On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 01:58:42 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:

"And few have put as much money behind their advocacy as Mr. Gore and
are as well positioned to profit from this green transformation, if
and when it comes."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/bu...nt/03gore.html

I guess it's easier for a liberal to pretend it's not a scam then to
admit to the possibility that he (or she) may have been wrong.

Just think. This is the *NEW YORK TIMES* publishing this, not the
Washington Times, Harry's favorite paper.

John H. wrote:
On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 01:58:42 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:

"And few have put as much money behind their advocacy as Mr. Gore and
are as well positioned to profit from this green transformation, if
and when it comes."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/bu...nt/03gore.html

I guess it's easier for a liberal to pretend it's not a scam then to
admit to the possibility that he (or she) may have been wrong.

Just think. This is the *NEW YORK TIMES* publishing this, not the
Washington Times, Harry's favorite paper.


If global warming is nothing but a scam, how come there is SO much
scientific data that it is, indeed occuring?

On Nov 4, 9:38*am, NotNow wrote:
John H. wrote:
On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 01:58:42 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:

"And few have put as much money behind their advocacy as Mr. Gore and
are as well positioned to profit from this green transformation, if
and when it comes."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/bu...ronment/03gore.....

I guess it's easier for a liberal to pretend it's not a scam then to
admit to the possibility that he (or she) may have been wrong.

Just think. This is the *NEW YORK TIMES* *publishing this, not the
Washington Times, Harry's favorite paper.

If global warming is nothing but a scam, how come there is SO much
scientific data that it is, indeed occuring?

Did you read this yet?
http://www.tulsabeacon.com/?p=462
I have posted it several times.... Your scientists are no smarter than
"mine". And it is far from "settled science".

JustWaitAFrekinMinute! wrote:
On Nov 4, 9:38 am, NotNow wrote:
John H. wrote:
On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 01:58:42 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
"And few have put as much money behind their advocacy as Mr. Gore and
are as well positioned to profit from this green transformation, if
and when it comes."
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/bu...ronment/03gore....
I guess it's easier for a liberal to pretend it's not a scam then to
admit to the possibility that he (or she) may have been wrong.
Just think. This is the *NEW YORK TIMES* publishing this, not the
Washington Times, Harry's favorite paper.
If global warming is nothing but a scam, how come there is SO much
scientific data that it is, indeed occuring?

Did you read this yet?
http://www.tulsabeacon.com/?p=462
I have posted it several times.... Your scientists are no smarter than
"mine". And it is far from "settled science".

Show me where in that article where any scientist has claimed global
warming isn't happening.

On 11/4/09 9:43 AM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute! wrote:
On Nov 4, 9:38 am, wrote:
John H. wrote:
On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 01:58:42 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:

"And few have put as much money behind their advocacy as Mr. Gore and
are as well positioned to profit from this green transformation, if
and when it comes."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/bu...ronment/03gore....

I guess it's easier for a liberal to pretend it's not a scam then to
admit to the possibility that he (or she) may have been wrong.

Just think. This is the *NEW YORK TIMES* publishing this, not the
Washington Times, Harry's favorite paper.

If global warming is nothing but a scam, how come there is SO much
scientific data that it is, indeed occuring?

Did you read this yet?
http://www.tulsabeacon.com/?p=462
I have posted it several times.... Your scientists are no smarter than
"mine". And it is far from "settled science".


The tulsa beacon is a fundamentalist, right-wing, anti-science rag.

From wiki:

The Tulsa Beacon is a weekly newspaper in Tulsa, Oklahoma. It was
founded by Charles and Susan Biggs under the corporate name Biggs
Communications, Inc. The first paper was published in April, 2001.

The Tulsa Beacon features news from Tulsa and the surrounding area. It
includes local columnists, a recipe page, church news, columns by Dr.
Billy Graham and Dr. James Dobson, local editorials and letters to the
editor, syndicated columnists (Robert Novak, David Limbaugh, Mona Charen
and Walter Williams), local sports, television listings, movie reviews,
classified ads and legal notices. The Tulsa Beacon is a legal newspaper
and a member of the Oklahoma Press Association. The Tulsa Beacon has a
conservative editorial policy with an evangelical Christian slant. For
example they promote the teaching of creation science and intelligent
design as equal alternatives to evolution

Yet another dimwit cite by the newsgroup's resident dimwit, using his
JustHate ID here.

On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 11:01:24 -0500, H the K
wrote:

On 11/4/09 9:43 AM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute! wrote:
On Nov 4, 9:38 am, wrote:
John H. wrote:
On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 01:58:42 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:

"And few have put as much money behind their advocacy as Mr. Gore and
are as well positioned to profit from this green transformation, if
and when it comes."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/bu...ronment/03gore....

I guess it's easier for a liberal to pretend it's not a scam then to
admit to the possibility that he (or she) may have been wrong.

Just think. This is the *NEW YORK TIMES* publishing this, not the
Washington Times, Harry's favorite paper.

If global warming is nothing but a scam, how come there is SO much
scientific data that it is, indeed occuring?

Did you read this yet?
http://www.tulsabeacon.com/?p=462
I have posted it several times.... Your scientists are no smarter than
"mine". And it is far from "settled science".


The tulsa beacon is a fundamentalist, right-wing, anti-science rag.

From wiki:

The Tulsa Beacon is a weekly newspaper in Tulsa, Oklahoma. It was
founded by Charles and Susan Biggs under the corporate name Biggs
Communications, Inc. The first paper was published in April, 2001.

The Tulsa Beacon features news from Tulsa and the surrounding area. It
includes local columnists, a recipe page, church news, columns by Dr.
Billy Graham and Dr. James Dobson, local editorials and letters to the
editor, syndicated columnists (Robert Novak, David Limbaugh, Mona Charen
and Walter Williams), local sports, television listings, movie reviews,
classified ads and legal notices. The Tulsa Beacon is a legal newspaper
and a member of the Oklahoma Press Association. The Tulsa Beacon has a
conservative editorial policy with an evangelical Christian slant. For
example they promote the teaching of creation science and intelligent
design as equal alternatives to evolution

Yet another dimwit cite by the newsgroup's resident dimwit, using his
JustHate ID here.

Purposeful ignorance.

"NotNow" wrote in message
...
John H. wrote:
On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 01:58:42 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:

"And few have put as much money behind their advocacy as Mr. Gore and
are as well positioned to profit from this green transformation, if
and when it comes."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/bu...nt/03gore.html

I guess it's easier for a liberal to pretend it's not a scam then to
admit to the possibility that he (or she) may have been wrong.

Just think. This is the *NEW YORK TIMES* publishing this, not the
Washington Times, Harry's favorite paper.


If global warming is nothing but a scam, how come there is SO much
scientific data that it is, indeed occuring?


Because all the scientists who are publishing are getting millions nay
billions of $. They make big oil execs look like pikers. (Let's see who
agrees with this.)

--
Nom=de=Plume

In article ,
says...

John H. wrote:
On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 01:58:42 -0500, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:

"And few have put as much money behind their advocacy as Mr. Gore and
are as well positioned to profit from this green transformation, if
and when it comes."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/bu...nt/03gore.html

I guess it's easier for a liberal to pretend it's not a scam then to
admit to the possibility that he (or she) may have been wrong.

Just think. This is the *NEW YORK TIMES* publishing this, not the
Washington Times, Harry's favorite paper.


If global warming is nothing but a scam, how come there is SO much
scientific data that it is, indeed occuring?

If you are not willing to stand up and defend your data and your
conclusions in front of your critics then you aren't too confident in
your data and nobody else should be either.

wrote in message
...
On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 09:38:53 -0500, NotNow wrote:

I guess it's easier for a liberal to pretend it's not a scam then to
admit to the possibility that he (or she) may have been wrong.

Just think. This is the *NEW YORK TIMES* publishing this, not the
Washington Times, Harry's favorite paper.


If global warming is nothing but a scam, how come there is SO much
scientific data that it is, indeed occuring?


Because nobody is getting grant money to publish a study that doesn't
support the global warming theory.



The oil/coal companies have deep pockets and are certainly funding that
effort.

--
Nom=de=Plume

On 11/5/09 1:00 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 09:38:53 -0500, wrote:

I guess it's easier for a liberal to pretend it's not a scam then to
admit to the possibility that he (or she) may have been wrong.

Just think. This is the *NEW YORK TIMES* publishing this, not the
Washington Times, Harry's favorite paper.


If global warming is nothing but a scam, how come there is SO much
scientific data that it is, indeed occuring?


Because nobody is getting grant money to publish a study that doesn't
support the global warming theory.



The oil/coal companies have deep pockets and are certainly funding that
effort.


....along with the U.S. senator from Oklahoma they own...