"mr.b" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 09:48:23 -0600, KLC Lewis wrote:
Ahhh, so anyone who disagrees with Global Warming Alarmists falls into
the category of either "the gullible, the weak minded (or) the
uninformed"? Rational discourse ends here.

I've edited your post to show the way you should have written it.

Rational discourse ends here. Ahhh, so anyone who disagrees with Global
Warming Alarmists falls into the category of either "the gullible, the
weak minded (or) the uninformed"?

Feel free to respond to my critique of your so-called expert site. I'm
anticipating a deafening silence.

Actually, my post meant exactly what I intended as I wrote it. But I suppose
when you run out of arguments, restructuring others' posts is all that's
left to you.

On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 11:13:14 -0600, KLC Lewis wrote:

Actually, my post meant exactly what I intended as I wrote it. But I
suppose when you run out of arguments, restructuring others' posts is all
that's left to you.

hmmm....maybe I used too many words. The site you referenced is the
web-presence of a bunch of paid political hacks with a Republican odour,
financed by corporations with an agenda. Their "experts" lack formal
training in the areas they where they advocate. They exist to obfuscate
the truth and to embroil government agencies in frivolous lawsuits
whenever the interests of public safety are in conflict with big
businesses, like Dow Chemical, Monsanto, ADM, etc...

That looks like an argument to me. You still haven't responded to that.
Oh damn, I used a lot of words again...

"mr.b" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 11:13:14 -0600, KLC Lewis wrote:

Actually, my post meant exactly what I intended as I wrote it. But I
suppose when you run out of arguments, restructuring others' posts is all
that's left to you.

hmmm....maybe I used too many words. The site you referenced is the
web-presence of a bunch of paid political hacks with a Republican odour,
financed by corporations with an agenda. Their "experts" lack formal
training in the areas they where they advocate. They exist to obfuscate
the truth and to embroil government agencies in frivolous lawsuits
whenever the interests of public safety are in conflict with big
businesses, like Dow Chemical, Monsanto, ADM, etc...

That looks like an argument to me. You still haven't responded to that.
Oh damn, I used a lot of words again...

Okay, let me respond ad-hominem in kind:

Al Gore and his ilk are knee-jerk reactionary Greenies who want to control
everything, everywhere, every time. They cherry-pick their data to meet
their pre-conceived notions, and their "experts" lack the recognition of
their peers. They despise free enterprise, and are little more than fascists
who wish to Federalize all corporations and make everyone a ward of the
State.

Yeah, that's pretty similar to the "argument" you gave. Hope it isn't to
brief for you to read between the lines.

On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 12:37:32 -0600, KLC Lewis wrote:


"mr.b" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 11:13:14 -0600, KLC Lewis wrote:

Actually, my post meant exactly what I intended as I wrote it. But I
suppose when you run out of arguments, restructuring others' posts is
all that's left to you.

hmmm....maybe I used too many words. The site you referenced is the
web-presence of a bunch of paid political hacks with a Republican odour,
financed by corporations with an agenda. Their "experts" lack formal
training in the areas they where they advocate. They exist to obfuscate
the truth and to embroil government agencies in frivolous lawsuits
whenever the interests of public safety are in conflict with big
businesses, like Dow Chemical, Monsanto, ADM, etc...

That looks like an argument to me. You still haven't responded to that.
Oh damn, I used a lot of words again...

Okay, let me respond ad-hominem in kind:

Al Gore and his ilk are knee-jerk reactionary Greenies who want to control
everything, everywhere, every time. They cherry-pick their data to meet
their pre-conceived notions, and their "experts" lack the recognition of
their peers. They despise free enterprise, and are little more than
fascists who wish to Federalize all corporations and make everyone a ward
of the State.

oh my...I'm sorry. You're one of those. I didn't realize. Do you
seriously believe this **** or are you just playing with my head? I mean,
because if you're serious, you have no idea how retarded this looks to a
non-American.

Yeah, that's pretty similar to the "argument" you gave. Hope it isn't to
brief for you to read between the lines.

Well no, it wasn't similar at all and you still haven't said anything of
value. Though reading your responses has reminded me of one of the great
leaders of your country who perhaps said it best; "What a waste it is to
lose one's mind. Or not to have a mind is being very wasteful. How true
that is."

Please feel free to get back to doing whatever it is that you do...as long
as it isn't trying to speak/write intelligently about climate change.

"mr.b" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 12:37:32 -0600, KLC Lewis wrote:


"mr.b" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 11:13:14 -0600, KLC Lewis wrote:

Actually, my post meant exactly what I intended as I wrote it. But I
suppose when you run out of arguments, restructuring others' posts is
all that's left to you.

hmmm....maybe I used too many words. The site you referenced is the
web-presence of a bunch of paid political hacks with a Republican odour,
financed by corporations with an agenda. Their "experts" lack formal
training in the areas they where they advocate. They exist to obfuscate
the truth and to embroil government agencies in frivolous lawsuits
whenever the interests of public safety are in conflict with big
businesses, like Dow Chemical, Monsanto, ADM, etc...

That looks like an argument to me. You still haven't responded to that.
Oh damn, I used a lot of words again...

Okay, let me respond ad-hominem in kind:

Al Gore and his ilk are knee-jerk reactionary Greenies who want to
control
everything, everywhere, every time. They cherry-pick their data to meet
their pre-conceived notions, and their "experts" lack the recognition of
their peers. They despise free enterprise, and are little more than
fascists who wish to Federalize all corporations and make everyone a ward
of the State.

oh my...I'm sorry. You're one of those. I didn't realize. Do you
seriously believe this **** or are you just playing with my head? I mean,
because if you're serious, you have no idea how retarded this looks to a
non-American.

Yeah, that's pretty similar to the "argument" you gave. Hope it isn't to
brief for you to read between the lines.

Well no, it wasn't similar at all and you still haven't said anything of
value. Though reading your responses has reminded me of one of the great
leaders of your country who perhaps said it best; "What a waste it is to
lose one's mind. Or not to have a mind is being very wasteful. How true
that is."

Please feel free to get back to doing whatever it is that you do...as long
as it isn't trying to speak/write intelligently about climate change.

Remember what I said about rational discourse? You chose that path, Bubbie.
Should you wish to engage in it at some time in the future, please do so.
Until then...

"Go thou, and do likewise."

In article , mr.b wrote:
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 12:37:32 -0600, KLC Lewis wrote:
oh my...I'm sorry. You're one of those. I didn't realize. Do you
seriously believe this **** or are you just playing with my head? I mean,
because if you're serious, you have no idea how retarded this looks to a
non-American.

Hey. Watch it. I'm an American, but I'm too polite to say it's
retarded. g

Well no, it wasn't similar at all and you still haven't said anything of
value. Though reading your responses has reminded me of one of the great
leaders of your country who perhaps said it best; "What a waste it is to
lose one's mind. Or not to have a mind is being very wasteful. How true
that is."

Dan... now he was something. But, on the upside, he knew how to spell
potatoe. g

--
Capt. JG @@
www.sailnow.com

On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 14:19:31 -0600, KLC Lewis wrote:

snip

honey, in order to take the high ground, you need to know where it is.
Good luck in your search.

Hey Peter,
Could you set the time (or the time zone) properly on your machine. I
normally sort by time and your post always show up many hours out of
sequence.

Don't worry, I won't accuse you of time zone plagiarism, there is no
copyright on the correct time.

"mr.b" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 14:19:31 -0600, KLC Lewis wrote:

snip

honey, in order to take the high ground, you need to know where it is.
Good luck in your search.




Hey! He called me "honey"! Guess I made an impression after all. All I need
now is a nice little pat on the butt.

On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 08:50:45 -0600, "KLC Lewis"
wrote:


"Eric Stevens" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 22:08:58 -0600, "KLC Lewis"
wrote:
Correlation does not imply causation. What will the consequences be?
Nobody
knows. Computer models don't even agree. Al Gore, of course, picks the
absolutely worst outcome and touts it as gospel, while the majority of the
models show the average increase in temperature following a very steady
and
moderate rate. Personally, I'm in favor of a slight increase in global
temperature, and the benefits that will bring.

You should read
http://energycommerce.house.gov/cmte...-testimony.pdf

I have much more shocking reputable sites for you once you have
digested this one. :-)



Eric Stevens

From a brief scan, that presentation echoes the arguments made by Al Gore.
All of which are refuted in the link I posted yesterday.

Have another look. He actually shows that Al Gore is talking
exaggerated rubbish.



Eric Stevens