Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
eavesdropper
Participant[quote=Russell][quote=walterwhite]also, he’s a karate expert. which could be good in foreign affairs.[/quote]
He will be able to spin kick Russia from Alaska?[/quote]Yeah, but can he spin kick Palin to Russia?
If he can pull that off, he gets my kids’ inheritance for his campaign.
Participant[quote=Arraya][quote=meadandale][quote=afx114][quote=meadandale]Your liberal friends in the CA school system want to teach Islam in school. Do you have a problem with this?[/quote]
Citation needed.[/quote]
How many do you want?
Here’s several. Note that the text book that is frequently cited in many of these articles portrays Islam as a peaceful religion and curiously omits anything remotely negative. Christianity isn’t given such a pass and most of the discussion of Christianity is done in with a negative tone.
http://www.herblondon.org/1381/when-islam-is-required-in-california-schools
http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/history-corrupted
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1571/is_6_18/ai_83144710/Despite some of the ‘rebuttals’ I’ve seen to these articles it is confirmed that they aren’t just teaching Muslim history, they are having students memorize verses from the Koran and pray to Allah as well as dressing like Muslims, adopting Muslim names and planning trips to Mecca. How many of these schools have the same students learn passages from the Bible and have the students pray to God?[/quote]
Between this, homosexual sensitivity training and a course on Marx our kids are going to become skateboarding marxist, gay suicide bombers.[/quote]
As presented here, I absolutely agree that I would not want my children to be schooled in this particular curriculum without the balance that should be provided by teaching of equal time and depth that would cover the tenets of other widely practiced international religions. As presented here, I find the curriculum a bit over the top, considering how much material has to be covered in a school year.
However, I find this response to Brian’s request for documentation of meadandale’s earlier statement somewhat flawed. And, fresh off my earlier “rant”, I am concerned.
First: Did anyone notice that, aside from the Weekly Standard article, the sources of the information were not exactly mainstream journalism? One of them was WorldNet Daily, which is an entity that was set up as a news source for far-right politicians, bloggers, and voters, and is widely known for its sensationalistic one-sided “news” articles, the veracity of which has been frequently called into question. The second is an opinion piece by Dr. Herbert London, director of the New York division of the Hudson Institute, a right-wing “think tank”. Dr. Hudson is highly educated, and has a strong academic background and impressive CV. But the first sentence of his piece read, “It was reported recently by Assist News Service that in the aftermath of September 11 a large number of California public school students were asked to attend intensive courses and workshops on Islam.” Sounds impressive. Difficult to understand how people missed something that had been reported by the Assist News Service. Until one discovers that ANS is the rather amateur-looking newsletter of Assist Ministries, run by a former reporter for the National Enquirer.
The third source is the Weekly Standard article, and while I am well aware that the Standard is a distinctly right-leaning publication, I respect them them as a journalistic source. That’s why it was so disturbing to discover that the author of their article is Steven Schwartz. I’ll be happy to expand on this another time, but suffice it to say that he has a rather fast and loose way with facts, which could well be the result of a rather large conflict of interest he and his right-wing editors choose to ignore when they frequently turn to him as an “expert” on all things Islam.
The fourth article is from a little-known publication called “Insight Into the News”, owned by the Rev. Sun Myung Moon and the Unification Church. Like WND, the articles in “Insight” contain information that is, shall we say, “flawed”. Verification of said information is difficult, if not impossible, because the editor-in-chief would not identify his reporters who, he claimed, were actually employees of MSM outlets who feared for their jobs (and more) because of the explosive secret information they had pried loose from their sources. Because their employers wouldn’t publish information that was essential to the well-being of every American citizen, these heroic reporters had to rely on the discretion and on the courage of “Insight”‘s management to print their stories.
So, I’m sorry, but I’m not buying into this whole drama. Damn right I’d be upset if these events were exactly as they appeared in these articles. But I seriously doubt that they are. Given the current viral hypersensitivity to anything even remotely smacking of Islam, somewhere along the line there would have been some outraged Tea Party moms looking for their star turn on Fox News, telling about little Bobby Ray being forced to learn the meaning of East and West so that he would be oriented correctly to face Mecca, right before the Pledge of Allegience to the Flag of Islam. Or about Britnee Lisa-Marie asking her mom to make her a “burka costume” for the school play in which she’d be falsely accused of adultery and stoned by the audience. Somebody, somewhere would have said SOMETHING. Well, perhaps not. Many of our middle-class families have had a lot to deal with, thanks to Obama and the Democrats. Job losses, home foreclosures, death panels, and now, another unbelieveable governmental intrusion.
Except….. then there’s the dates. Did anyone happen to notice that three out of four of the sources provided were from early (January & February) of 2002. This is from almost nine (!) years ago.
Read the source articles. See what they have to say. What ALL of the parties to this have to say. No matter what side you are on, don’t be searching for information that will confirm your preconceived opinions. Then ask yourself why are people suddenly getting all up in arms about this now,. In fact, is this book and/or curriculum even in use anymore.
If it was bad enough to raise the alarm back in January 2002, whatever happened? Why didn’t the right follow up on this? There was never a time more favorable politically for them: GWB in the White House, Republican majority in the Congress, rage at Islamic fundamentalists at peak…Hell, the Department of Homeland Security was even helping, keeping us all on edge with their color coding game.
This is the latest in inciting panic and unrest in the people, which has proven to be a far more effective tool in gaining votes (and control). Send out stuff that sounds bad, satisfying all the visceral “food groups” in terms of the impact it has on the average middle class joe on the street. Middle class joe dons his rather worn Paul Revere cloak, and gets on Facebook to bravely sound the alarm, making sure to bash a few “libtards” along the way for being so clueless (and socialist, to boot). The alarm goes viral, and you have millions of infected people wondering whether we’ll have any country left in two years.
I’m not belittling your concerns, meadandale. Lord knows, very few of these lawmakers and bureaucrats are worth a penny of what we pay them. I appreciate that people have finally shaken off their complacency, and are demanding answers. But I, for one, would be grateful if they would, first, be sure that they have the right QUESTIONS. I hate to be cynical, but I believe that most people have gone into this because they’re unhappy with their lives, and they don’t want to look into the mirror to see who’s at least partially responsible. Why do that when there are so many “smart” people telling you that it’s someone else’s fault.
In addition to that, I believe that this collective movement gives people the impression that they’re courageous and tough and badass. They can go on a board or in a chatroom, and openly talk about beating the shit out of people, or pulling out their (fill in your favorite gun model and ammo type here) and shooting someone, the criteria for doing so being the victims’ political opinions, sexual persuasion, or skin color. I might be 5’7″, not possess any clearly delineated muscle, be losing most of my hair, and weigh 325 pounds, but, in my mind, to the other guys on that board I’m Chuck Norris.
I’m not making this up, nor did I get it from a liberal website. I frequently visit right-wing websites, and am increasingly horrified by what I’m encountering there. It scares me a helluva lot, but I’m also puzzled. I can understand the frustration at the government, having felt a similar antagonism for several years now. But what I’m seeing doesn’t mesh with the message. The Tea Partiers I’ve encountered don’t distinguish between good politicians and bad. They align themselves solidly against Democrats and unanimously for Republicans; the only exception is when there’s a candidate that they prefer over the incumbent Republican, and there is never a discernible policy difference between the two. In fact, what stands out most of all about the Tea Party slate is their almost uniform unsuitability for public office.
Is it too much to expect people to investigate this “explosive” stuff a little BEFORE they light the fuse? It’s not rocket science (no pun intended). The alternative, to me, is unthinkable: that the right is grabbing at everything and anything, even at blatant untruths, to throw out there to panic the citizenry into action. I’m not sure which is worse: a nation’s people who don’t have the intellect or the willpower to question ALL that they are being fed, or one that believes any act of dishonesty or violence is justifiable in the name of getting their own way. When will enough be enough?
Participant[quote=Arraya][quote=meadandale][quote=afx114][quote=meadandale]Your liberal friends in the CA school system want to teach Islam in school. Do you have a problem with this?[/quote]
Citation needed.[/quote]
How many do you want?
Here’s several. Note that the text book that is frequently cited in many of these articles portrays Islam as a peaceful religion and curiously omits anything remotely negative. Christianity isn’t given such a pass and most of the discussion of Christianity is done in with a negative tone.
http://www.herblondon.org/1381/when-islam-is-required-in-california-schools
http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/history-corrupted
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1571/is_6_18/ai_83144710/Despite some of the ‘rebuttals’ I’ve seen to these articles it is confirmed that they aren’t just teaching Muslim history, they are having students memorize verses from the Koran and pray to Allah as well as dressing like Muslims, adopting Muslim names and planning trips to Mecca. How many of these schools have the same students learn passages from the Bible and have the students pray to God?[/quote]
Between this, homosexual sensitivity training and a course on Marx our kids are going to become skateboarding marxist, gay suicide bombers.[/quote]
As presented here, I absolutely agree that I would not want my children to be schooled in this particular curriculum without the balance that should be provided by teaching of equal time and depth that would cover the tenets of other widely practiced international religions. As presented here, I find the curriculum a bit over the top, considering how much material has to be covered in a school year.
However, I find this response to Brian’s request for documentation of meadandale’s earlier statement somewhat flawed. And, fresh off my earlier “rant”, I am concerned.
First: Did anyone notice that, aside from the Weekly Standard article, the sources of the information were not exactly mainstream journalism? One of them was WorldNet Daily, which is an entity that was set up as a news source for far-right politicians, bloggers, and voters, and is widely known for its sensationalistic one-sided “news” articles, the veracity of which has been frequently called into question. The second is an opinion piece by Dr. Herbert London, director of the New York division of the Hudson Institute, a right-wing “think tank”. Dr. Hudson is highly educated, and has a strong academic background and impressive CV. But the first sentence of his piece read, “It was reported recently by Assist News Service that in the aftermath of September 11 a large number of California public school students were asked to attend intensive courses and workshops on Islam.” Sounds impressive. Difficult to understand how people missed something that had been reported by the Assist News Service. Until one discovers that ANS is the rather amateur-looking newsletter of Assist Ministries, run by a former reporter for the National Enquirer.
The third source is the Weekly Standard article, and while I am well aware that the Standard is a distinctly right-leaning publication, I respect them them as a journalistic source. That’s why it was so disturbing to discover that the author of their article is Steven Schwartz. I’ll be happy to expand on this another time, but suffice it to say that he has a rather fast and loose way with facts, which could well be the result of a rather large conflict of interest he and his right-wing editors choose to ignore when they frequently turn to him as an “expert” on all things Islam.
The fourth article is from a little-known publication called “Insight Into the News”, owned by the Rev. Sun Myung Moon and the Unification Church. Like WND, the articles in “Insight” contain information that is, shall we say, “flawed”. Verification of said information is difficult, if not impossible, because the editor-in-chief would not identify his reporters who, he claimed, were actually employees of MSM outlets who feared for their jobs (and more) because of the explosive secret information they had pried loose from their sources. Because their employers wouldn’t publish information that was essential to the well-being of every American citizen, these heroic reporters had to rely on the discretion and on the courage of “Insight”‘s management to print their stories.
So, I’m sorry, but I’m not buying into this whole drama. Damn right I’d be upset if these events were exactly as they appeared in these articles. But I seriously doubt that they are. Given the current viral hypersensitivity to anything even remotely smacking of Islam, somewhere along the line there would have been some outraged Tea Party moms looking for their star turn on Fox News, telling about little Bobby Ray being forced to learn the meaning of East and West so that he would be oriented correctly to face Mecca, right before the Pledge of Allegience to the Flag of Islam. Or about Britnee Lisa-Marie asking her mom to make her a “burka costume” for the school play in which she’d be falsely accused of adultery and stoned by the audience. Somebody, somewhere would have said SOMETHING. Well, perhaps not. Many of our middle-class families have had a lot to deal with, thanks to Obama and the Democrats. Job losses, home foreclosures, death panels, and now, another unbelieveable governmental intrusion.
Except….. then there’s the dates. Did anyone happen to notice that three out of four of the sources provided were from early (January & February) of 2002. This is from almost nine (!) years ago.
Read the source articles. See what they have to say. What ALL of the parties to this have to say. No matter what side you are on, don’t be searching for information that will confirm your preconceived opinions. Then ask yourself why are people suddenly getting all up in arms about this now,. In fact, is this book and/or curriculum even in use anymore.
If it was bad enough to raise the alarm back in January 2002, whatever happened? Why didn’t the right follow up on this? There was never a time more favorable politically for them: GWB in the White House, Republican majority in the Congress, rage at Islamic fundamentalists at peak…Hell, the Department of Homeland Security was even helping, keeping us all on edge with their color coding game.
This is the latest in inciting panic and unrest in the people, which has proven to be a far more effective tool in gaining votes (and control). Send out stuff that sounds bad, satisfying all the visceral “food groups” in terms of the impact it has on the average middle class joe on the street. Middle class joe dons his rather worn Paul Revere cloak, and gets on Facebook to bravely sound the alarm, making sure to bash a few “libtards” along the way for being so clueless (and socialist, to boot). The alarm goes viral, and you have millions of infected people wondering whether we’ll have any country left in two years.
I’m not belittling your concerns, meadandale. Lord knows, very few of these lawmakers and bureaucrats are worth a penny of what we pay them. I appreciate that people have finally shaken off their complacency, and are demanding answers. But I, for one, would be grateful if they would, first, be sure that they have the right QUESTIONS. I hate to be cynical, but I believe that most people have gone into this because they’re unhappy with their lives, and they don’t want to look into the mirror to see who’s at least partially responsible. Why do that when there are so many “smart” people telling you that it’s someone else’s fault.
In addition to that, I believe that this collective movement gives people the impression that they’re courageous and tough and badass. They can go on a board or in a chatroom, and openly talk about beating the shit out of people, or pulling out their (fill in your favorite gun model and ammo type here) and shooting someone, the criteria for doing so being the victims’ political opinions, sexual persuasion, or skin color. I might be 5’7″, not possess any clearly delineated muscle, be losing most of my hair, and weigh 325 pounds, but, in my mind, to the other guys on that board I’m Chuck Norris.
I’m not making this up, nor did I get it from a liberal website. I frequently visit right-wing websites, and am increasingly horrified by what I’m encountering there. It scares me a helluva lot, but I’m also puzzled. I can understand the frustration at the government, having felt a similar antagonism for several years now. But what I’m seeing doesn’t mesh with the message. The Tea Partiers I’ve encountered don’t distinguish between good politicians and bad. They align themselves solidly against Democrats and unanimously for Republicans; the only exception is when there’s a candidate that they prefer over the incumbent Republican, and there is never a discernible policy difference between the two. In fact, what stands out most of all about the Tea Party slate is their almost uniform unsuitability for public office.
Is it too much to expect people to investigate this “explosive” stuff a little BEFORE they light the fuse? It’s not rocket science (no pun intended). The alternative, to me, is unthinkable: that the right is grabbing at everything and anything, even at blatant untruths, to throw out there to panic the citizenry into action. I’m not sure which is worse: a nation’s people who don’t have the intellect or the willpower to question ALL that they are being fed, or one that believes any act of dishonesty or violence is justifiable in the name of getting their own way. When will enough be enough?
Participant[quote=Arraya][quote=meadandale][quote=afx114][quote=meadandale]Your liberal friends in the CA school system want to teach Islam in school. Do you have a problem with this?[/quote]
Citation needed.[/quote]
How many do you want?
Here’s several. Note that the text book that is frequently cited in many of these articles portrays Islam as a peaceful religion and curiously omits anything remotely negative. Christianity isn’t given such a pass and most of the discussion of Christianity is done in with a negative tone.
http://www.herblondon.org/1381/when-islam-is-required-in-california-schools
http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/history-corrupted
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1571/is_6_18/ai_83144710/Despite some of the ‘rebuttals’ I’ve seen to these articles it is confirmed that they aren’t just teaching Muslim history, they are having students memorize verses from the Koran and pray to Allah as well as dressing like Muslims, adopting Muslim names and planning trips to Mecca. How many of these schools have the same students learn passages from the Bible and have the students pray to God?[/quote]
Between this, homosexual sensitivity training and a course on Marx our kids are going to become skateboarding marxist, gay suicide bombers.[/quote]
As presented here, I absolutely agree that I would not want my children to be schooled in this particular curriculum without the balance that should be provided by teaching of equal time and depth that would cover the tenets of other widely practiced international religions. As presented here, I find the curriculum a bit over the top, considering how much material has to be covered in a school year.
However, I find this response to Brian’s request for documentation of meadandale’s earlier statement somewhat flawed. And, fresh off my earlier “rant”, I am concerned.
First: Did anyone notice that, aside from the Weekly Standard article, the sources of the information were not exactly mainstream journalism? One of them was WorldNet Daily, which is an entity that was set up as a news source for far-right politicians, bloggers, and voters, and is widely known for its sensationalistic one-sided “news” articles, the veracity of which has been frequently called into question. The second is an opinion piece by Dr. Herbert London, director of the New York division of the Hudson Institute, a right-wing “think tank”. Dr. Hudson is highly educated, and has a strong academic background and impressive CV. But the first sentence of his piece read, “It was reported recently by Assist News Service that in the aftermath of September 11 a large number of California public school students were asked to attend intensive courses and workshops on Islam.” Sounds impressive. Difficult to understand how people missed something that had been reported by the Assist News Service. Until one discovers that ANS is the rather amateur-looking newsletter of Assist Ministries, run by a former reporter for the National Enquirer.
The third source is the Weekly Standard article, and while I am well aware that the Standard is a distinctly right-leaning publication, I respect them them as a journalistic source. That’s why it was so disturbing to discover that the author of their article is Steven Schwartz. I’ll be happy to expand on this another time, but suffice it to say that he has a rather fast and loose way with facts, which could well be the result of a rather large conflict of interest he and his right-wing editors choose to ignore when they frequently turn to him as an “expert” on all things Islam.
The fourth article is from a little-known publication called “Insight Into the News”, owned by the Rev. Sun Myung Moon and the Unification Church. Like WND, the articles in “Insight” contain information that is, shall we say, “flawed”. Verification of said information is difficult, if not impossible, because the editor-in-chief would not identify his reporters who, he claimed, were actually employees of MSM outlets who feared for their jobs (and more) because of the explosive secret information they had pried loose from their sources. Because their employers wouldn’t publish information that was essential to the well-being of every American citizen, these heroic reporters had to rely on the discretion and on the courage of “Insight”‘s management to print their stories.
So, I’m sorry, but I’m not buying into this whole drama. Damn right I’d be upset if these events were exactly as they appeared in these articles. But I seriously doubt that they are. Given the current viral hypersensitivity to anything even remotely smacking of Islam, somewhere along the line there would have been some outraged Tea Party moms looking for their star turn on Fox News, telling about little Bobby Ray being forced to learn the meaning of East and West so that he would be oriented correctly to face Mecca, right before the Pledge of Allegience to the Flag of Islam. Or about Britnee Lisa-Marie asking her mom to make her a “burka costume” for the school play in which she’d be falsely accused of adultery and stoned by the audience. Somebody, somewhere would have said SOMETHING. Well, perhaps not. Many of our middle-class families have had a lot to deal with, thanks to Obama and the Democrats. Job losses, home foreclosures, death panels, and now, another unbelieveable governmental intrusion.
Except….. then there’s the dates. Did anyone happen to notice that three out of four of the sources provided were from early (January & February) of 2002. This is from almost nine (!) years ago.
Read the source articles. See what they have to say. What ALL of the parties to this have to say. No matter what side you are on, don’t be searching for information that will confirm your preconceived opinions. Then ask yourself why are people suddenly getting all up in arms about this now,. In fact, is this book and/or curriculum even in use anymore.
If it was bad enough to raise the alarm back in January 2002, whatever happened? Why didn’t the right follow up on this? There was never a time more favorable politically for them: GWB in the White House, Republican majority in the Congress, rage at Islamic fundamentalists at peak…Hell, the Department of Homeland Security was even helping, keeping us all on edge with their color coding game.
This is the latest in inciting panic and unrest in the people, which has proven to be a far more effective tool in gaining votes (and control). Send out stuff that sounds bad, satisfying all the visceral “food groups” in terms of the impact it has on the average middle class joe on the street. Middle class joe dons his rather worn Paul Revere cloak, and gets on Facebook to bravely sound the alarm, making sure to bash a few “libtards” along the way for being so clueless (and socialist, to boot). The alarm goes viral, and you have millions of infected people wondering whether we’ll have any country left in two years.
I’m not belittling your concerns, meadandale. Lord knows, very few of these lawmakers and bureaucrats are worth a penny of what we pay them. I appreciate that people have finally shaken off their complacency, and are demanding answers. But I, for one, would be grateful if they would, first, be sure that they have the right QUESTIONS. I hate to be cynical, but I believe that most people have gone into this because they’re unhappy with their lives, and they don’t want to look into the mirror to see who’s at least partially responsible. Why do that when there are so many “smart” people telling you that it’s someone else’s fault.
In addition to that, I believe that this collective movement gives people the impression that they’re courageous and tough and badass. They can go on a board or in a chatroom, and openly talk about beating the shit out of people, or pulling out their (fill in your favorite gun model and ammo type here) and shooting someone, the criteria for doing so being the victims’ political opinions, sexual persuasion, or skin color. I might be 5’7″, not possess any clearly delineated muscle, be losing most of my hair, and weigh 325 pounds, but, in my mind, to the other guys on that board I’m Chuck Norris.
I’m not making this up, nor did I get it from a liberal website. I frequently visit right-wing websites, and am increasingly horrified by what I’m encountering there. It scares me a helluva lot, but I’m also puzzled. I can understand the frustration at the government, having felt a similar antagonism for several years now. But what I’m seeing doesn’t mesh with the message. The Tea Partiers I’ve encountered don’t distinguish between good politicians and bad. They align themselves solidly against Democrats and unanimously for Republicans; the only exception is when there’s a candidate that they prefer over the incumbent Republican, and there is never a discernible policy difference between the two. In fact, what stands out most of all about the Tea Party slate is their almost uniform unsuitability for public office.
Is it too much to expect people to investigate this “explosive” stuff a little BEFORE they light the fuse? It’s not rocket science (no pun intended). The alternative, to me, is unthinkable: that the right is grabbing at everything and anything, even at blatant untruths, to throw out there to panic the citizenry into action. I’m not sure which is worse: a nation’s people who don’t have the intellect or the willpower to question ALL that they are being fed, or one that believes any act of dishonesty or violence is justifiable in the name of getting their own way. When will enough be enough?
Participant[quote=Arraya][quote=meadandale][quote=afx114][quote=meadandale]Your liberal friends in the CA school system want to teach Islam in school. Do you have a problem with this?[/quote]
Citation needed.[/quote]
How many do you want?
Here’s several. Note that the text book that is frequently cited in many of these articles portrays Islam as a peaceful religion and curiously omits anything remotely negative. Christianity isn’t given such a pass and most of the discussion of Christianity is done in with a negative tone.
http://www.herblondon.org/1381/when-islam-is-required-in-california-schools
http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/history-corrupted
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1571/is_6_18/ai_83144710/Despite some of the ‘rebuttals’ I’ve seen to these articles it is confirmed that they aren’t just teaching Muslim history, they are having students memorize verses from the Koran and pray to Allah as well as dressing like Muslims, adopting Muslim names and planning trips to Mecca. How many of these schools have the same students learn passages from the Bible and have the students pray to God?[/quote]
Between this, homosexual sensitivity training and a course on Marx our kids are going to become skateboarding marxist, gay suicide bombers.[/quote]
As presented here, I absolutely agree that I would not want my children to be schooled in this particular curriculum without the balance that should be provided by teaching of equal time and depth that would cover the tenets of other widely practiced international religions. As presented here, I find the curriculum a bit over the top, considering how much material has to be covered in a school year.
However, I find this response to Brian’s request for documentation of meadandale’s earlier statement somewhat flawed. And, fresh off my earlier “rant”, I am concerned.
First: Did anyone notice that, aside from the Weekly Standard article, the sources of the information were not exactly mainstream journalism? One of them was WorldNet Daily, which is an entity that was set up as a news source for far-right politicians, bloggers, and voters, and is widely known for its sensationalistic one-sided “news” articles, the veracity of which has been frequently called into question. The second is an opinion piece by Dr. Herbert London, director of the New York division of the Hudson Institute, a right-wing “think tank”. Dr. Hudson is highly educated, and has a strong academic background and impressive CV. But the first sentence of his piece read, “It was reported recently by Assist News Service that in the aftermath of September 11 a large number of California public school students were asked to attend intensive courses and workshops on Islam.” Sounds impressive. Difficult to understand how people missed something that had been reported by the Assist News Service. Until one discovers that ANS is the rather amateur-looking newsletter of Assist Ministries, run by a former reporter for the National Enquirer.
The third source is the Weekly Standard article, and while I am well aware that the Standard is a distinctly right-leaning publication, I respect them them as a journalistic source. That’s why it was so disturbing to discover that the author of their article is Steven Schwartz. I’ll be happy to expand on this another time, but suffice it to say that he has a rather fast and loose way with facts, which could well be the result of a rather large conflict of interest he and his right-wing editors choose to ignore when they frequently turn to him as an “expert” on all things Islam.
The fourth article is from a little-known publication called “Insight Into the News”, owned by the Rev. Sun Myung Moon and the Unification Church. Like WND, the articles in “Insight” contain information that is, shall we say, “flawed”. Verification of said information is difficult, if not impossible, because the editor-in-chief would not identify his reporters who, he claimed, were actually employees of MSM outlets who feared for their jobs (and more) because of the explosive secret information they had pried loose from their sources. Because their employers wouldn’t publish information that was essential to the well-being of every American citizen, these heroic reporters had to rely on the discretion and on the courage of “Insight”‘s management to print their stories.
So, I’m sorry, but I’m not buying into this whole drama. Damn right I’d be upset if these events were exactly as they appeared in these articles. But I seriously doubt that they are. Given the current viral hypersensitivity to anything even remotely smacking of Islam, somewhere along the line there would have been some outraged Tea Party moms looking for their star turn on Fox News, telling about little Bobby Ray being forced to learn the meaning of East and West so that he would be oriented correctly to face Mecca, right before the Pledge of Allegience to the Flag of Islam. Or about Britnee Lisa-Marie asking her mom to make her a “burka costume” for the school play in which she’d be falsely accused of adultery and stoned by the audience. Somebody, somewhere would have said SOMETHING. Well, perhaps not. Many of our middle-class families have had a lot to deal with, thanks to Obama and the Democrats. Job losses, home foreclosures, death panels, and now, another unbelieveable governmental intrusion.
Except….. then there’s the dates. Did anyone happen to notice that three out of four of the sources provided were from early (January & February) of 2002. This is from almost nine (!) years ago.
Read the source articles. See what they have to say. What ALL of the parties to this have to say. No matter what side you are on, don’t be searching for information that will confirm your preconceived opinions. Then ask yourself why are people suddenly getting all up in arms about this now,. In fact, is this book and/or curriculum even in use anymore.
If it was bad enough to raise the alarm back in January 2002, whatever happened? Why didn’t the right follow up on this? There was never a time more favorable politically for them: GWB in the White House, Republican majority in the Congress, rage at Islamic fundamentalists at peak…Hell, the Department of Homeland Security was even helping, keeping us all on edge with their color coding game.
This is the latest in inciting panic and unrest in the people, which has proven to be a far more effective tool in gaining votes (and control). Send out stuff that sounds bad, satisfying all the visceral “food groups” in terms of the impact it has on the average middle class joe on the street. Middle class joe dons his rather worn Paul Revere cloak, and gets on Facebook to bravely sound the alarm, making sure to bash a few “libtards” along the way for being so clueless (and socialist, to boot). The alarm goes viral, and you have millions of infected people wondering whether we’ll have any country left in two years.
I’m not belittling your concerns, meadandale. Lord knows, very few of these lawmakers and bureaucrats are worth a penny of what we pay them. I appreciate that people have finally shaken off their complacency, and are demanding answers. But I, for one, would be grateful if they would, first, be sure that they have the right QUESTIONS. I hate to be cynical, but I believe that most people have gone into this because they’re unhappy with their lives, and they don’t want to look into the mirror to see who’s at least partially responsible. Why do that when there are so many “smart” people telling you that it’s someone else’s fault.
In addition to that, I believe that this collective movement gives people the impression that they’re courageous and tough and badass. They can go on a board or in a chatroom, and openly talk about beating the shit out of people, or pulling out their (fill in your favorite gun model and ammo type here) and shooting someone, the criteria for doing so being the victims’ political opinions, sexual persuasion, or skin color. I might be 5’7″, not possess any clearly delineated muscle, be losing most of my hair, and weigh 325 pounds, but, in my mind, to the other guys on that board I’m Chuck Norris.
I’m not making this up, nor did I get it from a liberal website. I frequently visit right-wing websites, and am increasingly horrified by what I’m encountering there. It scares me a helluva lot, but I’m also puzzled. I can understand the frustration at the government, having felt a similar antagonism for several years now. But what I’m seeing doesn’t mesh with the message. The Tea Partiers I’ve encountered don’t distinguish between good politicians and bad. They align themselves solidly against Democrats and unanimously for Republicans; the only exception is when there’s a candidate that they prefer over the incumbent Republican, and there is never a discernible policy difference between the two. In fact, what stands out most of all about the Tea Party slate is their almost uniform unsuitability for public office.
Is it too much to expect people to investigate this “explosive” stuff a little BEFORE they light the fuse? It’s not rocket science (no pun intended). The alternative, to me, is unthinkable: that the right is grabbing at everything and anything, even at blatant untruths, to throw out there to panic the citizenry into action. I’m not sure which is worse: a nation’s people who don’t have the intellect or the willpower to question ALL that they are being fed, or one that believes any act of dishonesty or violence is justifiable in the name of getting their own way. When will enough be enough?
Participant[quote=Arraya][quote=meadandale][quote=afx114][quote=meadandale]Your liberal friends in the CA school system want to teach Islam in school. Do you have a problem with this?[/quote]
Citation needed.[/quote]
How many do you want?
Here’s several. Note that the text book that is frequently cited in many of these articles portrays Islam as a peaceful religion and curiously omits anything remotely negative. Christianity isn’t given such a pass and most of the discussion of Christianity is done in with a negative tone.
http://www.herblondon.org/1381/when-islam-is-required-in-california-schools
http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/history-corrupted
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1571/is_6_18/ai_83144710/Despite some of the ‘rebuttals’ I’ve seen to these articles it is confirmed that they aren’t just teaching Muslim history, they are having students memorize verses from the Koran and pray to Allah as well as dressing like Muslims, adopting Muslim names and planning trips to Mecca. How many of these schools have the same students learn passages from the Bible and have the students pray to God?[/quote]
Between this, homosexual sensitivity training and a course on Marx our kids are going to become skateboarding marxist, gay suicide bombers.[/quote]
As presented here, I absolutely agree that I would not want my children to be schooled in this particular curriculum without the balance that should be provided by teaching of equal time and depth that would cover the tenets of other widely practiced international religions. As presented here, I find the curriculum a bit over the top, considering how much material has to be covered in a school year.
However, I find this response to Brian’s request for documentation of meadandale’s earlier statement somewhat flawed. And, fresh off my earlier “rant”, I am concerned.
First: Did anyone notice that, aside from the Weekly Standard article, the sources of the information were not exactly mainstream journalism? One of them was WorldNet Daily, which is an entity that was set up as a news source for far-right politicians, bloggers, and voters, and is widely known for its sensationalistic one-sided “news” articles, the veracity of which has been frequently called into question. The second is an opinion piece by Dr. Herbert London, director of the New York division of the Hudson Institute, a right-wing “think tank”. Dr. Hudson is highly educated, and has a strong academic background and impressive CV. But the first sentence of his piece read, “It was reported recently by Assist News Service that in the aftermath of September 11 a large number of California public school students were asked to attend intensive courses and workshops on Islam.” Sounds impressive. Difficult to understand how people missed something that had been reported by the Assist News Service. Until one discovers that ANS is the rather amateur-looking newsletter of Assist Ministries, run by a former reporter for the National Enquirer.
The third source is the Weekly Standard article, and while I am well aware that the Standard is a distinctly right-leaning publication, I respect them them as a journalistic source. That’s why it was so disturbing to discover that the author of their article is Steven Schwartz. I’ll be happy to expand on this another time, but suffice it to say that he has a rather fast and loose way with facts, which could well be the result of a rather large conflict of interest he and his right-wing editors choose to ignore when they frequently turn to him as an “expert” on all things Islam.
The fourth article is from a little-known publication called “Insight Into the News”, owned by the Rev. Sun Myung Moon and the Unification Church. Like WND, the articles in “Insight” contain information that is, shall we say, “flawed”. Verification of said information is difficult, if not impossible, because the editor-in-chief would not identify his reporters who, he claimed, were actually employees of MSM outlets who feared for their jobs (and more) because of the explosive secret information they had pried loose from their sources. Because their employers wouldn’t publish information that was essential to the well-being of every American citizen, these heroic reporters had to rely on the discretion and on the courage of “Insight”‘s management to print their stories.
So, I’m sorry, but I’m not buying into this whole drama. Damn right I’d be upset if these events were exactly as they appeared in these articles. But I seriously doubt that they are. Given the current viral hypersensitivity to anything even remotely smacking of Islam, somewhere along the line there would have been some outraged Tea Party moms looking for their star turn on Fox News, telling about little Bobby Ray being forced to learn the meaning of East and West so that he would be oriented correctly to face Mecca, right before the Pledge of Allegience to the Flag of Islam. Or about Britnee Lisa-Marie asking her mom to make her a “burka costume” for the school play in which she’d be falsely accused of adultery and stoned by the audience. Somebody, somewhere would have said SOMETHING. Well, perhaps not. Many of our middle-class families have had a lot to deal with, thanks to Obama and the Democrats. Job losses, home foreclosures, death panels, and now, another unbelieveable governmental intrusion.
Except….. then there’s the dates. Did anyone happen to notice that three out of four of the sources provided were from early (January & February) of 2002. This is from almost nine (!) years ago.
Read the source articles. See what they have to say. What ALL of the parties to this have to say. No matter what side you are on, don’t be searching for information that will confirm your preconceived opinions. Then ask yourself why are people suddenly getting all up in arms about this now,. In fact, is this book and/or curriculum even in use anymore.
If it was bad enough to raise the alarm back in January 2002, whatever happened? Why didn’t the right follow up on this? There was never a time more favorable politically for them: GWB in the White House, Republican majority in the Congress, rage at Islamic fundamentalists at peak…Hell, the Department of Homeland Security was even helping, keeping us all on edge with their color coding game.
This is the latest in inciting panic and unrest in the people, which has proven to be a far more effective tool in gaining votes (and control). Send out stuff that sounds bad, satisfying all the visceral “food groups” in terms of the impact it has on the average middle class joe on the street. Middle class joe dons his rather worn Paul Revere cloak, and gets on Facebook to bravely sound the alarm, making sure to bash a few “libtards” along the way for being so clueless (and socialist, to boot). The alarm goes viral, and you have millions of infected people wondering whether we’ll have any country left in two years.
I’m not belittling your concerns, meadandale. Lord knows, very few of these lawmakers and bureaucrats are worth a penny of what we pay them. I appreciate that people have finally shaken off their complacency, and are demanding answers. But I, for one, would be grateful if they would, first, be sure that they have the right QUESTIONS. I hate to be cynical, but I believe that most people have gone into this because they’re unhappy with their lives, and they don’t want to look into the mirror to see who’s at least partially responsible. Why do that when there are so many “smart” people telling you that it’s someone else’s fault.
In addition to that, I believe that this collective movement gives people the impression that they’re courageous and tough and badass. They can go on a board or in a chatroom, and openly talk about beating the shit out of people, or pulling out their (fill in your favorite gun model and ammo type here) and shooting someone, the criteria for doing so being the victims’ political opinions, sexual persuasion, or skin color. I might be 5’7″, not possess any clearly delineated muscle, be losing most of my hair, and weigh 325 pounds, but, in my mind, to the other guys on that board I’m Chuck Norris.
I’m not making this up, nor did I get it from a liberal website. I frequently visit right-wing websites, and am increasingly horrified by what I’m encountering there. It scares me a helluva lot, but I’m also puzzled. I can understand the frustration at the government, having felt a similar antagonism for several years now. But what I’m seeing doesn’t mesh with the message. The Tea Partiers I’ve encountered don’t distinguish between good politicians and bad. They align themselves solidly against Democrats and unanimously for Republicans; the only exception is when there’s a candidate that they prefer over the incumbent Republican, and there is never a discernible policy difference between the two. In fact, what stands out most of all about the Tea Party slate is their almost uniform unsuitability for public office.
Is it too much to expect people to investigate this “explosive” stuff a little BEFORE they light the fuse? It’s not rocket science (no pun intended). The alternative, to me, is unthinkable: that the right is grabbing at everything and anything, even at blatant untruths, to throw out there to panic the citizenry into action. I’m not sure which is worse: a nation’s people who don’t have the intellect or the willpower to question ALL that they are being fed, or one that believes any act of dishonesty or violence is justifiable in the name of getting their own way. When will enough be enough?
Participant[quote=ucodegen] 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.[/quote]ucodegen, given your mention of English wine, I’m sending these along for your consideration:
http://www.biddendenvineyards.com/wines.shtml
http://www.championwine.co.uk/SparklingWine.htm
http://www.bookersvineyard.co.uk/Our_Wines/our_wines.html
http://www.breakybottom.co.uk/winelist.aspx
http://www.broadfieldcourt.co.uk/wines.php
http://www.cornwallwines.co.uk/the-cellar.html
http://www.camelvalley.com/wines-and-shop
http://www.carr-taylor.co.uk/wines/wines.aspx
http://www.cartersvineyards.co.uk/our_wines.html
http://www.chilternvalley.co.uk/winery.html
http://www.chilfordhall.co.uk/cgi-bin/ch/index.html
http://www.coddingtonvineyard.com/page3.htmIt may interest you to know that these are all active British vineyards that both grow their own grapes, and produce and sell (retail) wine made from them. Note that these are only the vineyards from A thru C.
Am I forwarding these to you because I have, or believe that you have, an interest in British wine? No. It’s because I really hate the spread of misinformation, and your post here is chock full of it. I don’t even know where to begin.
[quote=ucodegen] 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.[/quote]Because so many Piggs are from California, I’m assuming that you are a resident, also (my sincere apologies if this is not the case). There are over 400,000 acres that are dedicated to the growing of grapes for wine in CA. The area considered as the Napa Valley covers roughly 100,000 acres (and much of that acreage is NOT used for growing anything). California has expanded its wine industry significantly over the past 30 years, and there are many regions, including the coast, that contribute.
There are a large number of states that have thriving wine industries, albeit not on a level near that of California. The temperature ranges of these states varies widely, and some differ significantly from California. There are even some in New England.
As for England itself, hopefully I’ve made my point.
[quote=ucodegen] 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
[/quote]Are you serious about this? Do you truly believe that members of the IPCC were embarrassed that it snowed in London in October 2008? More than that, do you honestly believe that this single not-terribly-exciting weather event has even the tiniest amount of statistical significance?
Allow me to say that if your answer to that is “yes”, you need to stop discussing the subject of global warming/climate change. Just. Stop. Now, preferably. Plain and simple, you are not even remotely equipped to engage in a discussion of this topic.
Before you assume that I am jumping to conclusions, allow me to point out that you included a link to Anthony Watts’ highly regarded (NOT) website, “Watts Up With That” that details his “scientific” findings “disproving” climate change. Anyone that reads this and believes that it qualifies as evidence against the findings of the scientists and researchers of the IPCC and other institutions is so far off the beam that I don’t think it’s possible to reduce the discussion to a level they will understand. But more on that later.
Watts is a former TV weatherman. That means that he read the weather on the newscasts before they fired guys like him to bring in busty blond gals who didn’t read quite as well but got bigger ratings for the stations. He calls himself a “former television meteorologist” but has no training in this field, formal or otherwise; he has made allusions to an education in electrical engineering and meteorology at Purdue University, but does not claim it on his website, nor will he answer inquiries regarding his education.
I’ve read Watts’s “science”; I’ve reviewed the material he’s released regarding his projects. There is nothing of value there. To say that his scientific methodology is faulty is a vast understatement, and if he ever attended Purdue, he somehow managed to elude a number of basic science, mathematics, and statistics courses. I’m sorry, but his websites have more of a middle-school science fair look to them than that of scientific research.
[quote=ucodegen] 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….[/quote]
The “change” you mention was to the labeling only, in a misguided attempt to “explain” the phenomenon in layman’s terms. Seriously, with people like Anthony Watts and his legions of pathologically loyal followers, I don’t know why they bother. As for asking a meteorologist about climate change, I wouldn’t ask “any” meteorologist. I’d make sure that I asked one who not only was well-educated in the science of his/her subject, but one who was open-minded and who continued to study long after leaving the halls of academia.
[quote=ucodegen] 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. [/quote]
Okay, I admit to being curious. You won’t believe hundreds of scientists (who are scientists in the true sense of the world), some of whom have many decades of experience behind them, many of who have multiple doctoral degrees from places like MIT and Oxford and CalTech, and all of whom have published records of the work that they have done with research results that can be reproduced. But you have no problem with putting your faith in the accuracy of “Chinese records” providing data from 1470.
As for the quote about the records, I cannot understand what you are trying to say:
1. A decade is ten (10) years. A century is one hundred (100) years. 5 decades would have been fifty (50) years ago.
2. Are you referring to the Northwest Passage or to the Northern Sea Route?
3. And I still don’t understand what you’re trying to establish with this piece of information. Perhaps you could post a link to the exact place where you found the info?And finally we have……
[quote=ucodegen] Growing grapes requires higher temperatures. That is why they are grown in the NAPA valley and not along the coast in California.[/quote]
Are you a grape grower, by any chance?
Look, ucodegen, I’m not trying to be an intellectual snob, or trying to say that people who don’t believe in global warming are stupid. In fact, I have my own disagreements with some of what’s being posited by some of the scientists. But that’s just it. If a topic comes up for discusson about which I know diddly, I stay out of it, or I ask questions. If I decide to participate in the discussion, I try to find out something about the topic first. That does not mean that I go to my favorite reactionary, knee-jerk political website, and get their take on it. And I don’t search until I find a site that agrees with my take on it, and then use that as “evidence”. No, I take the time to check a number of sources, primarily ones that DON’T align with my views (I already know what I believe, so why do I need to find more people who agree with me when I want to research/learn something).
Your post here was relatively brief. But it was full of half-truths, mistruths, and declarations that had no basis in fact. And they were declarations, not components of a discussion. That’s the problem today: people shooting off their mouths and creating widespread divisiveness – and much of it’s based on stuff that isn’t even true. In fact, it’s the topic of this thread
I stated earlier that you were in no way equipped to engage in a discussion on the topic of climate change. That opinion hasn’t changed: I honestly believe that an adult who is not aware that 5 decades does not equal 500 years has no business declaring that a well-respected scientist with an MIT degree and 40 years experience in climate science doesn’t know what he’s talking about in his scientific publications.
I’m not being a snob. I don’t think that academia is a sacred place to which the common man cannot gain admittance, nor do I believe that it impossible for an individual with who may be a high school dropout to understand advanced science and history and literature. But people don’t learn in a vacuum. It doesn’t just happen. They need to work at it. And they need to really want it. And you won’t get it from your political party leaders, either. When you’re getting your science or your history or your economics in a politically-wrapped package, it’s an empty box.
You won’t hear me say this often, but Glenn Beck is right about one thing: there are a lot of books out there and people can use them to educate themselves. But unlike Glenn Beck, I don’t believe in “cherry-picking” and looking only for books and other sources of learning that are 100% aligned with what I think. That is NOT learning. It’s the exact opposite.
So I don’t expect it to happen, but I’ll say it anyway: People need to shut the fuck up when they don’t have the faintest idea what they’re talking about. And if they limit their sources of information to those who they know to be in agreement with them, and use this as “evidence” in discussions with others while remaining completely close-minded to anyone else, they aren’t doing anything but deepening the divide. The people doing this the most declare that they are proud patriots. In reality, they are tearing this nation apart, and for selfish and ignorant reasons.
Miss O’Donnell is one of these. She has done nothing of substance in her 40 years here on earth. And she has been singularly unimpressive in her exhibitions (or lack thereof) of knowledge in subject matter necessary to serve effectively as a United States Senator. She loudly declares that the President and his administration (and pretty much the entire Democratic slate of legislators) have repeatedly violated the Constitution, and then publicly demonstrates ignorance of the content of that document while claiming to interpret it correctly.
Yet this is compounded by her followers, who support her unreservedly, and continue to defend her ignorance, usually by repeating lies about her opposition.
Participant[quote=ucodegen] 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.[/quote]ucodegen, given your mention of English wine, I’m sending these along for your consideration:
http://www.biddendenvineyards.com/wines.shtml
http://www.championwine.co.uk/SparklingWine.htm
http://www.bookersvineyard.co.uk/Our_Wines/our_wines.html
http://www.breakybottom.co.uk/winelist.aspx
http://www.broadfieldcourt.co.uk/wines.php
http://www.cornwallwines.co.uk/the-cellar.html
http://www.camelvalley.com/wines-and-shop
http://www.carr-taylor.co.uk/wines/wines.aspx
http://www.cartersvineyards.co.uk/our_wines.html
http://www.chilternvalley.co.uk/winery.html
http://www.chilfordhall.co.uk/cgi-bin/ch/index.html
http://www.coddingtonvineyard.com/page3.htmIt may interest you to know that these are all active British vineyards that both grow their own grapes, and produce and sell (retail) wine made from them. Note that these are only the vineyards from A thru C.
Am I forwarding these to you because I have, or believe that you have, an interest in British wine? No. It’s because I really hate the spread of misinformation, and your post here is chock full of it. I don’t even know where to begin.
[quote=ucodegen] 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.[/quote]Because so many Piggs are from California, I’m assuming that you are a resident, also (my sincere apologies if this is not the case). There are over 400,000 acres that are dedicated to the growing of grapes for wine in CA. The area considered as the Napa Valley covers roughly 100,000 acres (and much of that acreage is NOT used for growing anything). California has expanded its wine industry significantly over the past 30 years, and there are many regions, including the coast, that contribute.
There are a large number of states that have thriving wine industries, albeit not on a level near that of California. The temperature ranges of these states varies widely, and some differ significantly from California. There are even some in New England.
As for England itself, hopefully I’ve made my point.
[quote=ucodegen] 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
[/quote]Are you serious about this? Do you truly believe that members of the IPCC were embarrassed that it snowed in London in October 2008? More than that, do you honestly believe that this single not-terribly-exciting weather event has even the tiniest amount of statistical significance?
Allow me to say that if your answer to that is “yes”, you need to stop discussing the subject of global warming/climate change. Just. Stop. Now, preferably. Plain and simple, you are not even remotely equipped to engage in a discussion of this topic.
Before you assume that I am jumping to conclusions, allow me to point out that you included a link to Anthony Watts’ highly regarded (NOT) website, “Watts Up With That” that details his “scientific” findings “disproving” climate change. Anyone that reads this and believes that it qualifies as evidence against the findings of the scientists and researchers of the IPCC and other institutions is so far off the beam that I don’t think it’s possible to reduce the discussion to a level they will understand. But more on that later.
Watts is a former TV weatherman. That means that he read the weather on the newscasts before they fired guys like him to bring in busty blond gals who didn’t read quite as well but got bigger ratings for the stations. He calls himself a “former television meteorologist” but has no training in this field, formal or otherwise; he has made allusions to an education in electrical engineering and meteorology at Purdue University, but does not claim it on his website, nor will he answer inquiries regarding his education.
I’ve read Watts’s “science”; I’ve reviewed the material he’s released regarding his projects. There is nothing of value there. To say that his scientific methodology is faulty is a vast understatement, and if he ever attended Purdue, he somehow managed to elude a number of basic science, mathematics, and statistics courses. I’m sorry, but his websites have more of a middle-school science fair look to them than that of scientific research.
[quote=ucodegen] 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….[/quote]
The “change” you mention was to the labeling only, in a misguided attempt to “explain” the phenomenon in layman’s terms. Seriously, with people like Anthony Watts and his legions of pathologically loyal followers, I don’t know why they bother. As for asking a meteorologist about climate change, I wouldn’t ask “any” meteorologist. I’d make sure that I asked one who not only was well-educated in the science of his/her subject, but one who was open-minded and who continued to study long after leaving the halls of academia.
[quote=ucodegen] 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. [/quote]
Okay, I admit to being curious. You won’t believe hundreds of scientists (who are scientists in the true sense of the world), some of whom have many decades of experience behind them, many of who have multiple doctoral degrees from places like MIT and Oxford and CalTech, and all of whom have published records of the work that they have done with research results that can be reproduced. But you have no problem with putting your faith in the accuracy of “Chinese records” providing data from 1470.
As for the quote about the records, I cannot understand what you are trying to say:
1. A decade is ten (10) years. A century is one hundred (100) years. 5 decades would have been fifty (50) years ago.
2. Are you referring to the Northwest Passage or to the Northern Sea Route?
3. And I still don’t understand what you’re trying to establish with this piece of information. Perhaps you could post a link to the exact place where you found the info?And finally we have……
[quote=ucodegen] Growing grapes requires higher temperatures. That is why they are grown in the NAPA valley and not along the coast in California.[/quote]
Are you a grape grower, by any chance?
Look, ucodegen, I’m not trying to be an intellectual snob, or trying to say that people who don’t believe in global warming are stupid. In fact, I have my own disagreements with some of what’s being posited by some of the scientists. But that’s just it. If a topic comes up for discusson about which I know diddly, I stay out of it, or I ask questions. If I decide to participate in the discussion, I try to find out something about the topic first. That does not mean that I go to my favorite reactionary, knee-jerk political website, and get their take on it. And I don’t search until I find a site that agrees with my take on it, and then use that as “evidence”. No, I take the time to check a number of sources, primarily ones that DON’T align with my views (I already know what I believe, so why do I need to find more people who agree with me when I want to research/learn something).
Your post here was relatively brief. But it was full of half-truths, mistruths, and declarations that had no basis in fact. And they were declarations, not components of a discussion. That’s the problem today: people shooting off their mouths and creating widespread divisiveness – and much of it’s based on stuff that isn’t even true. In fact, it’s the topic of this thread
I stated earlier that you were in no way equipped to engage in a discussion on the topic of climate change. That opinion hasn’t changed: I honestly believe that an adult who is not aware that 5 decades does not equal 500 years has no business declaring that a well-respected scientist with an MIT degree and 40 years experience in climate science doesn’t know what he’s talking about in his scientific publications.
I’m not being a snob. I don’t think that academia is a sacred place to which the common man cannot gain admittance, nor do I believe that it impossible for an individual with who may be a high school dropout to understand advanced science and history and literature. But people don’t learn in a vacuum. It doesn’t just happen. They need to work at it. And they need to really want it. And you won’t get it from your political party leaders, either. When you’re getting your science or your history or your economics in a politically-wrapped package, it’s an empty box.
You won’t hear me say this often, but Glenn Beck is right about one thing: there are a lot of books out there and people can use them to educate themselves. But unlike Glenn Beck, I don’t believe in “cherry-picking” and looking only for books and other sources of learning that are 100% aligned with what I think. That is NOT learning. It’s the exact opposite.
So I don’t expect it to happen, but I’ll say it anyway: People need to shut the fuck up when they don’t have the faintest idea what they’re talking about. And if they limit their sources of information to those who they know to be in agreement with them, and use this as “evidence” in discussions with others while remaining completely close-minded to anyone else, they aren’t doing anything but deepening the divide. The people doing this the most declare that they are proud patriots. In reality, they are tearing this nation apart, and for selfish and ignorant reasons.
Miss O’Donnell is one of these. She has done nothing of substance in her 40 years here on earth. And she has been singularly unimpressive in her exhibitions (or lack thereof) of knowledge in subject matter necessary to serve effectively as a United States Senator. She loudly declares that the President and his administration (and pretty much the entire Democratic slate of legislators) have repeatedly violated the Constitution, and then publicly demonstrates ignorance of the content of that document while claiming to interpret it correctly.
Yet this is compounded by her followers, who support her unreservedly, and continue to defend her ignorance, usually by repeating lies about her opposition.
Participant[quote=ucodegen] 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.[/quote]ucodegen, given your mention of English wine, I’m sending these along for your consideration:
http://www.biddendenvineyards.com/wines.shtml
http://www.championwine.co.uk/SparklingWine.htm
http://www.bookersvineyard.co.uk/Our_Wines/our_wines.html
http://www.breakybottom.co.uk/winelist.aspx
http://www.broadfieldcourt.co.uk/wines.php
http://www.cornwallwines.co.uk/the-cellar.html
http://www.camelvalley.com/wines-and-shop
http://www.carr-taylor.co.uk/wines/wines.aspx
http://www.cartersvineyards.co.uk/our_wines.html
http://www.chilternvalley.co.uk/winery.html
http://www.chilfordhall.co.uk/cgi-bin/ch/index.html
http://www.coddingtonvineyard.com/page3.htmIt may interest you to know that these are all active British vineyards that both grow their own grapes, and produce and sell (retail) wine made from them. Note that these are only the vineyards from A thru C.
Am I forwarding these to you because I have, or believe that you have, an interest in British wine? No. It’s because I really hate the spread of misinformation, and your post here is chock full of it. I don’t even know where to begin.
[quote=ucodegen] 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.[/quote]Because so many Piggs are from California, I’m assuming that you are a resident, also (my sincere apologies if this is not the case). There are over 400,000 acres that are dedicated to the growing of grapes for wine in CA. The area considered as the Napa Valley covers roughly 100,000 acres (and much of that acreage is NOT used for growing anything). California has expanded its wine industry significantly over the past 30 years, and there are many regions, including the coast, that contribute.
There are a large number of states that have thriving wine industries, albeit not on a level near that of California. The temperature ranges of these states varies widely, and some differ significantly from California. There are even some in New England.
As for England itself, hopefully I’ve made my point.
[quote=ucodegen] 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
[/quote]Are you serious about this? Do you truly believe that members of the IPCC were embarrassed that it snowed in London in October 2008? More than that, do you honestly believe that this single not-terribly-exciting weather event has even the tiniest amount of statistical significance?
Allow me to say that if your answer to that is “yes”, you need to stop discussing the subject of global warming/climate change. Just. Stop. Now, preferably. Plain and simple, you are not even remotely equipped to engage in a discussion of this topic.
Before you assume that I am jumping to conclusions, allow me to point out that you included a link to Anthony Watts’ highly regarded (NOT) website, “Watts Up With That” that details his “scientific” findings “disproving” climate change. Anyone that reads this and believes that it qualifies as evidence against the findings of the scientists and researchers of the IPCC and other institutions is so far off the beam that I don’t think it’s possible to reduce the discussion to a level they will understand. But more on that later.
Watts is a former TV weatherman. That means that he read the weather on the newscasts before they fired guys like him to bring in busty blond gals who didn’t read quite as well but got bigger ratings for the stations. He calls himself a “former television meteorologist” but has no training in this field, formal or otherwise; he has made allusions to an education in electrical engineering and meteorology at Purdue University, but does not claim it on his website, nor will he answer inquiries regarding his education.
I’ve read Watts’s “science”; I’ve reviewed the material he’s released regarding his projects. There is nothing of value there. To say that his scientific methodology is faulty is a vast understatement, and if he ever attended Purdue, he somehow managed to elude a number of basic science, mathematics, and statistics courses. I’m sorry, but his websites have more of a middle-school science fair look to them than that of scientific research.
[quote=ucodegen] 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….[/quote]
The “change” you mention was to the labeling only, in a misguided attempt to “explain” the phenomenon in layman’s terms. Seriously, with people like Anthony Watts and his legions of pathologically loyal followers, I don’t know why they bother. As for asking a meteorologist about climate change, I wouldn’t ask “any” meteorologist. I’d make sure that I asked one who not only was well-educated in the science of his/her subject, but one who was open-minded and who continued to study long after leaving the halls of academia.
[quote=ucodegen] 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. [/quote]
Okay, I admit to being curious. You won’t believe hundreds of scientists (who are scientists in the true sense of the world), some of whom have many decades of experience behind them, many of who have multiple doctoral degrees from places like MIT and Oxford and CalTech, and all of whom have published records of the work that they have done with research results that can be reproduced. But you have no problem with putting your faith in the accuracy of “Chinese records” providing data from 1470.
As for the quote about the records, I cannot understand what you are trying to say:
1. A decade is ten (10) years. A century is one hundred (100) years. 5 decades would have been fifty (50) years ago.
2. Are you referring to the Northwest Passage or to the Northern Sea Route?
3. And I still don’t understand what you’re trying to establish with this piece of information. Perhaps you could post a link to the exact place where you found the info?And finally we have……
[quote=ucodegen] Growing grapes requires higher temperatures. That is why they are grown in the NAPA valley and not along the coast in California.[/quote]
Are you a grape grower, by any chance?
Look, ucodegen, I’m not trying to be an intellectual snob, or trying to say that people who don’t believe in global warming are stupid. In fact, I have my own disagreements with some of what’s being posited by some of the scientists. But that’s just it. If a topic comes up for discusson about which I know diddly, I stay out of it, or I ask questions. If I decide to participate in the discussion, I try to find out something about the topic first. That does not mean that I go to my favorite reactionary, knee-jerk political website, and get their take on it. And I don’t search until I find a site that agrees with my take on it, and then use that as “evidence”. No, I take the time to check a number of sources, primarily ones that DON’T align with my views (I already know what I believe, so why do I need to find more people who agree with me when I want to research/learn something).
Your post here was relatively brief. But it was full of half-truths, mistruths, and declarations that had no basis in fact. And they were declarations, not components of a discussion. That’s the problem today: people shooting off their mouths and creating widespread divisiveness – and much of it’s based on stuff that isn’t even true. In fact, it’s the topic of this thread
I stated earlier that you were in no way equipped to engage in a discussion on the topic of climate change. That opinion hasn’t changed: I honestly believe that an adult who is not aware that 5 decades does not equal 500 years has no business declaring that a well-respected scientist with an MIT degree and 40 years experience in climate science doesn’t know what he’s talking about in his scientific publications.
I’m not being a snob. I don’t think that academia is a sacred place to which the common man cannot gain admittance, nor do I believe that it impossible for an individual with who may be a high school dropout to understand advanced science and history and literature. But people don’t learn in a vacuum. It doesn’t just happen. They need to work at it. And they need to really want it. And you won’t get it from your political party leaders, either. When you’re getting your science or your history or your economics in a politically-wrapped package, it’s an empty box.
You won’t hear me say this often, but Glenn Beck is right about one thing: there are a lot of books out there and people can use them to educate themselves. But unlike Glenn Beck, I don’t believe in “cherry-picking” and looking only for books and other sources of learning that are 100% aligned with what I think. That is NOT learning. It’s the exact opposite.
So I don’t expect it to happen, but I’ll say it anyway: People need to shut the fuck up when they don’t have the faintest idea what they’re talking about. And if they limit their sources of information to those who they know to be in agreement with them, and use this as “evidence” in discussions with others while remaining completely close-minded to anyone else, they aren’t doing anything but deepening the divide. The people doing this the most declare that they are proud patriots. In reality, they are tearing this nation apart, and for selfish and ignorant reasons.
Miss O’Donnell is one of these. She has done nothing of substance in her 40 years here on earth. And she has been singularly unimpressive in her exhibitions (or lack thereof) of knowledge in subject matter necessary to serve effectively as a United States Senator. She loudly declares that the President and his administration (and pretty much the entire Democratic slate of legislators) have repeatedly violated the Constitution, and then publicly demonstrates ignorance of the content of that document while claiming to interpret it correctly.
Yet this is compounded by her followers, who support her unreservedly, and continue to defend her ignorance, usually by repeating lies about her opposition.
Participant[quote=ucodegen] 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.[/quote]ucodegen, given your mention of English wine, I’m sending these along for your consideration:
http://www.biddendenvineyards.com/wines.shtml
http://www.championwine.co.uk/SparklingWine.htm
http://www.bookersvineyard.co.uk/Our_Wines/our_wines.html
http://www.breakybottom.co.uk/winelist.aspx
http://www.broadfieldcourt.co.uk/wines.php
http://www.cornwallwines.co.uk/the-cellar.html
http://www.camelvalley.com/wines-and-shop
http://www.carr-taylor.co.uk/wines/wines.aspx
http://www.cartersvineyards.co.uk/our_wines.html
http://www.chilternvalley.co.uk/winery.html
http://www.chilfordhall.co.uk/cgi-bin/ch/index.html
http://www.coddingtonvineyard.com/page3.htmIt may interest you to know that these are all active British vineyards that both grow their own grapes, and produce and sell (retail) wine made from them. Note that these are only the vineyards from A thru C.
Am I forwarding these to you because I have, or believe that you have, an interest in British wine? No. It’s because I really hate the spread of misinformation, and your post here is chock full of it. I don’t even know where to begin.
[quote=ucodegen] 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.[/quote]Because so many Piggs are from California, I’m assuming that you are a resident, also (my sincere apologies if this is not the case). There are over 400,000 acres that are dedicated to the growing of grapes for wine in CA. The area considered as the Napa Valley covers roughly 100,000 acres (and much of that acreage is NOT used for growing anything). California has expanded its wine industry significantly over the past 30 years, and there are many regions, including the coast, that contribute.
There are a large number of states that have thriving wine industries, albeit not on a level near that of California. The temperature ranges of these states varies widely, and some differ significantly from California. There are even some in New England.
As for England itself, hopefully I’ve made my point.
[quote=ucodegen] 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
[/quote]Are you serious about this? Do you truly believe that members of the IPCC were embarrassed that it snowed in London in October 2008? More than that, do you honestly believe that this single not-terribly-exciting weather event has even the tiniest amount of statistical significance?
Allow me to say that if your answer to that is “yes”, you need to stop discussing the subject of global warming/climate change. Just. Stop. Now, preferably. Plain and simple, you are not even remotely equipped to engage in a discussion of this topic.
Before you assume that I am jumping to conclusions, allow me to point out that you included a link to Anthony Watts’ highly regarded (NOT) website, “Watts Up With That” that details his “scientific” findings “disproving” climate change. Anyone that reads this and believes that it qualifies as evidence against the findings of the scientists and researchers of the IPCC and other institutions is so far off the beam that I don’t think it’s possible to reduce the discussion to a level they will understand. But more on that later.
Watts is a former TV weatherman. That means that he read the weather on the newscasts before they fired guys like him to bring in busty blond gals who didn’t read quite as well but got bigger ratings for the stations. He calls himself a “former television meteorologist” but has no training in this field, formal or otherwise; he has made allusions to an education in electrical engineering and meteorology at Purdue University, but does not claim it on his website, nor will he answer inquiries regarding his education.
I’ve read Watts’s “science”; I’ve reviewed the material he’s released regarding his projects. There is nothing of value there. To say that his scientific methodology is faulty is a vast understatement, and if he ever attended Purdue, he somehow managed to elude a number of basic science, mathematics, and statistics courses. I’m sorry, but his websites have more of a middle-school science fair look to them than that of scientific research.
[quote=ucodegen] 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….[/quote]
The “change” you mention was to the labeling only, in a misguided attempt to “explain” the phenomenon in layman’s terms. Seriously, with people like Anthony Watts and his legions of pathologically loyal followers, I don’t know why they bother. As for asking a meteorologist about climate change, I wouldn’t ask “any” meteorologist. I’d make sure that I asked one who not only was well-educated in the science of his/her subject, but one who was open-minded and who continued to study long after leaving the halls of academia.
[quote=ucodegen] 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. [/quote]
Okay, I admit to being curious. You won’t believe hundreds of scientists (who are scientists in the true sense of the world), some of whom have many decades of experience behind them, many of who have multiple doctoral degrees from places like MIT and Oxford and CalTech, and all of whom have published records of the work that they have done with research results that can be reproduced. But you have no problem with putting your faith in the accuracy of “Chinese records” providing data from 1470.
As for the quote about the records, I cannot understand what you are trying to say:
1. A decade is ten (10) years. A century is one hundred (100) years. 5 decades would have been fifty (50) years ago.
2. Are you referring to the Northwest Passage or to the Northern Sea Route?
3. And I still don’t understand what you’re trying to establish with this piece of information. Perhaps you could post a link to the exact place where you found the info?And finally we have……
[quote=ucodegen] Growing grapes requires higher temperatures. That is why they are grown in the NAPA valley and not along the coast in California.[/quote]
Are you a grape grower, by any chance?
Look, ucodegen, I’m not trying to be an intellectual snob, or trying to say that people who don’t believe in global warming are stupid. In fact, I have my own disagreements with some of what’s being posited by some of the scientists. But that’s just it. If a topic comes up for discusson about which I know diddly, I stay out of it, or I ask questions. If I decide to participate in the discussion, I try to find out something about the topic first. That does not mean that I go to my favorite reactionary, knee-jerk political website, and get their take on it. And I don’t search until I find a site that agrees with my take on it, and then use that as “evidence”. No, I take the time to check a number of sources, primarily ones that DON’T align with my views (I already know what I believe, so why do I need to find more people who agree with me when I want to research/learn something).
Your post here was relatively brief. But it was full of half-truths, mistruths, and declarations that had no basis in fact. And they were declarations, not components of a discussion. That’s the problem today: people shooting off their mouths and creating widespread divisiveness – and much of it’s based on stuff that isn’t even true. In fact, it’s the topic of this thread
I stated earlier that you were in no way equipped to engage in a discussion on the topic of climate change. That opinion hasn’t changed: I honestly believe that an adult who is not aware that 5 decades does not equal 500 years has no business declaring that a well-respected scientist with an MIT degree and 40 years experience in climate science doesn’t know what he’s talking about in his scientific publications.
I’m not being a snob. I don’t think that academia is a sacred place to which the common man cannot gain admittance, nor do I believe that it impossible for an individual with who may be a high school dropout to understand advanced science and history and literature. But people don’t learn in a vacuum. It doesn’t just happen. They need to work at it. And they need to really want it. And you won’t get it from your political party leaders, either. When you’re getting your science or your history or your economics in a politically-wrapped package, it’s an empty box.
You won’t hear me say this often, but Glenn Beck is right about one thing: there are a lot of books out there and people can use them to educate themselves. But unlike Glenn Beck, I don’t believe in “cherry-picking” and looking only for books and other sources of learning that are 100% aligned with what I think. That is NOT learning. It’s the exact opposite.
So I don’t expect it to happen, but I’ll say it anyway: People need to shut the fuck up when they don’t have the faintest idea what they’re talking about. And if they limit their sources of information to those who they know to be in agreement with them, and use this as “evidence” in discussions with others while remaining completely close-minded to anyone else, they aren’t doing anything but deepening the divide. The people doing this the most declare that they are proud patriots. In reality, they are tearing this nation apart, and for selfish and ignorant reasons.
Miss O’Donnell is one of these. She has done nothing of substance in her 40 years here on earth. And she has been singularly unimpressive in her exhibitions (or lack thereof) of knowledge in subject matter necessary to serve effectively as a United States Senator. She loudly declares that the President and his administration (and pretty much the entire Democratic slate of legislators) have repeatedly violated the Constitution, and then publicly demonstrates ignorance of the content of that document while claiming to interpret it correctly.
Yet this is compounded by her followers, who support her unreservedly, and continue to defend her ignorance, usually by repeating lies about her opposition.
Participant[quote=ucodegen] 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.[/quote]ucodegen, given your mention of English wine, I’m sending these along for your consideration:
http://www.biddendenvineyards.com/wines.shtml
http://www.championwine.co.uk/SparklingWine.htm
http://www.bookersvineyard.co.uk/Our_Wines/our_wines.html
http://www.breakybottom.co.uk/winelist.aspx
http://www.broadfieldcourt.co.uk/wines.php
http://www.cornwallwines.co.uk/the-cellar.html
http://www.camelvalley.com/wines-and-shop
http://www.carr-taylor.co.uk/wines/wines.aspx
http://www.cartersvineyards.co.uk/our_wines.html
http://www.chilternvalley.co.uk/winery.html
http://www.chilfordhall.co.uk/cgi-bin/ch/index.html
http://www.coddingtonvineyard.com/page3.htmIt may interest you to know that these are all active British vineyards that both grow their own grapes, and produce and sell (retail) wine made from them. Note that these are only the vineyards from A thru C.
Am I forwarding these to you because I have, or believe that you have, an interest in British wine? No. It’s because I really hate the spread of misinformation, and your post here is chock full of it. I don’t even know where to begin.
[quote=ucodegen] 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.[/quote]Because so many Piggs are from California, I’m assuming that you are a resident, also (my sincere apologies if this is not the case). There are over 400,000 acres that are dedicated to the growing of grapes for wine in CA. The area considered as the Napa Valley covers roughly 100,000 acres (and much of that acreage is NOT used for growing anything). California has expanded its wine industry significantly over the past 30 years, and there are many regions, including the coast, that contribute.
There are a large number of states that have thriving wine industries, albeit not on a level near that of California. The temperature ranges of these states varies widely, and some differ significantly from California. There are even some in New England.
As for England itself, hopefully I’ve made my point.
[quote=ucodegen] 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
[/quote]Are you serious about this? Do you truly believe that members of the IPCC were embarrassed that it snowed in London in October 2008? More than that, do you honestly believe that this single not-terribly-exciting weather event has even the tiniest amount of statistical significance?
Allow me to say that if your answer to that is “yes”, you need to stop discussing the subject of global warming/climate change. Just. Stop. Now, preferably. Plain and simple, you are not even remotely equipped to engage in a discussion of this topic.
Before you assume that I am jumping to conclusions, allow me to point out that you included a link to Anthony Watts’ highly regarded (NOT) website, “Watts Up With That” that details his “scientific” findings “disproving” climate change. Anyone that reads this and believes that it qualifies as evidence against the findings of the scientists and researchers of the IPCC and other institutions is so far off the beam that I don’t think it’s possible to reduce the discussion to a level they will understand. But more on that later.
Watts is a former TV weatherman. That means that he read the weather on the newscasts before they fired guys like him to bring in busty blond gals who didn’t read quite as well but got bigger ratings for the stations. He calls himself a “former television meteorologist” but has no training in this field, formal or otherwise; he has made allusions to an education in electrical engineering and meteorology at Purdue University, but does not claim it on his website, nor will he answer inquiries regarding his education.
I’ve read Watts’s “science”; I’ve reviewed the material he’s released regarding his projects. There is nothing of value there. To say that his scientific methodology is faulty is a vast understatement, and if he ever attended Purdue, he somehow managed to elude a number of basic science, mathematics, and statistics courses. I’m sorry, but his websites have more of a middle-school science fair look to them than that of scientific research.
[quote=ucodegen] 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….[/quote]
The “change” you mention was to the labeling only, in a misguided attempt to “explain” the phenomenon in layman’s terms. Seriously, with people like Anthony Watts and his legions of pathologically loyal followers, I don’t know why they bother. As for asking a meteorologist about climate change, I wouldn’t ask “any” meteorologist. I’d make sure that I asked one who not only was well-educated in the science of his/her subject, but one who was open-minded and who continued to study long after leaving the halls of academia.
[quote=ucodegen] 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. [/quote]
Okay, I admit to being curious. You won’t believe hundreds of scientists (who are scientists in the true sense of the world), some of whom have many decades of experience behind them, many of who have multiple doctoral degrees from places like MIT and Oxford and CalTech, and all of whom have published records of the work that they have done with research results that can be reproduced. But you have no problem with putting your faith in the accuracy of “Chinese records” providing data from 1470.
As for the quote about the records, I cannot understand what you are trying to say:
1. A decade is ten (10) years. A century is one hundred (100) years. 5 decades would have been fifty (50) years ago.
2. Are you referring to the Northwest Passage or to the Northern Sea Route?
3. And I still don’t understand what you’re trying to establish with this piece of information. Perhaps you could post a link to the exact place where you found the info?And finally we have……
[quote=ucodegen] Growing grapes requires higher temperatures. That is why they are grown in the NAPA valley and not along the coast in California.[/quote]
Are you a grape grower, by any chance?
Look, ucodegen, I’m not trying to be an intellectual snob, or trying to say that people who don’t believe in global warming are stupid. In fact, I have my own disagreements with some of what’s being posited by some of the scientists. But that’s just it. If a topic comes up for discusson about which I know diddly, I stay out of it, or I ask questions. If I decide to participate in the discussion, I try to find out something about the topic first. That does not mean that I go to my favorite reactionary, knee-jerk political website, and get their take on it. And I don’t search until I find a site that agrees with my take on it, and then use that as “evidence”. No, I take the time to check a number of sources, primarily ones that DON’T align with my views (I already know what I believe, so why do I need to find more people who agree with me when I want to research/learn something).
Your post here was relatively brief. But it was full of half-truths, mistruths, and declarations that had no basis in fact. And they were declarations, not components of a discussion. That’s the problem today: people shooting off their mouths and creating widespread divisiveness – and much of it’s based on stuff that isn’t even true. In fact, it’s the topic of this thread
I stated earlier that you were in no way equipped to engage in a discussion on the topic of climate change. That opinion hasn’t changed: I honestly believe that an adult who is not aware that 5 decades does not equal 500 years has no business declaring that a well-respected scientist with an MIT degree and 40 years experience in climate science doesn’t know what he’s talking about in his scientific publications.
I’m not being a snob. I don’t think that academia is a sacred place to which the common man cannot gain admittance, nor do I believe that it impossible for an individual with who may be a high school dropout to understand advanced science and history and literature. But people don’t learn in a vacuum. It doesn’t just happen. They need to work at it. And they need to really want it. And you won’t get it from your political party leaders, either. When you’re getting your science or your history or your economics in a politically-wrapped package, it’s an empty box.
You won’t hear me say this often, but Glenn Beck is right about one thing: there are a lot of books out there and people can use them to educate themselves. But unlike Glenn Beck, I don’t believe in “cherry-picking” and looking only for books and other sources of learning that are 100% aligned with what I think. That is NOT learning. It’s the exact opposite.
So I don’t expect it to happen, but I’ll say it anyway: People need to shut the fuck up when they don’t have the faintest idea what they’re talking about. And if they limit their sources of information to those who they know to be in agreement with them, and use this as “evidence” in discussions with others while remaining completely close-minded to anyone else, they aren’t doing anything but deepening the divide. The people doing this the most declare that they are proud patriots. In reality, they are tearing this nation apart, and for selfish and ignorant reasons.
Miss O’Donnell is one of these. She has done nothing of substance in her 40 years here on earth. And she has been singularly unimpressive in her exhibitions (or lack thereof) of knowledge in subject matter necessary to serve effectively as a United States Senator. She loudly declares that the President and his administration (and pretty much the entire Democratic slate of legislators) have repeatedly violated the Constitution, and then publicly demonstrates ignorance of the content of that document while claiming to interpret it correctly.
Yet this is compounded by her followers, who support her unreservedly, and continue to defend her ignorance, usually by repeating lies about her opposition.
Participant[quote=flu] …….2)Increasing tax without reducing spending isn’t going to do didly……….[/quote]
Can we pass a law to have this tattooed on every citizen’s palm?
And, yes, there will be a quiz on this material…..
Participant[quote=flu] …….2)Increasing tax without reducing spending isn’t going to do didly……….[/quote]
Can we pass a law to have this tattooed on every citizen’s palm?
And, yes, there will be a quiz on this material…..
Participant[quote=flu] …….2)Increasing tax without reducing spending isn’t going to do didly……….[/quote]
Can we pass a law to have this tattooed on every citizen’s palm?
And, yes, there will be a quiz on this material…..
-
AuthorPosts