- This topic has 1,060 replies, 36 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 1 month ago by
patb.
-
AuthorPosts
-
October 21, 2010 at 10:07 AM #622191October 21, 2010 at 10:08 AM #621103
jstoesz
ParticipantI refer you to my earlier post, because after all what choice do we have. Actually, we don’t have to choose either, because we live in CA. But the thought process is still sound.
[quote]We already know that the other option is as bad as can be…
So the question is will Pat Toomey be more responsible than O’Donnell with tax payer money, and vote to reduce the scope of government?
I think we all know the answer to that question.
[/quote]October 21, 2010 at 10:08 AM #621185ParticipantI refer you to my earlier post, because after all what choice do we have. Actually, we don’t have to choose either, because we live in CA. But the thought process is still sound.
[quote]We already know that the other option is as bad as can be…
So the question is will Pat Toomey be more responsible than O’Donnell with tax payer money, and vote to reduce the scope of government?
I think we all know the answer to that question.
[/quote]October 21, 2010 at 10:08 AM #621744ParticipantI refer you to my earlier post, because after all what choice do we have. Actually, we don’t have to choose either, because we live in CA. But the thought process is still sound.
[quote]We already know that the other option is as bad as can be…
So the question is will Pat Toomey be more responsible than O’Donnell with tax payer money, and vote to reduce the scope of government?
I think we all know the answer to that question.
[/quote]October 21, 2010 at 10:08 AM #621866ParticipantI refer you to my earlier post, because after all what choice do we have. Actually, we don’t have to choose either, because we live in CA. But the thought process is still sound.
[quote]We already know that the other option is as bad as can be…
So the question is will Pat Toomey be more responsible than O’Donnell with tax payer money, and vote to reduce the scope of government?
I think we all know the answer to that question.
[/quote]October 21, 2010 at 10:08 AM #622186ParticipantI refer you to my earlier post, because after all what choice do we have. Actually, we don’t have to choose either, because we live in CA. But the thought process is still sound.
[quote]We already know that the other option is as bad as can be…
So the question is will Pat Toomey be more responsible than O’Donnell with tax payer money, and vote to reduce the scope of government?
I think we all know the answer to that question.
[/quote]October 21, 2010 at 10:36 AM #621128gandalf
ParticipantArraya, brian, russell — your points are well taken. I spoke incorrectly, and would like to submit a correction to the Piggington editorial board. Not my intention to introduce a false equivalency.
The right-wing fringe is SO MUCH MORE RETARDED.
October 21, 2010 at 10:36 AM #621210ParticipantArraya, brian, russell — your points are well taken. I spoke incorrectly, and would like to submit a correction to the Piggington editorial board. Not my intention to introduce a false equivalency.
The right-wing fringe is SO MUCH MORE RETARDED.
October 21, 2010 at 10:36 AM #621769ParticipantArraya, brian, russell — your points are well taken. I spoke incorrectly, and would like to submit a correction to the Piggington editorial board. Not my intention to introduce a false equivalency.
The right-wing fringe is SO MUCH MORE RETARDED.
October 21, 2010 at 10:36 AM #621891ParticipantArraya, brian, russell — your points are well taken. I spoke incorrectly, and would like to submit a correction to the Piggington editorial board. Not my intention to introduce a false equivalency.
The right-wing fringe is SO MUCH MORE RETARDED.
October 21, 2010 at 10:36 AM #622211ParticipantArraya, brian, russell — your points are well taken. I spoke incorrectly, and would like to submit a correction to the Piggington editorial board. Not my intention to introduce a false equivalency.
The right-wing fringe is SO MUCH MORE RETARDED.
October 21, 2010 at 10:42 AM #621133ucodegen
Participant[quote poorgradstudent]I’ve read some very rational arguments that human contribution to the global warmiing we’ve seen is a drop in the bucket compared to larger global effects beyond our control. But at least those arguments admit the earth has gotten warmer in the past five decades! [/quote]
Again, topic for another thread, but AGW is not proven.The IPCC was even put in an embarrassing position in 2008. It had snowed in London. London has not had snow for more than 70 years.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23579420-arctic-blast-brings-london-earliest-snow-for-70-years.do
This is also why the subject has changed from ‘global warming’ to ‘global climate change’. Talk to any meteorologist, and they will tell you – the climate always changes.
BTW: It also recently snowed in Florida and Texas. When was the last time that occurred?As for warmer over past 5 decades(500 years), that is blatantly false. Chinese records show the northern passage open/free of ice around 1470. England also used to grow grapes/make wine. Now it is only done on the individual scale.
http://www.english-wine.com/history.html
Growing grapes requires higher temperatures. That is why they are grown in the NAPA valley and not along the coast in California.October 21, 2010 at 10:42 AM #621214Participant[quote poorgradstudent]I’ve read some very rational arguments that human contribution to the global warmiing we’ve seen is a drop in the bucket compared to larger global effects beyond our control. But at least those arguments admit the earth has gotten warmer in the past five decades! [/quote]
Again, topic for another thread, but AGW is not proven.The IPCC was even put in an embarrassing position in 2008. It had snowed in London. London has not had snow for more than 70 years.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23579420-arctic-blast-brings-london-earliest-snow-for-70-years.do
This is also why the subject has changed from ‘global warming’ to ‘global climate change’. Talk to any meteorologist, and they will tell you – the climate always changes.
BTW: It also recently snowed in Florida and Texas. When was the last time that occurred?As for warmer over past 5 decades(500 years), that is blatantly false. Chinese records show the northern passage open/free of ice around 1470. England also used to grow grapes/make wine. Now it is only done on the individual scale.
http://www.english-wine.com/history.html
Growing grapes requires higher temperatures. That is why they are grown in the NAPA valley and not along the coast in California.October 21, 2010 at 10:42 AM #621774Participant[quote poorgradstudent]I’ve read some very rational arguments that human contribution to the global warmiing we’ve seen is a drop in the bucket compared to larger global effects beyond our control. But at least those arguments admit the earth has gotten warmer in the past five decades! [/quote]
Again, topic for another thread, but AGW is not proven.The IPCC was even put in an embarrassing position in 2008. It had snowed in London. London has not had snow for more than 70 years.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23579420-arctic-blast-brings-london-earliest-snow-for-70-years.do
This is also why the subject has changed from ‘global warming’ to ‘global climate change’. Talk to any meteorologist, and they will tell you – the climate always changes.
BTW: It also recently snowed in Florida and Texas. When was the last time that occurred?As for warmer over past 5 decades(500 years), that is blatantly false. Chinese records show the northern passage open/free of ice around 1470. England also used to grow grapes/make wine. Now it is only done on the individual scale.
http://www.english-wine.com/history.html
Growing grapes requires higher temperatures. That is why they are grown in the NAPA valley and not along the coast in California.October 21, 2010 at 10:42 AM #621896Participant[quote poorgradstudent]I’ve read some very rational arguments that human contribution to the global warmiing we’ve seen is a drop in the bucket compared to larger global effects beyond our control. But at least those arguments admit the earth has gotten warmer in the past five decades! [/quote]
Again, topic for another thread, but AGW is not proven.The IPCC was even put in an embarrassing position in 2008. It had snowed in London. London has not had snow for more than 70 years.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23579420-arctic-blast-brings-london-earliest-snow-for-70-years.do
This is also why the subject has changed from ‘global warming’ to ‘global climate change’. Talk to any meteorologist, and they will tell you – the climate always changes.
BTW: It also recently snowed in Florida and Texas. When was the last time that occurred?As for warmer over past 5 decades(500 years), that is blatantly false. Chinese records show the northern passage open/free of ice around 1470. England also used to grow grapes/make wine. Now it is only done on the individual scale.
http://www.english-wine.com/history.html
Growing grapes requires higher temperatures. That is why they are grown in the NAPA valley and not along the coast in California. -
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
