"Harry Krause" wrote in message
news
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"P. Fritz" wrote in message
...
"Jack Goff" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 27 May 2006 14:00:02 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"Jack Goff" wrote in message
. ..

Global warming alarmists are no different than religous
fanatics.
(and
in reality, just another brand)

You must believe in their particular brand or you are a heritic.
Anything out of the ordinary that happens has roots in their
beliefs.
There is the constant proclamations of the "end of day"
Those that express their disbelief are shouted down

etc. etc.

If it were found to be true (the connection between warming and
human
activity), how would you then decide which scientist hadn't been a
fanatic?


You may be missing the point. It's not that most people don't
acknowledge some type of connection between warming and human
activity. Rather, it's whether or not human activity plays a
*significant* role in the equation, and if anything we might do
could
make any measurable difference whatsoever.

Jack

I'm not missing the point. If you acknowledge the connection, then
logically, you must stop calling any scientist a political fanatic.


I didn't call anyone a fanatic. That was someone else.

However, whether or not there's a connection has little to do with a
scientist being a political fanatic. Being correct on a single
theory
does not preclude one from being a fanatic.

It is comical how the Global Warming Alarmists react. Anyone that
doesn't believe in the creed is "in denial" or has been bought by the
"evil corporate conspiracy" Have you noticed at almost every alarmist
has socialist leanings, some even wish to eliminate humans from the
earth, they also have short memories........forgetting the "coming ice
age" doomsday predictions of the 70's.

You sound really smart. I want to learn from you. What is a socialist?

According to Fritz, any legitimate scientist who doesn't support President
Retardo.

I wonder which president was part of the definition when Marx was alive and
writing.