[jficquette]

[quote=yellow8yellowm]1. Concensus: This means nothing. In Galileo’s day everybody agreed that the sun revolved around the earth, but they were all wrong. The list of the concensus being wrong goes on forever.

2. Correlation does not mean causation: If you assume temperatures have risen at the same time that CO2 has risen this does not prove that CO2 causes GW.

3. Stance changes: In 70’s there the mantra was “global cooling”. This changed to “global warming” and now it is more of just plain old “climate change”.

It is pretty obvious that this is more than just a scientific belief. It is more of a sociopolitical belief, or even a religious belief. It is not cooling, warming, or change that people are worried about. These people are just need something to feel good about. They don’t care about evidence or proof because you don’t those things when you have faith. Look at all the wood burning stoves in Marin County for example.

Don’t get me wrong everybody. I don’t like pollution either, but I think the alarmist/unscientific attitude of environmentalism needs some change.[/quote]

Another factor is it gives them something else to blame on “big business” and Republicans.

They don’t see to care that the biggest polluter on earth is communist China or that they are burning down the rain forest in Brazil to make charcoal.

John

[jficquette]

[quote=yellow8yellowm]1. Concensus: This means nothing. In Galileo’s day everybody agreed that the sun revolved around the earth, but they were all wrong. The list of the concensus being wrong goes on forever.

2. Correlation does not mean causation: If you assume temperatures have risen at the same time that CO2 has risen this does not prove that CO2 causes GW.

3. Stance changes: In 70’s there the mantra was “global cooling”. This changed to “global warming” and now it is more of just plain old “climate change”.

It is pretty obvious that this is more than just a scientific belief. It is more of a sociopolitical belief, or even a religious belief. It is not cooling, warming, or change that people are worried about. These people are just need something to feel good about. They don’t care about evidence or proof because you don’t those things when you have faith. Look at all the wood burning stoves in Marin County for example.

Don’t get me wrong everybody. I don’t like pollution either, but I think the alarmist/unscientific attitude of environmentalism needs some change.[/quote]

Another factor is it gives them something else to blame on “big business” and Republicans.

They don’t see to care that the biggest polluter on earth is communist China or that they are burning down the rain forest in Brazil to make charcoal.

John

[jficquette]

[quote=yellow8yellowm]1. Concensus: This means nothing. In Galileo’s day everybody agreed that the sun revolved around the earth, but they were all wrong. The list of the concensus being wrong goes on forever.

2. Correlation does not mean causation: If you assume temperatures have risen at the same time that CO2 has risen this does not prove that CO2 causes GW.

3. Stance changes: In 70’s there the mantra was “global cooling”. This changed to “global warming” and now it is more of just plain old “climate change”.

It is pretty obvious that this is more than just a scientific belief. It is more of a sociopolitical belief, or even a religious belief. It is not cooling, warming, or change that people are worried about. These people are just need something to feel good about. They don’t care about evidence or proof because you don’t those things when you have faith. Look at all the wood burning stoves in Marin County for example.

Don’t get me wrong everybody. I don’t like pollution either, but I think the alarmist/unscientific attitude of environmentalism needs some change.[/quote]

Another factor is it gives them something else to blame on “big business” and Republicans.

They don’t see to care that the biggest polluter on earth is communist China or that they are burning down the rain forest in Brazil to make charcoal.

John

[jficquette]

[quote=yellow8yellowm]1. Concensus: This means nothing. In Galileo’s day everybody agreed that the sun revolved around the earth, but they were all wrong. The list of the concensus being wrong goes on forever.

2. Correlation does not mean causation: If you assume temperatures have risen at the same time that CO2 has risen this does not prove that CO2 causes GW.

3. Stance changes: In 70’s there the mantra was “global cooling”. This changed to “global warming” and now it is more of just plain old “climate change”.

It is pretty obvious that this is more than just a scientific belief. It is more of a sociopolitical belief, or even a religious belief. It is not cooling, warming, or change that people are worried about. These people are just need something to feel good about. They don’t care about evidence or proof because you don’t those things when you have faith. Look at all the wood burning stoves in Marin County for example.

Don’t get me wrong everybody. I don’t like pollution either, but I think the alarmist/unscientific attitude of environmentalism needs some change.[/quote]

Another factor is it gives them something else to blame on “big business” and Republicans.

They don’t see to care that the biggest polluter on earth is communist China or that they are burning down the rain forest in Brazil to make charcoal.

John

[jficquette]

[quote=yellow8yellowm]1. Concensus: This means nothing. In Galileo’s day everybody agreed that the sun revolved around the earth, but they were all wrong. The list of the concensus being wrong goes on forever.

2. Correlation does not mean causation: If you assume temperatures have risen at the same time that CO2 has risen this does not prove that CO2 causes GW.

3. Stance changes: In 70’s there the mantra was “global cooling”. This changed to “global warming” and now it is more of just plain old “climate change”.

It is pretty obvious that this is more than just a scientific belief. It is more of a sociopolitical belief, or even a religious belief. It is not cooling, warming, or change that people are worried about. These people are just need something to feel good about. They don’t care about evidence or proof because you don’t those things when you have faith. Look at all the wood burning stoves in Marin County for example.

Don’t get me wrong everybody. I don’t like pollution either, but I think the alarmist/unscientific attitude of environmentalism needs some change.[/quote]

Another factor is it gives them something else to blame on “big business” and Republicans.

They don’t see to care that the biggest polluter on earth is communist China or that they are burning down the rain forest in Brazil to make charcoal.

John

[jficquette]

[quote=Daverz]Even Jonah Goldberg admitted he was taken in by this article.

[/quote]

All you have to do is search on the Internet and you will find many articles debunking global warming as a joke.

I can’t stress enough how much money plays into what some scientists support. The great majority of scientists who claim that humans are causing climate change are getting paid through grants given by entities who want them to find the link between Humans and Global Warming. If they don’t support their sponsors views they are out of a job.

John

[jficquette]

[quote=Daverz]Even Jonah Goldberg admitted he was taken in by this article.

[/quote]

All you have to do is search on the Internet and you will find many articles debunking global warming as a joke.

I can’t stress enough how much money plays into what some scientists support. The great majority of scientists who claim that humans are causing climate change are getting paid through grants given by entities who want them to find the link between Humans and Global Warming. If they don’t support their sponsors views they are out of a job.

John

[jficquette]

[quote=Daverz]Even Jonah Goldberg admitted he was taken in by this article.

[/quote]

All you have to do is search on the Internet and you will find many articles debunking global warming as a joke.

I can’t stress enough how much money plays into what some scientists support. The great majority of scientists who claim that humans are causing climate change are getting paid through grants given by entities who want them to find the link between Humans and Global Warming. If they don’t support their sponsors views they are out of a job.

John

[jficquette]

[quote=Daverz]Even Jonah Goldberg admitted he was taken in by this article.

[/quote]

All you have to do is search on the Internet and you will find many articles debunking global warming as a joke.

I can’t stress enough how much money plays into what some scientists support. The great majority of scientists who claim that humans are causing climate change are getting paid through grants given by entities who want them to find the link between Humans and Global Warming. If they don’t support their sponsors views they are out of a job.

John

[jficquette]

[quote=Daverz]Even Jonah Goldberg admitted he was taken in by this article.

[/quote]

All you have to do is search on the Internet and you will find many articles debunking global warming as a joke.

I can’t stress enough how much money plays into what some scientists support. The great majority of scientists who claim that humans are causing climate change are getting paid through grants given by entities who want them to find the link between Humans and Global Warming. If they don’t support their sponsors views they are out of a job.

John

[jficquette]

[quote=equalizer]Broken record, but gotta say again that Clinton, Obama are so selfish, only care about their personal needs desires instead of the good of their party or country. Obama is so out there that Mondale is looking good right now. Clinton, despised by half the country, still seems downright moderate compared to Obama. If these two idiots had any ounce of loyalty to their party, they would never had run and moderate like Mark Warner or Tim Kaine would have coasted to 10 point win. But no, gotta have that change, gotta have that woman. It’s not too late, Obama and Clinton can still walk away.

Watching McLaughlin Group on PBS, “Mort” Zuckerman was jokingly asked how the billionaire views the banks. BTW, he is the conservative billionaire owner of USN World report. He replied that we’ll get through this but that this will be the longest and deepest recession since the Great Depression. With that kind of attitude, Obama should be up 10-20 points in the poll now vs McCain like Dukakis was up in polls in summer of 88 vs GB1 before he got SwiftTanked. The fact that polls are tied now spells doom for Obama. I told friends that only way that Obama would win is if we have major recession, which today means if BofA or maybe even if smaller WaMu get taken over by FDIC. Exec party will do whatever it takes to prevent that because it would mean dem would win. So game over. All you geeks can run your fancy Monte Carlo game theory simulations, but you’ll still come up with my simple answer.

PS: All 4 people on show agreed that dems would pick up 5 Senate seat to get to 54.[/quote]

Only 9% of the people think congress is doing a good job which is almost 1/4 the % of people who think that Bush is a good job.

Considering how poorly congress is thought of (except in the MSM) then I don’t see how the Democrats are going to pick up any seats.

Who will vote for them since the % who think they are doing a good job is only twice the margin of error? LOL

John

[jficquette]

[quote=equalizer]Broken record, but gotta say again that Clinton, Obama are so selfish, only care about their personal needs desires instead of the good of their party or country. Obama is so out there that Mondale is looking good right now. Clinton, despised by half the country, still seems downright moderate compared to Obama. If these two idiots had any ounce of loyalty to their party, they would never had run and moderate like Mark Warner or Tim Kaine would have coasted to 10 point win. But no, gotta have that change, gotta have that woman. It’s not too late, Obama and Clinton can still walk away.

Watching McLaughlin Group on PBS, “Mort” Zuckerman was jokingly asked how the billionaire views the banks. BTW, he is the conservative billionaire owner of USN World report. He replied that we’ll get through this but that this will be the longest and deepest recession since the Great Depression. With that kind of attitude, Obama should be up 10-20 points in the poll now vs McCain like Dukakis was up in polls in summer of 88 vs GB1 before he got SwiftTanked. The fact that polls are tied now spells doom for Obama. I told friends that only way that Obama would win is if we have major recession, which today means if BofA or maybe even if smaller WaMu get taken over by FDIC. Exec party will do whatever it takes to prevent that because it would mean dem would win. So game over. All you geeks can run your fancy Monte Carlo game theory simulations, but you’ll still come up with my simple answer.

PS: All 4 people on show agreed that dems would pick up 5 Senate seat to get to 54.[/quote]

Only 9% of the people think congress is doing a good job which is almost 1/4 the % of people who think that Bush is a good job.

Considering how poorly congress is thought of (except in the MSM) then I don’t see how the Democrats are going to pick up any seats.

Who will vote for them since the % who think they are doing a good job is only twice the margin of error? LOL

John

[jficquette]

[quote=equalizer]Broken record, but gotta say again that Clinton, Obama are so selfish, only care about their personal needs desires instead of the good of their party or country. Obama is so out there that Mondale is looking good right now. Clinton, despised by half the country, still seems downright moderate compared to Obama. If these two idiots had any ounce of loyalty to their party, they would never had run and moderate like Mark Warner or Tim Kaine would have coasted to 10 point win. But no, gotta have that change, gotta have that woman. It’s not too late, Obama and Clinton can still walk away.

Watching McLaughlin Group on PBS, “Mort” Zuckerman was jokingly asked how the billionaire views the banks. BTW, he is the conservative billionaire owner of USN World report. He replied that we’ll get through this but that this will be the longest and deepest recession since the Great Depression. With that kind of attitude, Obama should be up 10-20 points in the poll now vs McCain like Dukakis was up in polls in summer of 88 vs GB1 before he got SwiftTanked. The fact that polls are tied now spells doom for Obama. I told friends that only way that Obama would win is if we have major recession, which today means if BofA or maybe even if smaller WaMu get taken over by FDIC. Exec party will do whatever it takes to prevent that because it would mean dem would win. So game over. All you geeks can run your fancy Monte Carlo game theory simulations, but you’ll still come up with my simple answer.

PS: All 4 people on show agreed that dems would pick up 5 Senate seat to get to 54.[/quote]

Only 9% of the people think congress is doing a good job which is almost 1/4 the % of people who think that Bush is a good job.

Considering how poorly congress is thought of (except in the MSM) then I don’t see how the Democrats are going to pick up any seats.

Who will vote for them since the % who think they are doing a good job is only twice the margin of error? LOL

John

[jficquette]

[quote=equalizer]Broken record, but gotta say again that Clinton, Obama are so selfish, only care about their personal needs desires instead of the good of their party or country. Obama is so out there that Mondale is looking good right now. Clinton, despised by half the country, still seems downright moderate compared to Obama. If these two idiots had any ounce of loyalty to their party, they would never had run and moderate like Mark Warner or Tim Kaine would have coasted to 10 point win. But no, gotta have that change, gotta have that woman. It’s not too late, Obama and Clinton can still walk away.

Watching McLaughlin Group on PBS, “Mort” Zuckerman was jokingly asked how the billionaire views the banks. BTW, he is the conservative billionaire owner of USN World report. He replied that we’ll get through this but that this will be the longest and deepest recession since the Great Depression. With that kind of attitude, Obama should be up 10-20 points in the poll now vs McCain like Dukakis was up in polls in summer of 88 vs GB1 before he got SwiftTanked. The fact that polls are tied now spells doom for Obama. I told friends that only way that Obama would win is if we have major recession, which today means if BofA or maybe even if smaller WaMu get taken over by FDIC. Exec party will do whatever it takes to prevent that because it would mean dem would win. So game over. All you geeks can run your fancy Monte Carlo game theory simulations, but you’ll still come up with my simple answer.

PS: All 4 people on show agreed that dems would pick up 5 Senate seat to get to 54.[/quote]

Only 9% of the people think congress is doing a good job which is almost 1/4 the % of people who think that Bush is a good job.

Considering how poorly congress is thought of (except in the MSM) then I don’t see how the Democrats are going to pick up any seats.

Who will vote for them since the % who think they are doing a good job is only twice the margin of error? LOL

John

[jficquette]

[quote=equalizer]Broken record, but gotta say again that Clinton, Obama are so selfish, only care about their personal needs desires instead of the good of their party or country. Obama is so out there that Mondale is looking good right now. Clinton, despised by half the country, still seems downright moderate compared to Obama. If these two idiots had any ounce of loyalty to their party, they would never had run and moderate like Mark Warner or Tim Kaine would have coasted to 10 point win. But no, gotta have that change, gotta have that woman. It’s not too late, Obama and Clinton can still walk away.

Watching McLaughlin Group on PBS, “Mort” Zuckerman was jokingly asked how the billionaire views the banks. BTW, he is the conservative billionaire owner of USN World report. He replied that we’ll get through this but that this will be the longest and deepest recession since the Great Depression. With that kind of attitude, Obama should be up 10-20 points in the poll now vs McCain like Dukakis was up in polls in summer of 88 vs GB1 before he got SwiftTanked. The fact that polls are tied now spells doom for Obama. I told friends that only way that Obama would win is if we have major recession, which today means if BofA or maybe even if smaller WaMu get taken over by FDIC. Exec party will do whatever it takes to prevent that because it would mean dem would win. So game over. All you geeks can run your fancy Monte Carlo game theory simulations, but you’ll still come up with my simple answer.

PS: All 4 people on show agreed that dems would pick up 5 Senate seat to get to 54.[/quote]

Only 9% of the people think congress is doing a good job which is almost 1/4 the % of people who think that Bush is a good job.

Considering how poorly congress is thought of (except in the MSM) then I don’t see how the Democrats are going to pick up any seats.

Who will vote for them since the % who think they are doing a good job is only twice the margin of error? LOL

John

[Author]

Posts