www.amalgamatedlampblack.com/images/protest/1000-1130/Thumbnails/2004-11-30_1000-1130_006_resize.JPG

It's unrelated to this thread, but it's kind of sweet.

AAlgar
07-05-2007, 05:28 AM
I like this picture.
http://www.amalgamatedlampblack.com/images/protest/1000-1130/Thumbnails/2004-11-30_1000-1130_006_resize.JPG

It's unrelated to this thread, but it's kind of sweet.

Must you bring your ridiculous liberal agenda to every thread? :roll:

badpoet
07-05-2007, 05:28 AM
See, that kind of pisses me off. There's really no comparing people to Hitler or Stalin. To me, Bush is more like a Mussolini.

ClintP
07-05-2007, 05:28 AM
Just once I'd love to hear someone say "I fucked up but I don't owe anyone a public apology."

But the most important part of the story has been completely ignored by this board and I'm really disappointed. Who the fuck knew a Prius could hit 100??? HYBRID POWER!

I agree with both of these comments. Especially the 2nd one. :lol:

Ethan Van Sciver
07-05-2007, 05:29 AM
Must you bring your ridiculous liberal agenda to every thread? :roll:

Yes, I'm trying to get the word out. I especially like the swastika, so that people who can't read get the message as well.

AAlgar
07-05-2007, 05:30 AM
Yes, I'm trying to get the word out. I especially like the swastika, so that people who can't read get the message as well.

But the Nazis were Socialists. :?

Ethan Van Sciver
07-05-2007, 05:30 AM
See, that kind of pisses me off. There's really no comparing people to Hitler or Stalin. To me, Bush is more like a Mussolini.

Mussolini sounds delicious. It'd be a whipped, chocolate dessert with lady fingers.

badpoet
07-05-2007, 05:32 AM
Mussolini sounds delicious. It'd be a whipped, chocolate dessert with lady fingers.

And a cherry on top!

Ethan Van Sciver
07-05-2007, 05:32 AM
But the Nazis were Socialists. :?

Ja, National Socialists, which is a far cry from Marxism.

Ethan Van Sciver
07-05-2007, 05:33 AM
Do they make single-serving tear gas cannisters? I wouldn't want to waste.

adamgreenberger
07-05-2007, 05:35 AM
Must have been a slow news day.

Why becasue they are reporting on this story??

You would be all over this if this was the Bush twins.

adamgreenberger
07-05-2007, 05:35 AM
Who knew Prius' went that fast.

AAlgar
07-05-2007, 05:36 AM
Who knew Prius' went that fast.

Certainly at least the two people who already made that joke. ;)

Ethan Van Sciver
07-05-2007, 05:36 AM
Who knew Prius' went that fast.

It was being pushed by a pissed off mom in an SUV.

artimoff
07-05-2007, 05:41 AM
Why becasue they are reporting on this story??

You would be all over this if this was the Bush twins.

At least the Bush twins had the secret service to drive for them.

Bill?
07-05-2007, 05:42 AM
didn't he get in trouble when his father was running for president too? it's got to be tough having a dad like that (just ask the bush twins or ronald reagans kids). but maybe his pop should get him a driver or something whenever he gets out of the pokey. on the bright side at least he was driving a hybrid (at over 100 mph! thats amazing!).

AAlgar
07-05-2007, 05:42 AM
didn't he get in trouble when his father was running for president too? it's got to be tough having a dad like that (just ask the bush twins or ronald reagans kids). but maybe his pop should get him a driver or something whenever he gets out of the pokey. on the bright side at least he was driving a hybrid (at over 100 mph! thats amazing!).

Et tu, Bill? :no:

Bill?
07-05-2007, 05:44 AM
Everyone here hopes he gets the absolute max, right? Otherwise it's celebrity justice! :crazy:

hey i got no problem with that. i'm a fan of his dads, but this guy sounds likes a real dummy. you think someone who was almost killed in a car accident as a kid would know better.

adamgreenberger
07-05-2007, 05:44 AM
didn't he get in trouble when his father was running for president too? it's got to be tough having a dad like that (just ask the bush twins or ronald reagans kids). but maybe his pop should get him a driver or something whenever he gets out of the pokey. on the bright side at least he was driving a hybrid (at over 100 mph! thats amazing!).

He is probably pissed that he HAS to drive a Prius, becasue if he didn't his dad would look like a hyprocrite.

Bill?
07-05-2007, 05:47 AM
Et tu, Bill? :no:

everyone knows a joke only gets funnier the more times in a row it's told. kind of like how amazing it is that a prius hybrid can go 100 miles per hour!

dEnny!
07-05-2007, 05:48 AM
Wow, there's a chestnut I haven't heard in a long time.

Chestnuts roasting on an open fire.

AAlgar
07-05-2007, 05:52 AM
Chestnuts roasting on an open fire.

And Priuses that can go a hunnerd miles a hour! :crazy:

Bill Nolan
07-05-2007, 06:03 AM
It's not surprising. It's a hybrid, right? Doesn't the electric engine part bascially shut off over 35/40 mph and the regular internal combustion engine runs on its own?

ClintP
07-05-2007, 06:06 AM
It's not surprising. It's a hybrid, right? Doesn't the electric engine part bascially shut off over 35/40 mph and the regular internal combustion engine runs on its own?

Was he going down hill? Was driving into or with the wind? :lol:

Bill Nolan
07-05-2007, 06:09 AM
Was he going down hill? Was driving into or with the wind? :lol:

Was it an an African or European Prius?

mario
07-05-2007, 06:10 AM
well.....the carbon emissions on marijuana can't be that great.........

he was driving a Prius!

mario
07-05-2007, 06:13 AM
Isn't 20k bail a little harsh for speeding and medicines without a subscription?

Bill Nolan
07-05-2007, 06:16 AM
Isn't 20k bail a little harsh for speeding and medicines without a subscription?

And marijuana... and a past record... no.

CPA
07-05-2007, 06:25 AM
Anytime a scientist comes to a potentially scary, kneejerk conclusion, he's using "scare tactics." Can't you see the hypocrisy?

Consensus is not a scientific conclusion. There are plenty of scientists that disagree with man made global warming. As a religious believer in global warming, all that is expected is an insult and a personal attack. His facts are correct. Debate those.

Ben
07-05-2007, 06:27 AM
Consensus is not a scientific conclusion. There are plenty of scientists that disagree with man made global warming. As a religious believer in global warming, all that is expected is an insult and a personal attack. His facts are correct. Debate those.His facts are not correct, and I don't really feel like typing out the textbook an answer would require everytime someone busted out with a lot of nonsense points.

And I, as a scientist, have to kind of disagree with you on that 'consensus does not equal conclusion' thing...

CPA
07-05-2007, 06:38 AM
And I, as a scientist, have to kind of disagree with you on that 'consensus does not equal conclusion' thing...

My point is that you, your famliy and I could agree or come to consensus on something and it be wrong. I always understood that consensus is a group agreement, not a fulfillment of a hypothesis. I believe that warming is occurring, but not because of us.

Ben
07-05-2007, 06:40 AM
My point is that you, your famliy and I could agree or come to consensus on something and it be wrong. I always understood that consensus is a group agreement, not a fulfillment of a hypothesis. I believe that warming is occurring, but not because of us.So you don't really assign any weight to expert opinion?

Bill?
07-05-2007, 06:44 AM
So you don't really assign any weight to expert opinion?

"experts" is just another word for "pinkos"! a true blue American goes with his gut!

CPA
07-05-2007, 06:45 AM
So you don't really assign any weight to expert opinion?

That is my point. An opinion is not fact. I have read a number of articles that debate it as being man-made. That means that the science has not been finalized. If you are telling me the hypothesis has been proved, then a conclusion has been reached. Consensus is when a lot of people all agree. A murder trial has expert opinion, but those people are not always right. A doctor gives me a medical opinion and maybe I get another one that is different.

A scientific test should be able to reproduced with the exact same results everytime to be proven. That does not happen in global warming. You know that it was snowing in July during the Revolutionary War. Was that global cooling?

ClintP
07-05-2007, 06:47 AM
You know that it was snowing in July during the Revolutionary War. Was that global cooling?
On the discovery or history channel , I saw something about that. They said it was a mini ice age. :dunno:

Ben
07-05-2007, 06:48 AM
That is my point. An opinion is not fact. I have read a number of articles that debate it as being man-made. That means that the science has not been finalized. If you are telling me the hypothesis has been proved, then a conclusion has been reached. Consensus is when a lot of people all agree. A murder trial has expert opinion, but those people are not always right. A doctor gives me a medical opinion and maybe I get another one that is different.

A scientific test should be able to reproduced with the exact same results everytime to be proven. That does not happen in global warming. You know that it was snowing in July during the Revolutionary War. Was that global cooling?Ugh, I'm not getting into one of these discussions again. Sorry, but your wrong. If the scientific consensus is that, say, evolution occurred, this consensus is based on the evidence that experts have evaluated. It is then silly for laymen to disagree, esp. since they usually don't understand the issues well enough to have an informed opinion.

ClintP
07-05-2007, 06:52 AM
Ugh, I'm not getting into one of these discussions again. Sorry, but your wrong. If the scientific consensus is that, say, evolution occurred, this consensus is based on the evidence that experts have evaluated. It is then silly for laymen to disagree, esp. since they usually don't understand the issues well enough to have an informed opinion.

What about Columbus and every other person back in the day who disagreed with the consensus?

Notice how I stay away from other things that I am not smart enough to respond to? :D

CPA
07-05-2007, 06:53 AM
Ugh, I'm not getting into one of these discussions again. Sorry, but your wrong. If the scientific consensus is that, say, evolution occurred, this consensus is based on the evidence that experts have evaluated. It is then silly for laymen to disagree, esp. since they usually don't understand the issues well enough to have an informed opinion.


This is why I love global warming people. You disagree about the merits and it becomes about my lack of knowledge and understanding. There is no concrete proof evolution occurred. I believe in it, but we are still searching for the missing link. If consensus was enough, the reasearch would be over. There are so many holes in the global warming model that I have read from other scientists that make complete sense, I will have to respectfully disagree.

I do have one question about the experts. If I cannot rely on a weatherman for a forecast four days in advance, how am supposed to rely on a climatologist for a forecast on the climate in 20-30 years? Just saying the understanding of weather patterns is far from certain.

TheTravis!
07-05-2007, 06:59 AM
Well, if we're right and you're wrong, I hope you don't live too close to the shore.

Ryan F
07-05-2007, 07:01 AM
What about Columbus and every other person back in the day who disagreed with the consensus?

Notice how I stay away from other things that I am not smart enough to respond to? :D

Columbus was dead wrong. He thought China was only a couple of thousand miles west of Europe. :)


Anyway, it's pretty crude and hateful to taunt Al Gore for his son getting in trouble because you disagree with his beliefs. I seem to recall a lot of conservatives declaring discussion of the Bush girls off limits...

CPA
07-05-2007, 07:02 AM
Well, if we're right and you're wrong, I hope you don't live too close to the shore.

Well, that scare tactic almost worked. How about the Medieval Ages being warmer than it is now? Population exploded during that time period. Man, I can't believe the King allowed the peasants to drive SUVs!

ClintP
07-05-2007, 07:04 AM
Columbus was dead wrong. He thought China was only a couple of thousand miles west of Europe. :)


Anyway, it's pretty crude and hateful to taunt Al Gore for his son getting in trouble because you disagree with his beliefs. I seem to recall a lot of conservatives declaring discussion of the Bush girls off limits...

I thought it was funny that his dad got brought up in this. I found more humor in the >100 mph than anything else.

Albert
07-05-2007, 07:05 AM
He is probably pissed that he HAS to drive a Prius, becasue if he didn't his dad would look like a hyprocrite.

There's nothing wrong with HAVING to drive a Prius. I own one and it's by far the best car I've ever driven.

CPA
07-05-2007, 07:05 AM
Columbus was dead wrong. He thought China was only a couple of thousand miles west of Europe. :)


Anyway, it's pretty crude and hateful to taunt Al Gore for his son getting in trouble because you disagree with his beliefs. I seem to recall a lot of conservatives declaring discussion of the Bush girls off limits...


A) Columbus believed the world was not flat which there was a consensus about.
B) Al Gore's son has not come up a single time in my discussion. That is a tough situation and I hope they can figure that out. His politics and bad science are what my discussion is based on.

Just needed to clear that up.

McAfee
07-05-2007, 07:37 AM
I do have one question about the experts. If I cannot rely on a weatherman for a forecast four days in advance, how am supposed to rely on a climatologist for a forecast on the climate in 20-30 years? Just saying the understanding of weather patterns is far from certain.

Weather and climate are not the same thing...

Bill!
07-05-2007, 07:41 AM
These debates are useless. Its just a circle of baiting by people who have jumped on the anti-environment bandwagon because its easy and no actual research is involved. There are the typical series of one line arguments and catch phrases that don't actually mean anything to the person educated on the subject.

And yes, I am making a general statement, people who dismiss global warming do not know much about the subject.

Ben
07-05-2007, 07:42 AM
These debates are useless. Its just a circle of baiting by people who have jumped on the anti-environment bandwagon because its easy and no actual research is involved. There are the typical series of one line arguments and catch phrases that don't actually mean anything to the person educated on the subject.They learned well from the anti-evolution people.

Ryan F
07-05-2007, 07:42 AM
A) Columbus believed the world was not flat which there was a consensus about.


Not sure I follow...most people in Columbus's time knew the world was round and had the correct circumference (which had been established over a thousand years earlier). Columbus thought the world was half as large as anyone else and he could sail to China in no time. He got lucky and hit land anyway. He challenged a consensus, but he was wrong.

I don't think the smattering of Exxon-funded scientists who challenge the evidence-based consensus of global warming really compare to Columbus anyway, I just like to dispel the "flat world" myth.

Mister Mets
07-05-2007, 07:43 AM
Prius' can go 100 mph????
They should try advertising this.

mario
07-05-2007, 07:52 AM
Well, that scare tactic almost worked. How about the Medieval Ages being warmer than it is now? Population exploded during that time period. Man, I can't believe the King allowed the peasants to drive SUVs!

Are we talking about the same middle ages where one tird of the population got killed of by the plague? And where there was a shortage of men due to continual crusades and wars?

CPA
07-05-2007, 07:54 AM
Are we talking about the same middle ages where one tird of the population got killed of by the plague? And where there was a shortage of men due to continual crusades and wars?

Yes. Plague is not connected to crop growth. The point was that it was warm more crops grew and people actually became heathier. War aand disease are not part of that. People poring their feces into the streets due to no sewer system is not part of the weather.

Thomas Mauer
07-05-2007, 07:54 AM
10 years from now it'll be something else. It always is.

We wouldn't be human if it wasn't so. :)

WillieLee
07-05-2007, 07:55 AM
This is why I love global warming people. You disagree about the merits and it becomes about my lack of knowledge and understanding. There is no concrete proof evolution occurred. I believe in it, but we are still searching for the missing link. If consensus was enough, the reasearch would be over. There are so many holes in the global warming model that I have read from other scientists that make complete sense, I will have to respectfully disagree.


I hate to be 'rude' but if you are going to say you have no lack of knowledge then you shouldn't make an incorrect statement about evolution theory.

Bill!
07-05-2007, 07:56 AM
Well, that scare tactic almost worked. How about the Medieval Ages being warmer than it is now? Population exploded during that time period. Man, I can't believe the King allowed the peasants to drive SUVs!

You do understand the concept of climate cycles right? And that the key is not comparing two time periods, but finding a pattern over hundreds of thousands of years?

CPA
07-05-2007, 07:59 AM
These debates are useless. Its just a circle of baiting by people who have jumped on the anti-environment bandwagon because its easy and no actual research is involved. There are the typical series of one line arguments and catch phrases that don't actually mean anything to the person educated on the subject.

And yes, I am making a general statement, people who dismiss global warming do not know much about the subject.

I know you are making a general statement in a true demeaning and lack of intelligence way. The real reason discussion of this never works is that the global warming faithful turn to insulting and demeaning all others. My lack of knowledge is always the issue. If you can explain to me scientifically, the debate ends. Saying that I am stupid and ignorant of the subject without proof of it happening, are how you guys work. It is fine, I love you guys getting all personal and angry!

Thomas Mauer
07-05-2007, 08:03 AM
Columbus was dead wrong. He thought China was only a couple of thousand miles west of Europe.

Columbus actually tried to find Japan because he read in Marco Polo's book that Japan had gold en masse. :)

Bill!
07-05-2007, 08:04 AM
I know you are making a general statement in a true demeaning and lack of intelligence way. The real reason discussion of this never works is that the global warming faithful turn to insulting and demeaning all others. My lack of knowledge is always the issue. If you can explain to me scientifically, the debate ends. Saying that I am stupid and ignorant of the subject without proof of it happening, are how you guys work. It is fine, I love you guys getting all personal and angry!

No. Its just frustrating. Its like trying to teach someone to count who doesn't believe in numbers.

Beta_Ray_Bryan
07-05-2007, 08:09 AM
Prius' can go 100 mph????

Sorry but to me this is still the most interesting part of the story.

Whodathunkit?

CPA
07-05-2007, 08:10 AM
No. Its just frustrating. Its like trying to teach someone to count who doesn't believe in numbers.

No. It is not difficult. THe whole point is that the science has not been decided. That is all I have a problem with. Talking down to people and dismissing there understanding of it without a scientific conclusion does not work. I am working off of the idea that once something is scientifically proven a scientist should be able to duplicate with the exact same results. If not, the hypothesis is not proven. I believe in global warming, just not we are the ONLY reason it is happening. There have always been changes in the climate.

By the way, your signature movie is one of the funniest things I have seen in awhile.

Bill!
07-05-2007, 08:11 AM
No. It is not difficult. THe whole point is that the science has not been decided. That is all I have a problem with. Talking down to people and dismissing there understanding of it without a scientific conclusion does not work. I am working off of the idea that once something is scientifically proven a scientist should be able to duplicate with the exact same results. If not, the hypothesis is not proven. I believe in global warming, just not we are the ONLY reason it is happening. There have always been changes in the climate.

By the way, your signature movie is one of the funniest things I have seen in awhile.

But have the changes in climate been as dramatic at any point in recorded history as they are now? And I'm not just talking about temperature, I'm talking about atmospheric content as well. Also, do you not recognize the pattern? Or do you ignore that part?

Ben
07-05-2007, 08:12 AM
No. It is not difficult. THe whole point is that the science has not been decided. That is all I have a problem with. Talking down to people and dismissing there understanding of it without a scientific conclusion does not work. I am working off of the idea that once something is scientifically proven a scientist should be able to duplicate with the exact same results. If not, the hypothesis is not proven. I believe in global warming, just not we are the ONLY reason it is happening. There have always been changes in the climate.

By the way, your signature movie is one of the funniest things I have seen in awhile.The science has been decided. Sorry, you're wrong.

DAVE
07-05-2007, 08:12 AM
No. It is not difficult. THe whole point is that the science has not been decided. That is all I have a problem with. Talking down to people and dismissing there understanding of it without a scientific conclusion does not work. I am working off of the idea that once something is scientifically proven a scientist should be able to duplicate with the exact same results. If not, the hypothesis is not proven. I believe in global warming, just not we are the ONLY reason it is happening. There have always been changes in the climate.

By the way, your signature movie is one of the funniest things I have seen in awhile.
So do you think people shouldn't change their gas consumption habits?

Albert
07-05-2007, 08:26 AM
So do you think people shouldn't change their gas consumption habits?

Right. Even if in some bizarro world, what scientists are universally agreeing on turns out to not be 100% correct, what's wrong with doing positive things to help prolong our planet's existence?

WillieLee
07-05-2007, 08:27 AM
Right. Even if in some bizarro world, what scientists are universally agreeing on turns out to not be 100% correct, what's wrong with doing positive things to help prolong our planet's existence?

Whatever you say, COMRADE.

Ben
07-05-2007, 08:28 AM
Right. Even if in some bizarro world, what scientists are universally agreeing on turns out to not be 100% correct, what's wrong with doing positive things to help prolong our planet's existence?Because God gave us the planet to use! We should use it up!

Bill!
07-05-2007, 08:28 AM
Right. Even if in some bizarro world, what scientists are universally agreeing on turns out to not be 100% correct, what's wrong with doing positive things to help prolong our planet's existence?

See, thats the thing that always gets me in these debates. Why would you not want to err on the side of caution and be more healthy? The only reason I can understand people being against this is one of three things:

Laziness
Selfishness (greed)
Desire to disagree

Albert
07-05-2007, 08:28 AM
Whatever you say, COMRADE.

Don't hate me just because I turn the lights off when I leave a room!

WillieLee
07-05-2007, 08:30 AM
Don't hate me just because I turn the lights off when I leave a room!

I won't. I leave my A/C on even when I'm not home to compensate for your actions.

Ben
07-05-2007, 08:33 AM
I won't. I leave my A/C on even when I'm not home to compensate for your actions.I'm not stopping at any more red lights to compensate for your actions!

DAVE
07-05-2007, 08:34 AM
Because God gave us the planet to use! We should use it up!

Yeah, George Washington didn't kill the King of England so that we can conserve our resources! Freedom!

CPA
07-05-2007, 08:34 AM
But have the changes in climate been as dramatic at any point in recorded history as they are now? And I'm not just talking about temperature, I'm talking about atmospheric content as well. Also, do you not recognize the pattern? Or do you ignore that part?

Yes the changes have been as drastic. Snow during the Revolutionary War in July. That is a pretty big climate shift. Greenland used to be green. That is a pretty major climate shift. Climate changes over years back and forth.

As far as atmospheric content, scientists change their mind about the most important things. I read an article that actually said the atmosphere is cleaner than 25 years ago and that it would speed up global warming. Another said we needed to pollute more to stop it.

Look in the seventies, climatologists were concerned with global cooling. Our measurements are only truly accurate for the past 50 years for America. Go read about weather and climate patterns decades ago even centuries ago. They are not consistently the same. I do not ignore any of it. There are bigger patterns happening. It is getting colder in other areas of the world.

Look, I have read a fairly large amount of stuff about this on both sides. There are plenty of scientists that do not agree with it (sorry Ben). There are two sides adn just because a "consensus" of scientists agree does not mean the science is settled. The only reply is, "you are wrong", like Ben here, or you do not know enough. That is all I need to hear from you people is that the science is not complete. You can believe that it is happening and provide facts, but the science, not matter how much Ben thinks, is not concluded. Only people with no scientific argument shut off debate and research. It is easy to prove right when the argument can say, "Look at increasing tempertures" when it is hot and "Weather is erratic" when it is cold. Read the other perspective on it. I have read both.

You guys have a nice day. It has been interesting. ;)

DAVE
07-05-2007, 08:37 AM
Yes the changes have been as drastic. Snow during the Revolutionary War in July. That is a pretty big climate shift. Greenland used to be green. That is a pretty major climate shift. Climate changes over years back and forth.

As far as atmospheric content, scientists change their mind about the most important things. I read an article that actually said the atmosphere is cleaner than 25 years ago and that it would speed up global warming. Another said we needed to pollute more to stop it.

Look in the seventies, climatologists were concerned with global cooling. Our measurements are only truly accurate for the past 50 years for America. Go read about weather and climate patterns decades ago even centuries ago. They are not consistently the same. I do not ignore any of it. There are bigger patterns happening. It is getting colder in other areas of the world.

Look, I have read a fairly large amount of stuff about this on both sides. There are plenty of scientists that do not agree with it (sorry Ben). There are two sides adn just because a "consensus" of scientists agree does not mean the science is settled. The only reply is, "you are wrong", like Ben here, or you do not know enough. That is all I need to hear from you people is that the science is not complete. You can believe that it is happening and provide facts, but the science, not matter how much Ben thinks, is not concluded. Only people with no scientific argument shut off debate and research. It is easy to prove right when the argument can say, "Look at increasing tempertures" when it is hot and "Weather is erratic" when it is cold. Read the other perspective on it. I have read both.

You guys have a nice day. It has been interesting. ;)

:lol: Greenland was never green. It was named that by an explorer who was fooled by the lush looking lands that came out of the shore on fjords.
That's hysterical that you would list that as an example to prove your claim.

Ben
07-05-2007, 08:38 AM
Hey, doesn't evolution violate the 2nd law of thermodynamics? WTF!?

DAVE
07-05-2007, 08:39 AM
I was actually just laughing out loud about the Greenland thing. Ben, get ready to be third funniest on the board.

CPA
07-05-2007, 08:40 AM
:lol: Greenland was never green. It was named that by an explorer who was fooled by the lush looking lands that came out of the shore on fjords.
That's hysterical that you would list that as an example to prove your claim.


It is hysterical that you are wrong. I have read about them finding all types of vegetation and other artifacts because the ice is melting. Go read!

RebootedCorpse
07-05-2007, 08:41 AM
Suddenly, this thread became awesome.

WillieLee
07-05-2007, 08:41 AM
Yes the changes have been as drastic. Snow during the Revolutionary War in July. That is a pretty big climate shift. Greenland used to be green. That is a pretty major climate shift. Climate changes over years back and forth.

As far as atmospheric content, scientists change their mind about the most important things. I read an article that actually said the atmosphere is cleaner than 25 years ago and that it would speed up global warming. Another said we needed to pollute more to stop it.

It's almost like it's a massively complex subject in which you need some form of education to decipher the information.



Look in the seventies, climatologists were concerned with global cooling.

No they weren't. The press was concerned with global cooling.

Ben
07-05-2007, 08:41 AM
I was actually just laughing out loud about the Greenland thing. Ben, get ready to be third funniest on the board.Did you know that Antarctica used to have ants? That's why they called it that.

Bill!
07-05-2007, 08:42 AM
Yes the changes have been as drastic. Snow during the Revolutionary War in July. That is a pretty big climate shift. Greenland used to be green. That is a pretty major climate shift. Climate changes over years back and forth.

As far as atmospheric content, scientists change their mind about the most important things. I read an article that actually said the atmosphere is cleaner than 25 years ago and that it would speed up global warming. Another said we needed to pollute more to stop it.

Look in the seventies, climatologists were concerned with global cooling. Our measurements are only truly accurate for the past 50 years for America. Go read about weather and climate patterns decades ago even centuries ago. They are not consistently the
same. I do not ignore any of it. There are bigger patterns happening. It is getting colder in other areas of the world.

Look, I have read a fairly large amount of stuff about this on both sides. There are plenty of scientists that do not agree with it (sorry Ben). There are two sides adn just because a "consensus" of scientists agree does not mean the science is settled. The only reply is, "you are wrong", like Ben here, or you do not know enough. That is all I need to hear from you people is that the science is not complete. You can believe that it is happening and provide facts, but the science, not matter how much Ben thinks, is not concluded. Only people with no scientific argument shut off debate and research. It is easy to prove right when the argument can say, "Look at increasing tempertures" when it is hot and "Weather is erratic" when it is cold. Read the other perspective on it. I have read both.

You guys have a nice day. It has been interesting. ;)

Thanks for proving my point by your post of more lies and complete lack of looking beyond a few hundred years of history. This is the typical weakness of any anti-environment argument, a complete lack of scope.

Another thing, after making a post like this, how do you expect people not to tell you you don't know what you're talking about regadring the subject?

WillieLee
07-05-2007, 08:43 AM
I'm not stopping at any more red lights to compensate for your actions!

I'm not paying for gas anymore! Oh wait, that's not right.

Ben
07-05-2007, 08:44 AM
I'm not paying for gas anymore! Oh wait, that's not right.
You should pay extra for gas to drive up demand and drive prices up even further. Also, buy gas that you don't use (poor it into the ocean) to drive down supply.

DAVE
07-05-2007, 08:45 AM
It is hysterical that you are wrong. I have read about them finding all types of vegetation and other artifacts because the ice is melting. Go read!

Yes, let's read. It's fun-demental!


Why "Greenland" ?
There ia a story about the origin of Greenland's name. The first settler in Greenland, Erik the Red, is reported in old Icelandic sagas to have named the new country Greenland to attract other settlers there.


The name "Greenland" comes from Scandinavian settlers. In the Icelandic sagas, it is said that Erik the Red was exiled from Iceland for murder. He, along with his extended family and thralls, set out in ships to find the land that was rumoured to be to the northwest. After settling there, he named the land Grænland ("Greenland"), possibly in order to attract more people to settle there.[1] Greenland was also called Gruntland ("Ground-land") and Engronelant (or Engroneland) on early maps.

The real story behind the name is given in Erik the Red's Saga, based on oral tradition and written down in the early thirteenth century in Iceland. After the Icelandic landnám was over, Erik the Red and his father Thorvald were forced to leave Norway because one or both of them was involved in killings (details are not given). After Thorvald died, Erik was involved in yet more killings, for which his punishment was three years' vacation--er, I mean banishment from Iceland. (And you thought O. J. got off easy.)

He used the time to explore the rumored lands to the west. When his term of banishment expired, he returned to Icleand to invite his neighbors and friends to settle the new country with him. He purposely chose the pleasant name Grænland ("green land") to attract settlers

WillieLee
07-05-2007, 08:49 AM
You should pay extra for gas to drive up demand and drive prices up even further. Also, buy gas that you don't use (poor it into the ocean) to drive down supply.

Can I chant "Die hippie!" while I'm doing this?

Bill!
07-05-2007, 08:49 AM
CPA - since you are so big on complete irrefutable scientific fact on everything, I want your sources for every statement you made in that last post. That should keep you busy for a while.

Generic Poster
07-05-2007, 08:57 AM
It amuses me he was speeding in a Prius. Those Gores all love the environment!

Albert
07-05-2007, 09:02 AM
It amuses me he was speeding in a Prius. Those Gores all love the environment!

They can get pretty fast!

Ben
07-05-2007, 09:03 AM
They can get pretty fast!I think that people think hybrids are just electric cars.

Albert
07-05-2007, 09:04 AM
I think that people think hybrids are just electric cars.

Yeah. A Prius is just as capable of speeds as any other consumer car. I drive it on the highway frequently.

WillieLee
07-05-2007, 09:05 AM
I think that people think hybrids are just electric cars.

That's just rude!

ClintP
07-05-2007, 09:05 AM
I think that people think hybrids are just electric cars.

I wonder if it can take my malibu...


They can get pretty fast!

The faster you go the more gas you use. If you want to open it up like that, you had better be pulling some wind generator behind you to off set the fuel you are sucking up. :)

RebootedCorpse
07-05-2007, 09:05 AM
Did you know that Antarctica used to have ants? That's why they called it that.

Then there's Micronesia in the early '80s.:
http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f228/cbunn1117/Pow%20Moments/micronauts.jpg

Albert
07-05-2007, 09:07 AM
The faster you go the more gas you use. If you want to open it up like that, you had better be pulling some wind generator behind you to off set the fuel you are sucking up. :)

That's not really true. Even at highway speeds, it's still using a combination of the electric motor and gas engine. Depending on how you drive and the elevation, you can easily get as efficient if not more efficient mileage on the highway compared to local traffic.

ClintP
07-05-2007, 09:09 AM
That's not really true. Even at highway speeds, it's still using a combination of the electric motor and gas engine. Depending on how you drive and the elevation, you can easily get as efficient if not more efficient mileage on the highway compared to local traffic.

So going 100 mph will use the same amount of gas as going 55?

Albert
07-05-2007, 09:10 AM
So going 100 mph will use the same amount of gas as going 55?

If you're going down an inclined slope, sure!

ClintP
07-05-2007, 09:11 AM
If you're going down an inclined slope, sure!

:lol:

Oh, and I rate my mileage on smiles per gallon!

Albert
07-05-2007, 09:11 AM
Seriously, though, Priuses are great cars. I recommend them to anyone. I haven't had one problem or complaint with mine.

WillieLee
07-05-2007, 09:12 AM
Seriously, though, Priuses are great cars. I recommend them to anyone.

I feel the same way about Vicodin.

Albert
07-05-2007, 09:14 AM
I feel the same way about Vicodin.

Vicodin isn't a car!

WillieLee
07-05-2007, 09:16 AM
Vicodin isn't a car!

You can take a trip with Vicodin.

dasNdanger
07-05-2007, 10:07 AM
This is why you never, ever name your kid after yourself.

das

Generic Poster
07-05-2007, 10:22 AM
I think that people think hybrids are just electric cars.

I have a Hybrid Camry. It actually has more horserpower than a regular (4 cylinder, anyway) one.

I also have a Hybrid Canary that I will set loose on you all if I'm not accorded the proper respect.

Albert
07-05-2007, 10:25 AM
I have a Hybrid Camry. It actually has more horserpower than a regular (4 cylinder, anyway) one.

I also have a Hybrid Canary that I will set loose on you all if I'm not accorded the proper respect.

Hybrid buddy! Let's hug! Or maybe half-hug and half-high five.

Generic Poster
07-05-2007, 10:37 AM
Hybrid buddy! Let's hug! Or maybe half-hug and half-high five.

Yay!

Martin J
07-05-2007, 10:40 AM
Hey reminds me when Euan Blair was found unconciously drunk in Leicester Square when he was underage and nobady batted an eye over her ein the Uk the big question was shy didnt he have some security to take him home as he was the PM's son.

More importantly a Prius can go at 100.

MJ

ClintP
07-05-2007, 11:03 AM
I have been researching this 100 mph business and it looks like 105 is the top speed. That means someone made a mistake about Gore going 120....

http://john1701a.com/prius/prius-specs.htm


5 passenger capacity
5 door hatchback
96.2 cubic ft passenger volume
16.1 cubic ft cargo volume
2890 pound curb-weight
175 inch (14.6 ft) length
67.9 inch (5.7 ft) width
58.1 inch (4.8 ft) height
5.25 inch ground clearance
10.1 seconds 0-60 MPH
0.26 Cd (coefficient of drag)
42 MPH top speed (electric motor only)
105 MPH top speed (gas engine & electric motor)

ClintP
07-05-2007, 11:07 AM
Interesting. They got one up to 130 mph... It can get up to 130 mph, however it has to be pushed to get going. :lol:

http://www.toyota.com/html/hybridsynergyview/2004/october/bonneville.html


For generations the trek to Bonneville has been an American ritual performed by small, dedicated teams of speed enthusiasts. Backyard mechanics rub elbows with professional drivers and corporate crews. They share the quest to push their machines to be as fast as possible.

Bonneville Speed Week has strict rules and procedures for teams to follow. The teams take their work very seriously. Records set at Bonneville are recognized worldwide.

The idea to take Prius to Bonneville began with a "what if" conversation between Car and Driver writer Aaron Robinson and Toyota National Manager Bill Reinert. The notion of a hybrid speed record was so intriguing that it quickly turned into a fast-track build project at the Toyota Motorsports workshop in Torrance, California. The result was the Prius Greensport, a 2004 Prius with the stock Hybrid Synergy Drive® system, plus a couple of modifications: bigger wheels and tires, and a change in gearing.

The gear modifications make takeoff from the starting line a bit challenging, but at Bonneville, that is no problem. Rules allow vehicles to get a push start because top speed is the main concern. On the so-called Short Track, cars have one mile to get up to full speed before measurements are taken. Two miles remain to reach top speed, and plenty of salt follows to slow down and stop safely.

Prius Greensport claimed the first Bonneville hybrid production car speed record at 130.794 miles per hour with Aaron Robinson behind the wheel. Shigeyuki Hori, Toyota's Executive Chief Engineer for Prius, and Fumiaki Kobayashi, a Toyota Vice President, also had fast runs on the salt. Kobayashi says, "I think it is important that Prius has set the first hybrid-car speed record. We demonstrated that hybrids could exhibit high performance. It is important for us to challenge ourselves and the auto world to see what hybrids can do. Prius Greensport will inspire us to imagine new possibilities, and might challenge others to try Bonneville themselves."

mario
07-05-2007, 11:58 AM
Yes. Plague is not connected to crop growth. The point was that it was warm more crops grew and people actually became heathier. War aand disease are not part of that. People poring their feces into the streets due to no sewer system is not part of the weather.

so because it was warmer the population exploded in the middle ages?
"people became healthier because crops grew and it was warmer"?
Man, i gotta try some of that shit you're on. I'm dying to get some good hallucinations!!:lol: :lol: :lol:

KHAN!
07-05-2007, 01:18 PM
No. Its just frustrating. Its like trying to teach someone to count who doesn't believe in numbers.

Can you be any more insulting?

KHAN!
07-05-2007, 01:20 PM
Thanks for proving my point by your post of more lies and complete lack of looking beyond a few hundred years of history. This is the typical weakness of any anti-environment argument, a complete lack of scope.

Another thing, after making a post like this, how do you expect people not to tell you you don't know what you're talking about regadring the subject?

Blah blah blah blah

Ben
07-05-2007, 01:21 PM
Blah blah blah blahCan you be any more insulting?

See, you clearly have no interest in any actual criticisms of what you're saying, so why should anyone go through the trouble of actually typing out all the things you were inaccurate about in your original posts? A lot of what you said was wrong because you didn't have a complex enough understanding of the science behind this stuff. Asking people to respond means those people who know what they're talking about having to actually type out a LOT of stuff. That's work. People get paid for that kind of work. But if you're not even going to listen to it, why bother? I'm not being snarky or rude here. That's just the situation as I see it.

KHAN!
07-05-2007, 01:23 PM
The science has been decided. Sorry, you're wrong.

Actually, I think alot of scientists are being pressured to follow the "global climate change" mindset or risk having the others try to discredit them.

The Global warming people are essentially the anti capitalism communist people looking for a new target and a new M.O. since the Soviet Union went Kaput.

Ben
07-05-2007, 01:24 PM
Actually, I think alot of scientists are being pressured to follow the "global climate change" mindset or risk having the others try to discredit them.

The Global warming people are essentially the anti capitalism communist people looking for a new target and a new M.O. since the Soviet Union went Kaput.I disagree completely, and I'm speaking as a scientist. Anyone that finds results that contradict what global warming predicts will have very little trouble publishing (assuming their research methods are sound, etc.).

KHAN!
07-05-2007, 01:24 PM
Why? Instead of insulting, DISCUSS!

Because they would rather insult me and not address the valid points I bring foward. And yet they call me a troll on other threads.

Ben
07-05-2007, 01:25 PM
Because they would rather insult me and not address the valid points I bring foward. And yet they call me a troll on other threads..
Blah blah blah blah

Khrutch
07-05-2007, 01:32 PM
“Anthropogenic global warming is a particular good example of the deductive method at work – an initial assumption of increasing CO2 causes warming, the climate sensitivity factor, (in which the doubling CO2 is thought to raise the surface temperature of the earth 1.8 - 5 degrees Kelvin), is accepted as a fact by consensus though no scientist has yet demonstrated this by physical experiment.”

Google is your friend.

;)

KHAN!
07-05-2007, 01:32 PM
I disagree completely, and I'm speaking as a scientist. Anyone that finds results that contradict what global warming predicts will have very little trouble publishing (assuming their research methods are sound, etc.).

Wrong sir. There have been scientists with very sound methods which went against the global warming bandwagon and they were threatened to be disbarred.

I am not dismissing that there is something going on with the climate. But I am not going to subscribe to the notion that man is responsible. I think things are more of a cyclical climate thing. But, they want to blame us, and try to force us to use these kneejerk practices, which doesn't exactly help. Look at ethanol. To take out 12% of our dependence on oil, there has to be a cornfield the size of Texas with all of that going to Ethanol use. All this is going to do is cause people to starve, because corn and sugar prices are skyrocketing because of this. Or what about the Compressed Flourescent bulbs. The Environazis say how it uses alot less energy. But they don't mention that if the bulb actually breaks, it is a EPA hazard.

I'm all for saving energy and all that. But I want something that doesn't reek of it being a kneejerk reaction, that doesn't cause more problems than it solves, and is something convienent to use.

We don't need to force this shit on people. The best way to adopt this is to find something the free market could use and it will take off that way.

T-Dro
07-05-2007, 01:34 PM
The Global warming people are essentially the anti capitalism communist people looking for a new target and a new M.O. since the Soviet Union went Kaput.


OK, I didn't want to get involved in this mess, but do you have ANY proof of this at all? Or even a vaguely logical reason why you believe this?

Dan McLellan
07-05-2007, 01:35 PM
Wrong sir. There have been scientists with very sound methods which went against the global warming bandwagon and they were threatened to be disbarred.

I am not dismissing that there is something going on with the climate. But I am not going to subscribe to the notion that man is responsible. I think things are more of a cyclical climate thing. But, they want to blame us, and try to force us to use these kneejerk practices, which doesn't exactly help. Look at ethanol. To take out 12% of our dependence on oil, there has to be a cornfield the size of Texas with all of that going to Ethanol use. All this is going to do is cause people to starve, because corn and sugar prices are skyrocketing because of this. Or what about the Compressed Flourescent bulbs. The Environazis say how it uses alot less energy. But they don't mention that if the bulb actually breaks, it is a EPA hazard.

I'm all for saving energy and all that. But I want something that doesn't reek of it being a kneejerk reaction, that doesn't cause more problems than it solves, and is something convienent to use.

We don't need to force this shit on people. The best way to adopt this is to find something the free market could use and it will take off that way.

Comparing people you disagree with to Nazis is always a good way to discuss issues.

Albert
07-05-2007, 01:39 PM
I disagree completely, and I'm speaking as a scientist.

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1102/731036002_d911b9d7ec.jpg

Dan McLellan
07-05-2007, 01:40 PM
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1102/731036002_d911b9d7ec.jpg

Are you, Alice, currently menstruating?

KHAN!
07-05-2007, 01:45 PM
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1102/731036002_d911b9d7ec.jpg

heh

Bill!
07-05-2007, 01:47 PM
Ah yes. So the truth comes clean. Global warming is just another soviet plot to bring capitalism to its knees. How blind we all have been.

Bill!
07-05-2007, 01:48 PM
Can you be any more insulting?

This from the same troll who called me a nazi and a communist? Please, do yourself and everyone a favor, disconnect, go read a book, and take it easy.

Dan McLellan
07-05-2007, 01:51 PM
This from the same troll who called me a nazi and a communist? Please, do yourself and everyone a favor, disconnect, go read a book, and take it easy.

There is irony in your post.

KHAN!
07-05-2007, 01:58 PM
This from the same troll who called me a nazi and a communist? Please, do yourself and everyone a favor, disconnect, go read a book, and take it easy.

I refer to the environmentalists to nazis because of the oppressive nature they treat other scientists that don't subscribe to their line of thinking.

But, I'll chill with the commie and nazi remarks, if you stop with the condesending tone.

Bill!
07-05-2007, 01:58 PM
I refer to the environmentalists to nazis because of the oppressive nature they treat other scientists that don't subscribe to their line of thinking.

But, I'll chill with the commie and nazi remarks, if you stop with the condesending tone.

Show me some proof of your claims.

Alex(sadly)Maleev
07-05-2007, 02:00 PM
Easy boys. Shake hands or leave the discussion.

jamestolliver
07-05-2007, 02:02 PM
Easy boys. Shake hands or leave the discussion.

I feel like the calvary has arrived! You might want to post the same thing in the Olbermann: Bush, Cheney should resign thread.

Ben
07-05-2007, 02:26 PM
I feel like the calvary has arrived! You might want to post the same thing in the Olbermann: Bush, Cheney should resign thread.
But Bush and Cheney SHOULD RESIGN!!! WATHAJTHAIOHNOI$NHGI@Gohtoh2oigh483t b098hg9hvo
ghiovqh5n4v9tyh34tvp]
hrh
svi4s
tkvjhu
35jy
bh
j
4

QED

jamestolliver
07-05-2007, 02:35 PM
But Bush and Cheney SHOULD RESIGN!!! WATHAJTHAIOHNOI$NHGI@Gohtoh2oigh483t b098hg9hvo
ghiovqh5n4v9tyh34tvp]
hrh
svi4s
tkvjhu
35jy
bh
j
4

QED

Weird side rant but I hate QED. It makes me think of IB Higher Level math which is currently kicking my ass. Our teacher is actually making us come in over the summer so that he can continue teaching us which makes me unhappy because it screws with my work schedule.

Thomas Mauer
07-05-2007, 03:30 PM
Rirse is going to go far on the board! I'd say Favorite Poster 2007. :D

Ben
07-05-2007, 03:31 PM
Weird side rant but I hate QED. It makes me think of IB Higher Level math which is currently kicking my ass. Our teacher is actually making us come in over the summer so that he can continue teaching us which makes me unhappy because it screws with my work schedule.You can't counter a QED. Once you say QED, you've won the argument. It comes at a very high price, though, so use it wisely.

Corey
07-05-2007, 03:32 PM
You can't counter a QED. Once you say QED, you've won the argument. It comes at a very high price, though, so use it wisely.

I... don't know what QED means...

:cry:

Mister Mets
07-05-2007, 03:36 PM
This is why you never, ever name your kid after yourself.

das
or why you should always try raising your kids right, so they won't fuck up in an extraordinary manner.

Ben
07-05-2007, 03:43 PM
or why you should always try raising your kids right, so they won't fuck up in an extraordinary manner.If only Al Gore had thought of raising his kids right! DAMMIT!

Mister Mets
07-05-2007, 03:50 PM
If only Al Gore had thought of raising his kids right! DAMMIT!

He may have thought of it, but it seems that he didn't.

Bill!
07-05-2007, 03:57 PM
or why you should always try raising your kids right, so they won't fuck up in an extraordinary manner.

So would it be safe to say lots of members of this board are fuck ups? As I'm sure many of us have had run ins with the law, maybe some of a similar nature. OR, have acted in a similar way but not gotten caught.

Ben
07-05-2007, 03:58 PM
So would it be safe to say lots of members of this board are fuck ups? As I'm sure many of us have had run ins with the law, maybe some of a similar nature. OR, have acted in a similar way but not gotten caught.
I got pulled over for speeding last year. Call my dad "Mr. Fuckup" from now on!

Mister Mets
07-05-2007, 04:39 PM
So would it be safe to say lots of members of this board are fuck ups? As I'm sure many of us have had run ins with the law, maybe some of a similar nature. OR, have acted in a similar way but not gotten caught.
If you're caught speeding at 100 miles an hour AND there are various drugs in your car AND you've had two prior arrests, you are a fuck-up.

I don't think many here have done things quite that bad.

I really don't have a problem with the possession as much as the stupidity of speeding that much when you have drugs in your car.
That's just an astounding level of stupidity.


I got pulled over for speeding last year. Call my dad "Mr. Fuckup" from now on!
If you were speeding at 100 miles an hour AND there were various drugs in your car AND you've had two prior arrests for possession and suspicion of DUI (or anything equivalent or worse) I would call your dad "Mr Fuckup." But I doubt the time you were pulled over speeding was that bad.

If it was, I think many here would lose respect for you.

Thomas Mauer
07-05-2007, 04:42 PM
I... don't know what QED means...

:cry:

Quod erat demonstrandum - what was to be proven.

Dan McLellan
07-05-2007, 04:46 PM
Al Gore is the new Paris Hilton

Generic Poster
07-05-2007, 04:47 PM
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1102/731036002_d911b9d7ec.jpg

I liked it better when we were just talking about being hybrid buddies! Why do you all always have to fight so much??!! *sob*

Justin.Strange
07-05-2007, 05:39 PM
There's nothing wrong with HAVING to drive a Prius. I own one and it's by far the best car I've ever driven.

Oh word? How is it maintenance wise? I'm considering purchasing one when my current car finally dies.

KHAN!
07-06-2007, 09:46 AM
OK, I didn't want to get involved in this mess, but do you have ANY proof of this at all? Or even a vaguely logical reason why you believe this?

Here's some proof about how the global warming scare is a fraud.

In Science magazine, there is an article about how they found plants and butterflies and shit under the glaciers in Greenland. it was carbon-dated to have been from just a couple of hundred thousand years ago. According to ice core samples, the average temperature was 10 degrees warmer than it is now, but the "scientists" go off about how it increased .7 degrees in the past 100 years of so. There are evidence of more and more scientists jumping off the "global climate change" scare tactics as more holes are poked into their "sound" evidence.

But you combine that with Gore's recent remarks about "consumption tax" should be added to fuel, particularly for the wealthy and it's easy to put together that it's less about saving the environment and more about redistribution of wealth and other socialist propaganda.

Ben
07-06-2007, 09:56 AM
Here's some proof about how the global warming scare is a fraud.

In Science magazine, there is an article about how they found plants and butterflies and shit under the glaciers in Greenland. it was carbon-dated to have been from just a couple of hundred thousand years ago. According to ice core samples, the average temperature was 10 degrees warmer than it is now, but the "scientists" go off about how it increased .7 degrees in the past 100 years of so. There are evidence of more and more scientists jumping off the "global climate change" scare tactics as more holes are poked into their "sound" evidence.

But you combine that with Gore's recent remarks about "consumption tax" should be added to fuel, particularly for the wealthy and it's easy to put together that it's less about saving the environment and more about redistribution of wealth and other socialist propaganda.I've read a lot of articles in Science, and I've never seen any scientists "go off" about anything.

And they all are scientists that are published that journal.

I don't even know where to start with the rest of what you said. It might help if you cited the actual article, so we could read it and evaluate your interpretation.

Nice try, though.

DAVE
07-06-2007, 09:58 AM
I've read a lot of articles in Science, and I've never seen any scientists "go off" about anything.

And they all are scientists that are published that journal.

I don't even know where to start with the rest of what you said. It might help if you cited the actual article, so we could read it and evaluate your interpretation.

Nice try, though.

No dude I read a science magazine That said that dinosaurs are stil lalive and that global warming is fake because a dinosaur told me it was. also it said i had the ideas for star wars and everything but gorge lucas is working for the islamofacists and they stol all the ideas and redrew stepehen platts art and it made his anatomy bad but the science magazine said its not true. thats some proof.

KHAN!
07-06-2007, 09:59 AM
I've read a lot of articles in Science, and I've never seen any scientists "go off" about anything.

And they all are scientists that are published that journal.

I don't even know where to start with the rest of what you said. It might help if you cited the actual article, so we could read it and evaluate your interpretation.

Nice try, though.


I don't know the actual article. Glenn Beck was talking about it on his show, where he was debunking all the myths the scientists claim as facts of global warming.

Dan McLellan
07-06-2007, 10:01 AM
I don't know the actual article. Glenn Beck was talking about it on his show, where he was debunking all the myths the scientists claim as facts of global warming.

This Glenn Beck?

http://mediamatters.org/issues_topics/people/glennbeck

KHAN!
07-06-2007, 10:02 AM
This Glenn Beck?

http://mediamatters.org/issues_topics/people/glennbeck

Yes THAT Glenn Beck. But don't listen to media matters. They are so liberally biased and they take so much of his stuff out of context.

Dan McLellan
07-06-2007, 10:03 AM
Yes THAT Glenn Beck. But don't listen to media matters. They are so liberally biased and they take so much of his stuff out of context.

No they don't.

Ben
07-06-2007, 10:03 AM
I don't know the actual article. Glenn Beck was talking about it on his show, where he was debunking all the myths the scientists claim as facts of global warming.So the authors of a Science article, one of the most prestigious scientific journals in the world, are "scientists," but Glenn Beck, a former Top 40 disc jockey, is somehow an authority?

ClintP
07-06-2007, 10:04 AM
I liked it better when we were just talking about being hybrid buddies! Why do you all always have to fight so much??!! *sob*
Did you like my research I did on the Prius top speeds? Turns out if you want to get one up to 130 mph, you have to push it to get it going. AKA, shit-car! :twisted:

edwardmblake
07-06-2007, 10:04 AM
I don't know the actual article. Glenn Beck was talking about it on his show, where he was debunking all the myths the scientists claim as facts of global warming.

If it wasn't so offensive, I'd refer you to the "Read a Book" thread.

KHAN!
07-06-2007, 10:05 AM
No they don't.

Yes, yes they do.

Bill?
07-06-2007, 10:05 AM
I don't know the actual article. Glenn Beck was talking about it on his show, where he was debunking all the myths the scientists claim as facts of global warming.

Glen Beck= Noted Climatologist.

ClintP
07-06-2007, 10:05 AM
If it wasn't so offensive, I'd refer you to the "Read a Book" thread.

I love that song. I need a mp3 so I can jam to it while I am stuck in traffic. :lol:

DAVE
07-06-2007, 10:05 AM
Yes THAT Glenn Beck. But don't listen to media matters. They are so liberally biased and they take so much of his stuff out of context.

Yeah don't listen to MediaMatters, they use people's exact words to make a point about what kind of people they are.

Ben
07-06-2007, 10:06 AM
Yes, yes they do.Glenn Beck... scientists... Glenn Beck... scientists...

Hmmm... one of them has to be outrageous and pompous to make a living.... the other has to design experiments to test well-constructed hypotheses and write up their results in a clear manner... Hmm...........................

Thomas Mauer
07-06-2007, 10:17 AM
Here's some proof about how the global warming scare is a fraud.

In Science magazine, there is an article about how they found plants and butterflies and shit under the glaciers in Greenland. it was carbon-dated to have been from just a couple of hundred thousand years ago. According to ice core samples, the average temperature was 10 degrees warmer than it is now, but the "scientists" go off about how it increased .7 degrees in the past 100 years of so. There are evidence of more and more scientists jumping off the "global climate change" scare tactics as more holes are poked into their "sound" evidence.

But you combine that with Gore's recent remarks about "consumption tax" should be added to fuel, particularly for the wealthy and it's easy to put together that it's less about saving the environment and more about redistribution of wealth and other socialist propaganda.

Humanity as a whole is dependent on the stability of the current ecosystem. If temperatures change, there will be rapid, violent changes in flora and fauna, redirected wind patterns and so forth. There will be a rise in natural disasters such as hurricanes, tornadoes and flooding where that wasn't an issue before. Life will become more dangerous for humanity. Cities, power plants, pipelines, water reservoirs et al will be damaged and destroyed by force of nature and there'll be chaos that governments won't be able to handle smoothly, if at all.

It doesn't matter that temperatures may have been 10 degrees warmer 100k years ago because we live in the here and now and need our current global climate zones to stay intact if we don't want to face wars over fresh water reservoirs and crops.

There have been numerous mini ice ages throughout recorded history, so the planet cooling off by 10 degrees over a period of 100,000 years is a very gradual shift.

However, the average temperature rising by nearly 1 degree in the last 100 years is alarming, because meteorologically, that is a completely unstable rise in temperature. Flora and fauna can't react over time and adapt, they simply change their makeup with more species dying out and being replaced in such a short amount of time than ever before.

There is NO dispute in the scientific community that global warming is or isn't happening. Global warming and cooling happens in cycles, and we're nearing a warming peak. The only dispute is about whether humans accelerated the process and still do, and what can be done to avert disaster so that civilization as we know it can continue to exist.

KHAN!
07-06-2007, 10:21 AM
You want proof, here are actual quotes from actual scientists who believe that any climate change is naturally occurring and not man made;

Khabibullo Ismailovich Abdusamatov, mathematician and astronomer at Pulkovskaya Observatory of the Russian Academy of Sciences and the supervisor of the Astrometria project of the Russian section of the International Space Station: "Global warming results not from the emission of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, but from an unusually high level of solar radiation and a lengthy - almost throughout the last century - growth in its intensity...Ascribing 'greenhouse' effect properties to the Earth's atmosphere is not scientifically substantiated...Heated greenhouse gases, which become lighter as a result of expansion, ascend to the atmosphere only to give the absorbed heat away." (Russian News & Information Agency, Jan. 15, 2007 [11]) (See also [12], [13], [14])


# David Bellamy, environmental campaigner, broadcaster and former botanist: "Global warming is a largely natural phenomenon. The world is wasting stupendous amounts of money on trying to fix something that can’t be fixed."[17]

Reid Bryson, emeritus professor of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, University of Wisconsin-Madison: "It’s absurd. Of course it’s going up. It has gone up since the early 1800s, before the Industrial Revolution, because we’re coming out of the Little Ice Age, not because we’re putting more carbon dioxide into the air." [18].


William M. Gray, Professor of Atmospheric Science, Colorado State University: "This small warming is likely a result of the natural alterations in global ocean currents which are driven by ocean salinity variations. Ocean circulation variations are as yet little understood. Human kind has little or nothing to do with the recent temperature changes. We are not that influential."[23]) "I am of the opinion that [global warming] is one of the greatest hoaxes ever perpetrated on the American people." [24]) "So many people have a vested interest in this global-warming thing—all these big labs and research and stuff. The idea is to frighten the public, to get money to study it more."[25])

Or this scientist who doesn't believe global warming doesn't even exist

* Timothy F. Ball, former Professor of Geography, University of Winnipeg: "(The world's climate) warmed from 1680 up to 1940, but since 1940 it's been cooling down. The evidence for warming is because of distorted records. The satellite data, for example, shows cooling." (November 2004) [5] "The temperature hasn't gone up. ... But the mood of the world has changed: It has heated up to this belief in global warming." (August 2006) [6] "Temperatures declined from 1940 to 1980 and in the early 1970's global cooling became the consensus. ... By the 1990's temperatures appeared to have reversed and Global Warming became the consensus. It appears I'll witness another cycle before retiring, as the major mechanisms and the global temperature trends now indicate a cooling." (Feb. 5, 2007) [7]


All of this was easily obtained from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_global_warming_consens us

DAVE
07-06-2007, 10:28 AM
You want proof, here are actual quotes from actual scientists who believe that any climate change is naturally occurring and not man made;

Khabibullo Ismailovich Abdusamatov, mathematician and astronomer at Pulkovskaya Observatory of the Russian Academy of Sciences and the supervisor of the Astrometria project of the Russian section of the International Space Station: "Global warming results not from the emission of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, but from an unusually high level of solar radiation and a lengthy - almost throughout the last century - growth in its intensity...Ascribing 'greenhouse' effect properties to the Earth's atmosphere is not scientifically substantiated...Heated greenhouse gases, which become lighter as a result of expansion, ascend to the atmosphere only to give the absorbed heat away." (Russian News & Information Agency, Jan. 15, 2007 [11]) (See also [12], [13], [14])


# David Bellamy, environmental campaigner, broadcaster and former botanist: "Global warming is a largely natural phenomenon. The world is wasting stupendous amounts of money on trying to fix something that can’t be fixed."[17]

Reid Bryson, emeritus professor of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, University of Wisconsin-Madison: "It’s absurd. Of course it’s going up. It has gone up since the early 1800s, before the Industrial Revolution, because we’re coming out of the Little Ice Age, not because we’re putting more carbon dioxide into the air." [18].


William M. Gray, Professor of Atmospheric Science, Colorado State University: "This small warming is likely a result of the natural alterations in global ocean currents which are driven by ocean salinity variations. Ocean circulation variations are as yet little understood. Human kind has little or nothing to do with the recent temperature changes. We are not that influential."[23]) "I am of the opinion that [global warming] is one of the greatest hoaxes ever perpetrated on the American people." [24]) "So many people have a vested interest in this global-warming thing—all these big labs and research and stuff. The idea is to frighten the public, to get money to study it more."[25])

Or this scientist who doesn't believe global warming doesn't even exist

* Timothy F. Ball, former Professor of Geography, University of Winnipeg: "(The world's climate) warmed from 1680 up to 1940, but since 1940 it's been cooling down. The evidence for warming is because of distorted records. The satellite data, for example, shows cooling." (November 2004) [5] "The temperature hasn't gone up. ... But the mood of the world has changed: It has heated up to this belief in global warming." (August 2006) [6] "Temperatures declined from 1940 to 1980 and in the early 1970's global cooling became the consensus. ... By the 1990's temperatures appeared to have reversed and Global Warming became the consensus. It appears I'll witness another cycle before retiring, as the major mechanisms and the global temperature trends now indicate a cooling." (Feb. 5, 2007) [7]


All of this was easily obtained from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_global_warming_consens us

Oh wikipedia...I see, well let's take a look at what I just added to that article:

Tad Murty, oceanographer; adjunct professor, Departments of Civil Engineering and Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa: global warming "is the biggest scientific hoax being perpetrated on humanity. There is no global warming due to human anthropogenic activities. The atmosphere hasn’t changed much in 280 million years, and there have always been cycles of warming and cooling. The Cretaceous period was the warmest on earth. You could have grown tomatoes at the North Pole"[29]

Professor David the Mighty,Lover, fighter, Larger than Life Twice as Beautiful, Bendis Board, says: "I read a science magazine That said that dinosaurs are stil lalive and that global warming is fake because a dinosaur told me it was. also it said i had the ideas for star wars and everything but gorge lucas is working for the islamofacists and they stol all the ideas and redrew stepehen platts art and it made his anatomy bad but the science magazine said its not true. thats some proof. "http://www.606studios.com/bendisboard/showpost.php?p=3285574&postcount=179

Ben
07-06-2007, 10:29 AM
Oh wikipedia...I see, well let's take a look at what I just added to that article:

Tad Murty, oceanographer; adjunct professor, Departments of Civil Engineering and Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa: global warming "is the biggest scientific hoax being perpetrated on humanity. There is no global warming due to human anthropogenic activities. The atmosphere hasn’t changed much in 280 million years, and there have always been cycles of warming and cooling. The Cretaceous period was the warmest on earth. You could have grown tomatoes at the North Pole"[29]

Professor David the Mighty,Lover, fighter, Larger than Life Twice as Beautiful, Bendis Board, says: "I read a science magazine That said that dinosaurs are stil lalive and that global warming is fake because a dinosaur told me it was. also it said i had the ideas for star wars and everything but gorge lucas is working for the islamofacists and they stol all the ideas and redrew stepehen platts art and it made his anatomy bad but the science magazine said its not true. thats some proof. "http://www.606studios.com/bendisboard/showpost.php?p=3285574&postcount=179I don't see any reason why the list he posted isn't reliable.

Now we just need to find the list of scientists that form the consensus and show how much longer it is.

DAVE
07-06-2007, 10:33 AM
I don't see any reason why the list he posted isn't reliable.

Now we just need to find the list of scientists that form the consensus and show how much longer it is.

Oh look at you, all the sudden jokes have to be thoughtful and relevent and make sense. :roll: ;-)

I'm just saying any argument that is supported solely by wiki facts is open to ridicule. That's like rule #5 of message board arguing rules.

TheTravis!
07-06-2007, 10:35 AM
I don't see any reason why the list he posted isn't reliable.

Now we just need to find the list of scientists that form the consensus and show how much longer it is.

It's hard to make a pie chart for this. The "scientists who don't think Global Warming exists, and are also total fucking idiots" slice is SOOOOOOO very small.

KHAN!
07-06-2007, 10:35 AM
Sorry, but what the fuck!! You ask for proof, I give it but yet you still fucking ridicule me, not taking my fucking points seriously. I swear to fucking god, you guys don't exactly provide a great atmosphere for healthy debate.

Jesus fucking Christ!

Ben
07-06-2007, 10:37 AM
It's hard to make a pie chart for this. The "scientists who don't think Global Warming exists, and are also total fucking idiots" slice is SOOOOOOO very small.Someone find a list, so we can show him!

We wanted him to start giving specific information. He did that. Now it's our turn.

KHAN!
07-06-2007, 10:38 AM
It's hard to make a pie chart for this. The "scientists who don't think Global Warming exists, and are also total fucking idiots" slice is SOOOOOOO very small.


Dude, fuck off! I wanted to quickly get some quotes to give the people some proof supporting my fucking claims, but yet I still get fucked with! Your remarks saying people who don't agree with fucking Al Gore are idiots is not helping the situation here!!

TheTravis!
07-06-2007, 10:39 AM
Sorry, but what the fuck!! You ask for proof, I give it but yet you still fucking ridicule me, not taking my fucking points seriously. I swear to fucking god, you guys don't exactly provide a great atmosphere for healthy debate.

Jesus fucking Christ!

I, for one, am not interested in healthy debate. We're right, and you're wrong, and that's really all there is to it. The crazy homeless guy down the street is convinced he's the King of Sweden. I don't need to have a "healthy debate" with him to know he's wrong.

DAVE
07-06-2007, 10:41 AM
Sorry, but what the fuck!! You ask for proof, I give it but yet you still fucking ridicule me, not taking my fucking points seriously. I swear to fucking god, you guys don't exactly provide a great atmosphere for healthy debate.

Jesus fucking Christ!

We asked for proof from scientists and you posted Glenn Beck's interpretation of a Science magazine article.
You also posted a Wikipedia article that has a handful of quotes from scientists.
That's not proof. Now those scientists probably have work that supports their claims, to them. If we read that work we could address their claims. We can't, because we haven't read them, just their quotes.
I think Ben has probably read the notes and reasons behind why he thinks the scientists he believes to be right feel the way the do about Global Warming.

edwardmblake
07-06-2007, 10:42 AM
Sorry, but what the fuck!! You ask for proof, I give it but yet you still fucking ridicule me, not taking my fucking points seriously. I swear to fucking god, you guys don't exactly provide a great atmosphere for healthy debate.

Jesus fucking Christ!

How is what you posted proof? Do some people agree with how you think? Yes. Is it proof that global warming is a hoax? No. If I pasted quotes that from people who think that the world is flat or that there is a time cube it would not mean that they are so.

Oh yeah, and don't blaspheme in my kitchen!

DAVE
07-06-2007, 10:42 AM
I, for one, am not interested in healthy debate. We're right, and you're wrong, and that's really all there is to it. The crazy homeless guy down the street is convinced he's the King of Sweden. I don't need to have a "healthy debate" with him to know he's wrong.

Actually I read on Wikipedia that that homeless guy is the King of Sweden.

Colby
07-06-2007, 10:42 AM
Dude, fuck off! I wanted to quickly get some quotes to give the people some proof supporting my fucking claims, but yet I still get fucked with! Your remarks saying people who don't agree with fucking Al Gore are idiots is not helping the situation here!!

Yeah, well, TheTravis is rarely trying to help.;)

TheTravis!
07-06-2007, 10:43 AM
Dude, fuck off! I wanted to quickly get some quotes to give the people some proof supporting my fucking claims, but yet I still get fucked with! Your remarks saying people who don't agree with fucking Al Gore are idiots is not helping the situation here!!

You're going to hate this, then:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v311/thetravis/chart.jpg

Thomas Mauer
07-06-2007, 10:44 AM
Dude, fuck off! I wanted to quickly get some quotes to give the people some proof supporting my fucking claims, but yet I still get fucked with! Your remarks saying people who don't agree with fucking Al Gore are idiots is not helping the situation here!!

The name change you requested won't help you get more respect here. Cool down and step away from arguments you clearly see you can't win (because your opponents have different POV and won't change theirs just as you won't yours). And then start being as courteous as you want everybody else to be toward you.

Do unto others, my friend.

JMP
07-06-2007, 10:45 AM
You're going to hate this, then:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v311/thetravis/chart.jpg

Ironically, blue and yellow are the exact same colors that appear on the Swedish flag. I think there's a conspiracy afoot!

Colby
07-06-2007, 10:45 AM
You're going to hate this, then:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v311/thetravis/chart.jpg

Oh man, there's totally a good Pat Buchanan joke in there somewhere, but it's SO seven years ago...

TheTravis!
07-06-2007, 10:47 AM
Yeah, well, TheTravis is rarely trying to help.;)

True. It's my secret shame. :Oops:

Thomas Mauer
07-06-2007, 10:51 AM
True. It's my secret shame. :Oops:

Shame? More like guilty pleasure! :)

Brad N.
07-06-2007, 10:54 AM
You're going to hate this, then:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v311/thetravis/chart.jpg

:lol:

Bravo, my good man!

Simps
07-06-2007, 10:55 AM
Everyone needs to settle the fuck down here.