On Aug 25, 4:23*pm, Mille GT Owner wrote:
On Tue, 25 Aug 2009 05:59:18 -0700 (PDT), wf3h
wrote:


THEN they got much of the middle class to believe this is the way god
means it to be.

jesus, i wish i had their marketing system.

If you hadn't left your assets 'out in the street', you'd still have
them. It's *your* job to watch *your* assets.
--

i am watching them. that's why i realize the GOP is stealing them

"Keith Nuttle" wrote in message
...
It has been nearly 200 years and the debate on evolution is still going
on. Cancer has been a topic of investigation for over 60 years, and still
there is no cure for cancer.

You're just playing with words. "Debate" is a meaningless phrase when it
comes to evolution.

Many cancers have been cured.


How can the debate on the climate and global warming, a significantly more
complex system, be understood after about 20 years. The climate cycles
are over 100000 years in length and they claim to understand them with
about 200 years of data, of which the last 50 years are accurate. Sounds
like poor science to me.

You're very clearly not a scientist familiar with the subject. Thus, you
rely on wild exaggerations promoted by unreliable sources.


If those that promote global warming truly believe that global warming
was a problem that had to be addressed they would be 100% behind nuclear
power which has NO greenhouse gasses. Since the supporters of global
warming are against nuclear energy, the only conclusion is it is strictly
politics.

No one "promotes" global warming, except perhaps polluters. The solution to
global climate change can be partially addressed by nuclear, but not
completely. Reduction in meat consumption is also a partial (and
significant) solution. If you're talking about environmentalists, since your
language is a bit fuzzy, many are willing to consider nuclear energy, many
are not. There are waste issues with nuclear fission technology that hasn't
been solved, not to mention security issues.

--
Nom=de=Plume

On Tue, 25 Aug 2009 15:31:00 -0700 (PDT), wf3h
wrote:

On Aug 25, 4:23*pm, Mille GT Owner wrote:
On Tue, 25 Aug 2009 05:59:18 -0700 (PDT), wf3h
wrote:


THEN they got much of the middle class to believe this is the way god
means it to be.

jesus, i wish i had their marketing system.

If you hadn't left your assets 'out in the street', you'd still have
them. It's *your* job to watch *your* assets.
--

i am watching them. that's why i realize the GOP is stealing them

You don't think Obama stole any? He's pretty rich, you know.

What about George? Old man Soros is pretty wealthy also. I don't
suppose he got any of your money.
--
John H

"If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait until it's free!"
--Anonymous

On Tue, 25 Aug 2009 15:26:12 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Mille GT Owner" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 25 Aug 2009 13:38:51 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"BAR" wrote in message
news:9badnchpXuDT2AnXnZ2dnUVZ_vmdnZ2d@giganews. com...
thunder wrote:
On Tue, 25 Aug 2009 07:43:11 -0500, jpjccd wrote:


While skinny dipping in the public domain, I stumbled across this;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
List_of_scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scienti fic_assessment_of_global_warming

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
List_of_authors_from_Climate_Change_2007:_The_Phys ical_Science_Basis

There is no consensus.

The debate must continue. The data must be made available for peer
review.

Anyone claiming that the science is settled is pursuing a political
agenda
and not involved in science.


I guess that's why the US military considers it a national security risk.

Define 'it'.
--
John H

"If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait until it's free!"
--Anonymous


It =
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&n...=&aqi=g 9g-s1

Seriously... "it" is global climate change, as you indicated in the copied
link, specifically warming.

Ah yes, *if* the global climate change has the impacts some predice,
*then* it could be a national security issue.

Note that the *cause* of the change is irrelevant to the military's
stance, and *it* is not considered a national security risk. That is
the science that is 'unsettled'.

FWIW, I find the arguments presented by you, wf3h, and Loogy to have
the same merit.
--
John H

"If you think healthcare is expensive now, wait until it's free!"
--Anonymous

On Aug 25, 8:01*pm, Mille GT Owner wrote:
On Tue, 25 Aug 2009 15:31:00 -0700 (PDT), wf3h
wrote:


i am watching them. that's why i realize the GOP is stealing them

You don't think Obama stole any? He's pretty rich, you know.

ROFLMAO!! your sock puppet, GW, was born rich. obama actually worked
for his money. i know to you reactionaries, 'work' is a filthy word
fit only for servants, but some of us middle class folks are actually
proud of the fact we work for a living

"wf3h" wrote in message
...
On Aug 25, 8:01 pm, Mille GT Owner wrote:
On Tue, 25 Aug 2009 15:31:00 -0700 (PDT), wf3h
wrote:


i am watching them. that's why i realize the GOP is stealing them

You don't think Obama stole any? He's pretty rich, you know.

ROFLMAO!! your sock puppet, GW, was born rich. obama actually worked
for his money. i know to you reactionaries, 'work' is a filthy word
fit only for servants, but some of us middle class folks are actually
proud of the fact we work for a living

Obama worked to get rich. Dang, an ACORN organizer must get a lot more pay
then they deserve. And a lot more than the people they are oganizing.

On Aug 25, 9:00*pm, "Calif Bill" wrote:
"wf3h" wrote in message

...
On Aug 25, 8:01 pm, Mille GT Owner wrote:

On Tue, 25 Aug 2009 15:31:00 -0700 (PDT), wf3h
wrote:

i am watching them. that's why i realize the GOP is stealing them

You don't think Obama stole any? He's pretty rich, you know.

ROFLMAO!! your sock puppet, GW, was born rich. obama actually worked
for his money. i know to you reactionaries, 'work' is a filthy word
fit only for servants, but some of us middle class folks are actually
proud of the fact we work for a living

Obama worked to get rich. *Dang, an ACORN organizer must get a lot more pay
then they deserve. *And a lot more than the people they are oganizing.

at least he didnt steal like the nice folks at kennebunkport did

"Mille GT Owner" wrote in message
...

Seriously... "it" is global climate change, as you indicated in the copied
link, specifically warming.

Ah yes, *if* the global climate change has the impacts some predice,
*then* it could be a national security issue.

Note that the *cause* of the change is irrelevant to the military's
stance, and *it* is not considered a national security risk. That is
the science that is 'unsettled'.

FWIW, I find the arguments presented by you, wf3h, and Loogy to have
the same merit.
--
John H

Dance all you want, the fact is that the military considers it a looming
security risk.

--
Nom=de=Plume

"wf3h" wrote in message
...
On Aug 25, 9:00 pm, "Calif Bill" wrote:
"wf3h" wrote in message

...
On Aug 25, 8:01 pm, Mille GT Owner wrote:

On Tue, 25 Aug 2009 15:31:00 -0700 (PDT), wf3h
wrote:

i am watching them. that's why i realize the GOP is stealing them

You don't think Obama stole any? He's pretty rich, you know.

ROFLMAO!! your sock puppet, GW, was born rich. obama actually worked
for his money. i know to you reactionaries, 'work' is a filthy word
fit only for servants, but some of us middle class folks are actually
proud of the fact we work for a living

Obama worked to get rich. Dang, an ACORN organizer must get a lot more pay
then they deserve. And a lot more than the people they are oganizing.

at least he didnt steal like the nice folks at kennebunkport did

Reply:
He did not? How did he get rich then?

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"BAR" wrote in message
...
thunder wrote:
On Tue, 25 Aug 2009 07:43:11 -0500, jpjccd wrote:


While skinny dipping in the public domain, I stumbled across this;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
List_of_scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scienti fic_assessment_of_global_warming

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
List_of_authors_from_Climate_Change_2007:_The_Phys ical_Science_Basis

There is no consensus.

The debate must continue. The data must be made available for peer
review.

Anyone claiming that the science is settled is pursuing a political
agenda and not involved in science.


I guess that's why the US military considers it a national security risk.

That would be because of the social upheaval that might well come about.
What if south america starts to really suffer, will this lead to massive
immigration, followed by massive force to try to stop it, followed perhaps
by an all out war etc