Even though it does this: www.youtube.com/watch?v=nauLgZISozs its still a strawman. You can fluff it up and even have it talk and sing, Its still a strawman.
Me I want THEM TO FIND 100000 yrs more of oil, just because it pisses the climatologist off. As to parent,
Hey, I'm all for quitting burning fossil fuels. Give me a cheap form of energy I can burn that doesn't contribute to greenhouse gasses, and I will use it. I can't attach a windmill to my car. I can't run my car on what solar panels put out. There is not enough power from these sources. When people yelp about not burning fossil fuels, they are talking about crashing society. They want to make people suffer. They want everything to stop, to radically change all that is, to force everyone to being a tree hugger. They want you to change your whole life without giving you any better option. They refuse nuclear, even clean nuclear. They want to blight the landscape with windmills, even when the noise and vibration makes you sick and the blades kill the songbirds, they want you to ride a bicycle when you are a geriatric, when its impractical to do so: across thousands or tens of thousands of miles through very deep snow. They want you to suffer, be cold, and die. They don't care about progressing society. They want to wreck it. If we are all dying, at least with fossil fuels you will be warm and comfortable. They are offering you CFL's that leak mercury. They want change but either offer piss poor solutions, or no solutions at all. I have begun to hate them. They protest and sign petitions, but are too lazy to think. They refuse to do the real work of change. That's why I hate them. They claim burning fossils are a free lunch and maybe it is, but insisting on change without offering a viable solution to change to makes them all so very useless.
I agree. People like Lovejoy need to test their idea separate from everyone else for a year. See how it works.
"A study out of McGill University sought to examine historical temperature data going back.00001% of the earth's total age in order to determine the likelihood that global warming was caused by natural fluctuations in the earth's climate. The study concluded there was less than a 1% chance the warming could be attributed to simple fluctuations."
Interesting what happens when you plug correct data into the report. They used a variety of gauges found in nature, such as tree rings, ice cores, and lake sediments from the last one ten-thousandth of a percent of the earths age to show they are right. even more interesting is over half of that about was the period of that if they were correct was be considered affected.
So to be succinct they fudged the numbers. Its laughable that
“This study will be a blow to any remaining climate-change deniers,” Lovejoy says. “Their two most convincing arguments – that the warming is natural in origin, and that the computer models are wrong – are either directly contradicted by this analysis, or simply do not apply to it.”
when he offers a study that only reviews.00001% of the earth's age. Thats like basing the temperature of a building over the last year on a single hour long visit.
I assume Lovejoy couldn't get access to the antarctic core samples retrieved in 2003 that are 3/4 of a million years old. http://www.newscientist.com/ar...http://www.rmtrr.org/oldlist.h... talks about the oldest tree rings which date back to 300 BC almost all are in California.
Even more amusing is Sister university UC Berkeley has ancient sediments at the bottom of Northern California’s Clear Lake they pulled in 2012. This is among thousands pulled up in the last 30 yrs.
So when someone actually offers the same info from the last.01% of the earths age, I'll listen. That at least covers an ice age and several geologic periods.
All that will happen is people who actual degrees in climatology will tear his paper apart. But at least its nice to know there are people falsifying climate data just like there are people doing the same to fossils http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aso/da...https://tumblehomelearning.com...
Or as a former inspector general who goes on CNN to talk about MH370 and the fact that black holes would consume the universe even though some of the greatest scientific minds believe there is one that the center of our galaxy.
Cultures aren't a reactive sociology created under the iron hot forge of setting. No no, they're a sculpture, created by a genius hive mind for us to live in! We must shelter and protect them!
If anyone manages to "cure gay", I suspect we will witness this same argument louder and with far more venom.
At the risk of losing Karma, only billionaires could 'cure gay'. (assuming it is curable. Evangelists claim it can be). You are assuming gay culture is divergent from deaf etc culture. Actually it is responsible for fashion. Name one totally straight, well known male of the fashion elite. (someone who would have a shop in Beverly hills, be involved with Fashion week, and be known in Milan and Paris)
what do you want to see the furries go away. I think furries are interesting. Then again, anyone willing to dress up in a costume (like LARPERS) and go out in public on a day other than October 31 is interesting.
And that is what is so deeply wrong with political correctness. All handicaps are debilitating You are deprived of something that others have and its ability. It should never be equated for beauty considered a power or believed to be fostering a culture. These people are crippled in the worst possible way. They actually believe that makes them special. If that was true then those with PTSD, austism and having lost limbs are special too. I seriously doubt they would agree with you. (especially those who have to care for the autistic.)
The bottom 80% of Americans are competing over 5% of the money in the economy
counter the statement above it? It actually confirms it. Deaf people have a high unemployment rate because they can't hear as well as because they are part of the bottom 80%.
yes I was. Its interesting you answered with the typical fear-mongering atheist bs. It people want to include t the flying spaghetti monster and the magical pink unicorn, Cthulhu, Doctor who and even My little pony: Friendship is magic then fine. I want discourse. Nothing was ever said about force feeding anything. You want to force-feed non belief as much as westboro wants to slaughter homosexuals the way Hitler did Jews. (yes the comparison was intentional)
True atheists don't give a damn about anyone's religion because they think its as stupid as believing that if you move to Forks, Washington you will meet vampires.
Finally, I never said Christians are perfect.
I said
Real Christianity has always been about choice.
That choice is to choice to believe in a deity that loves you and died for you two thousand years ago. Its also the choice to believe that its the oldest surviving fictional book. Nevertheless its still a choice. Unlike what you are espousing.
Finally, its amusing that you suggest that the scientists are offering evidence based ideas. Who was that keyboard you typed on make by. Where did they get that plastic and silicon from. Finally how did that silicon and oil get there? Nothing can magically appear. Its is far easier to say a magical sky fairy from another reality created this one than its to say 'I believe that even those everything I uise on a daily basic was created, the fundamental items they were created from just randomly popped into existance a couple billions years ago. Oh they slowly colaslesed into something.
You do understand odds right. So the likelihood of a a couple of atoms randomly happen to being this event is a 1 with 100,000 zeros behind it.
It is more likely for both us to alternate winning the lottery everyday for the rest of our lives then that to happen.
The point is, It has happened before. It will happen again. If people try to interfer in anyway, they will either destroy society or damage the planet. Since I don't want either during my lifetime, please go take your wonderful website that abuses climate studies to manipulate and prove their point and place beside this one that does the same thing. http://www.activistpost.com/20...
For the record, I believe that the environment is changing. But I wall you all to STFU about it because any solution will end up destroying the world economy. Harsh yes. I honestly don't care if the Maldives and the Netherlands sinks beneath the waves. I don't give a damn about NYC being inundated with water. This is what happens when you have your head up you anus while city planning.
Our govt is so corrupt at this point, nothing will change unless a lobbyist wants it too. Remember that.
You are welcome to disagree. However, every does mean exactly that. Every. As in all conceivable events. I love how you just assume that all realities will start with a primordial soup or a big bang. That wouldn't be every because it would extremely narrow the scope.
So yes it really possible that there's a universe somewhere with a teapot in it, a million light years in diameter made out of cream cheese? And there is also a universe with an alien race that happens to have a being named Thor who looks like Chris Hemsworth and a Nick Fury who looks and sounds like Samuel L. Jackson.
What amuses me is why is that harder to believe than the absolute emptiness of nothingness created something? Your eyes see everything you have ever touched, everything you have ever heard, tasted was created. (fruits are created by Fruit trees which come from fruit seeds of fruits or splicing of other fruit trees)
And that comment above is why were are were we are. I would much rather He have an actual serious discussion as to how a universe could be created by a human, rather than so random freaking magical event. There is more faith in science's belief than there ever will be in religion.
Which is easier to believe:
Nothing created something. Truly absolutely vast quantities of nothingness. No atoms, no quarks, no foam. Just emptiness. And that created something.
OR
A immortal being who existing in a different reality created this one and because he created it, he is omniscient and omnipotent in it.
A lot of people chose too because we learn that things just don't magically appear. Science can ignore everyone when it can prove what created the universe, and exactly how and when humanity was created in the same detail that a computer circuit board is created. Until that day, they must be able to have open, frank and honest discourse without arrogance.
Evolution HAS NEVER BEEN OBSERVED. Adaptation is common. Adaptation is not evolution. Evolution is fish into dog. Adaptation is dog moving from Denver to Jamaica.
Seriously what the hell is so scary about spending a day taking a world creation beliefs. No one is indoctrinating the children into Christianity, Real Christianity has always been about choice. Its the other religions (including greed and self worship) that are the ones indoctrinating. The fact is the intractability of the those scientists are what is getting the push back. So rather than dialogue that can allow discourse and enlightenment (in either direction) we get people insisting their way is the only right one. Guess which side is winning. its not the scientists.
If this society gets destroyed (like revolution) it won't matter about evolution or climate change. Those people will be dead and their ideas with them. However, a lot of people believe the Bible is right and considering its 5000 yrs old. It will continue. We need flexibility and a willingness to explain why. Not intractacble we are right.
Because when 'we are right' gets a knife twisted in his gut, it wont matter much then.
Slashdot Mirror
Even though it does this: www.youtube.com/watch?v=nauLgZISozs its still a strawman. You can fluff it up and even have it talk and sing, Its still a strawman.
Hey, I'm all for quitting burning fossil fuels. Give me a cheap form of energy I can burn that doesn't contribute to greenhouse gasses, and I will use it. I can't attach a windmill to my car. I can't run my car on what solar panels put out. There is not enough power from these sources. When people yelp about not burning fossil fuels, they are talking about crashing society. They want to make people suffer. They want everything to stop, to radically change all that is, to force everyone to being a tree hugger. They want you to change your whole life without giving you any better option. They refuse nuclear, even clean nuclear. They want to blight the landscape with windmills, even when the noise and vibration makes you sick and the blades kill the songbirds, they want you to ride a bicycle when you are a geriatric, when its impractical to do so: across thousands or tens of thousands of miles through very deep snow. They want you to suffer, be cold, and die. They don't care about progressing society. They want to wreck it. If we are all dying, at least with fossil fuels you will be warm and comfortable. They are offering you CFL's that leak mercury. They want change but either offer piss poor solutions, or no solutions at all. I have begun to hate them. They protest and sign petitions, but are too lazy to think. They refuse to do the real work of change. That's why I hate them. They claim burning fossils are a free lunch and maybe it is, but insisting on change without offering a viable solution to change to makes them all so very useless.
I agree. People like Lovejoy need to test their idea separate from everyone else for a year. See how it works.
"A study out of McGill University sought to examine historical temperature data going back .00001% of the earth's total age in order to determine the likelihood that global warming was caused by natural fluctuations in the earth's climate. The study concluded there was less than a 1% chance the warming could be attributed to simple fluctuations."
Interesting what happens when you plug correct data into the report. They used a variety of gauges found in nature, such as tree rings, ice cores, and lake sediments from the last one ten-thousandth of a percent of the earths age to show they are right. even more interesting is over half of that about was the period of that if they were correct was be considered affected. So to be succinct they fudged the numbers. Its laughable that
“This study will be a blow to any remaining climate-change deniers,” Lovejoy says. “Their two most convincing arguments – that the warming is natural in origin, and that the computer models are wrong – are either directly contradicted by this analysis, or simply do not apply to it.”
when he offers a study that only reviews .00001% of the earth's age. Thats like basing the temperature of a building over the last year on a single hour long visit.
I assume Lovejoy couldn't get access to the antarctic core samples retrieved in 2003 that are 3/4 of a million years old. http://www.newscientist.com/ar...
http://www.rmtrr.org/oldlist.h... talks about the oldest tree rings which date back to 300 BC almost all are in California.
Even more amusing is Sister university UC Berkeley has ancient sediments at the bottom of Northern California’s Clear Lake they pulled in 2012. This is among thousands pulled up in the last 30 yrs.
So when someone actually offers the same info from the last .01% of the earths age, I'll listen. That at least covers an ice age and several geologic periods.
All that will happen is people who actual degrees in climatology will tear his paper apart. But at least its nice to know there are people falsifying climate data just like there are people doing the same to fossils http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aso/da... https://tumblehomelearning.com...
see they are already removing the furry culture.
Or as a former inspector general who goes on CNN to talk about MH370 and the fact that black holes would consume the universe even though some of the greatest scientific minds believe there is one that the center of our galaxy.
you deserve mod points. I have them but I can't use them here. *sigh*
Because culture is important.
Cultures aren't a reactive sociology created under the iron hot forge of setting. No no, they're a sculpture, created by a genius hive mind for us to live in! We must shelter and protect them!
If anyone manages to "cure gay", I suspect we will witness this same argument louder and with far more venom.
At the risk of losing Karma, only billionaires could 'cure gay'. (assuming it is curable. Evangelists claim it can be). You are assuming gay culture is divergent from deaf etc culture. Actually it is responsible for fashion. Name one totally straight, well known male of the fashion elite. (someone who would have a shop in Beverly hills, be involved with Fashion week, and be known in Milan and Paris)
Sadly, you can't cure ginger culture. Its too intrinsically tied to Blonde culture and I love my blondes.
what do you want to see the furries go away. I think furries are interesting. Then again, anyone willing to dress up in a costume (like LARPERS) and go out in public on a day other than October 31 is interesting.
Sounds like racism to me only about hearing or not.
And that is what is so deeply wrong with political correctness. All handicaps are debilitating You are deprived of something that others have and its ability. It should never be equated for beauty considered a power or believed to be fostering a culture. These people are crippled in the worst possible way. They actually believe that makes them special. If that was true then those with PTSD, austism and having lost limbs are special too. I seriously doubt they would agree with you. (especially those who have to care for the autistic.)
The bottom 80% of Americans are competing over 5% of the money in the economy
counter the statement above it? It actually confirms it. Deaf people have a high unemployment rate because they can't hear as well as because they are part of the bottom 80%.
Real Christianity has always been about choice.
That choice is to choice to believe in a deity that loves you and died for you two thousand years ago. Its also the choice to believe that its the oldest surviving fictional book. Nevertheless its still a choice. Unlike what you are espousing. Finally, its amusing that you suggest that the scientists are offering evidence based ideas. Who was that keyboard you typed on make by. Where did they get that plastic and silicon from. Finally how did that silicon and oil get there? Nothing can magically appear. Its is far easier to say a magical sky fairy from another reality created this one than its to say 'I believe that even those everything I uise on a daily basic was created, the fundamental items they were created from just randomly popped into existance a couple billions years ago. Oh they slowly colaslesed into something. You do understand odds right. So the likelihood of a a couple of atoms randomly happen to being this event is a 1 with 100,000 zeros behind it. It is more likely for both us to alternate winning the lottery everyday for the rest of our lives then that to happen.
The point is, It has happened before. It will happen again. If people try to interfer in anyway, they will either destroy society or damage the planet. Since I don't want either during my lifetime, please go take your wonderful website that abuses climate studies to manipulate and prove their point and place beside this one that does the same thing. http://www.activistpost.com/20... For the record, I believe that the environment is changing. But I wall you all to STFU about it because any solution will end up destroying the world economy. Harsh yes. I honestly don't care if the Maldives and the Netherlands sinks beneath the waves. I don't give a damn about NYC being inundated with water. This is what happens when you have your head up you anus while city planning. Our govt is so corrupt at this point, nothing will change unless a lobbyist wants it too. Remember that.
And you can prove that with an actual link to a scientific study? (link please. paywall or not. doesn't matter)
You are welcome to disagree. However, every does mean exactly that. Every. As in all conceivable events. I love how you just assume that all realities will start with a primordial soup or a big bang. That wouldn't be every because it would extremely narrow the scope. So yes it really possible that there's a universe somewhere with a teapot in it, a million light years in diameter made out of cream cheese? And there is also a universe with an alien race that happens to have a being named Thor who looks like Chris Hemsworth and a Nick Fury who looks and sounds like Samuel L. Jackson. What amuses me is why is that harder to believe than the absolute emptiness of nothingness created something? Your eyes see everything you have ever touched, everything you have ever heard, tasted was created. (fruits are created by Fruit trees which come from fruit seeds of fruits or splicing of other fruit trees)
No I want to observe a trout turning into a pitbull.
Yeah, that sums it up.
No, I'm not. Trying reading it in Hebrew (Aramaic) and greek.
Without proportional representation, all you're doing is making a checkmark on a piece of paper and calling it democracy.
We left democracy behind. We WERE a republic and then we BECAME a oligarchy. We need to get back.
seriously? You picked AC to just curse. This isn't 4chan. So you think the discourse is an embrassment? Why?
And that comment above is why were are were we are. I would much rather He have an actual serious discussion as to how a universe could be created by a human, rather than so random freaking magical event. There is more faith in science's belief than there ever will be in religion. Which is easier to believe: Nothing created something. Truly absolutely vast quantities of nothingness. No atoms, no quarks, no foam. Just emptiness. And that created something. OR A immortal being who existing in a different reality created this one and because he created it, he is omniscient and omnipotent in it. A lot of people chose too because we learn that things just don't magically appear. Science can ignore everyone when it can prove what created the universe, and exactly how and when humanity was created in the same detail that a computer circuit board is created. Until that day, they must be able to have open, frank and honest discourse without arrogance.
Evolution HAS NEVER BEEN OBSERVED. Adaptation is common. Adaptation is not evolution. Evolution is fish into dog. Adaptation is dog moving from Denver to Jamaica.
No science fucked up their own image by refusing to be flexible and having dialogue.
Seriously what the hell is so scary about spending a day taking a world creation beliefs. No one is indoctrinating the children into Christianity, Real Christianity has always been about choice. Its the other religions (including greed and self worship) that are the ones indoctrinating. The fact is the intractability of the those scientists are what is getting the push back. So rather than dialogue that can allow discourse and enlightenment (in either direction) we get people insisting their way is the only right one. Guess which side is winning. its not the scientists. If this society gets destroyed (like revolution) it won't matter about evolution or climate change. Those people will be dead and their ideas with them. However, a lot of people believe the Bible is right and considering its 5000 yrs old. It will continue. We need flexibility and a willingness to explain why. Not intractacble we are right. Because when 'we are right' gets a knife twisted in his gut, it wont matter much then.