"Frogwatch" wrote in message
...
On Dec 18, 10:09 am, "mmc" wrote:
"Loogypicker" wrote in message

...



And to think many on the right believe every word he utters....

Last evening on my drive home, I was listening to Hannity. He made a
statement about the weather in Geneva where they are having the
climate talks. Well, this idiot said something to the affect that
global warming is a hoax because the weather in Geneva was supposed to
be a record cold! THEN he had the guy that is the head of AccuWeather
on. Now if you listen to Hannity, he'll ask questions in such a manner
that it will help in HIS discussion. Well the weather guy was asked by
Hannity something like well, if the weather in Geneva is this record
cold, doesn't this disspell the global warming debate? The weather
guy, who is Hannity's friend replied, "no, it doesn't mean anything
like that. As a matter of fact, there is very real evidence that
global warming IS real." Now, Hannity didn't like this answer, so he
asked "but does this mean that man is causing global warming?" The
weather guy answered "No, it doesn't, but it doesn't mean that man has
NOT caused global warming. Again, there is a LOT of data suggesting
that man's pollutants and co2 levels have had an affect on warming. We
just don't know how much." These may not be exact quotes, but that was
from the horses mouth! So what did Hannity do? Changed the subject of
course.

One thing the hard right has to be applauded for is thier ability to stick
together no matter what. And to blindly follow the party line.

Copenhagen, not Geneva.

reply:

Typical lib not to even know the major details of the conversation.

Geneva. That's rich.

Steve

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 08:33:26 -0800, "Steve B"
wrote:


"Frogwatch" wrote in message
...
On Dec 18, 10:09 am, "mmc" wrote:
"Loogypicker" wrote in message

...



And to think many on the right believe every word he utters....

Last evening on my drive home, I was listening to Hannity. He made a
statement about the weather in Geneva where they are having the
climate talks. Well, this idiot said something to the affect that
global warming is a hoax because the weather in Geneva was supposed to
be a record cold! THEN he had the guy that is the head of AccuWeather
on. Now if you listen to Hannity, he'll ask questions in such a manner
that it will help in HIS discussion. Well the weather guy was asked by
Hannity something like well, if the weather in Geneva is this record
cold, doesn't this disspell the global warming debate? The weather
guy, who is Hannity's friend replied, "no, it doesn't mean anything
like that. As a matter of fact, there is very real evidence that
global warming IS real." Now, Hannity didn't like this answer, so he
asked "but does this mean that man is causing global warming?" The
weather guy answered "No, it doesn't, but it doesn't mean that man has
NOT caused global warming. Again, there is a LOT of data suggesting
that man's pollutants and co2 levels have had an affect on warming. We
just don't know how much." These may not be exact quotes, but that was
from the horses mouth! So what did Hannity do? Changed the subject of
course.

One thing the hard right has to be applauded for is thier ability to stick
together no matter what. And to blindly follow the party line.

Copenhagen, not Geneva.

reply:

Typical lib not to even know the major details of the conversation.

Geneva. That's rich.

Steve

Wonder what else got dicked up.
--

Have a Super Christmas and a Spectacular New Year!

John H

On Dec 18, 10:44*am, John H wrote:
On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 08:33:26 -0800, "Steve B"





wrote:

"Frogwatch" wrote in message
...
On Dec 18, 10:09 am, "mmc" wrote:
"Loogypicker" wrote in message

....

And to think many on the right believe every word he utters....

Last evening on my drive home, I was listening to Hannity. He made a
statement about the weather in Geneva where they are having the
climate talks. Well, this idiot said something to the affect that
global warming is a hoax because the weather in Geneva was supposed to
be a record cold! THEN he had the guy that is the head of AccuWeather
on. Now if you listen to Hannity, he'll ask questions in such a manner
that it will help in HIS discussion. Well the weather guy was asked by
Hannity something like well, if the weather in Geneva is this record
cold, doesn't this disspell the global warming debate? The weather
guy, who is Hannity's friend replied, "no, it doesn't mean anything
like that. As a matter of fact, there is very real evidence that
global warming IS real." Now, Hannity didn't like this answer, so he
asked "but does this mean that man is causing global warming?" The
weather guy answered "No, it doesn't, but it doesn't mean that man has
NOT caused global warming. Again, there is a LOT of data suggesting
that man's pollutants and co2 levels have had an affect on warming. We
just don't know how much." These may not be exact quotes, but that was
from the horses mouth! So what did Hannity do? Changed the subject of
course.

One thing the hard right has to be applauded for is thier ability to stick
together no matter what. And to blindly follow the party line.

Copenhagen, not Geneva.

reply:

Typical lib not to even know the major details of the conversation.

Geneva. *That's rich.

Steve

Wonder what else got dicked up.
--

You.

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 08:33:26 -0800, "Steve B"
wrote:


"Frogwatch" wrote in message
...
On Dec 18, 10:09 am, "mmc" wrote:
"Loogypicker" wrote in message

...



And to think many on the right believe every word he utters....

Last evening on my drive home, I was listening to Hannity. He made a
statement about the weather in Geneva where they are having the
climate talks. Well, this idiot said something to the affect that
global warming is a hoax because the weather in Geneva was supposed to
be a record cold! THEN he had the guy that is the head of AccuWeather
on. Now if you listen to Hannity, he'll ask questions in such a manner
that it will help in HIS discussion. Well the weather guy was asked by
Hannity something like well, if the weather in Geneva is this record
cold, doesn't this disspell the global warming debate? The weather
guy, who is Hannity's friend replied, "no, it doesn't mean anything
like that. As a matter of fact, there is very real evidence that
global warming IS real." Now, Hannity didn't like this answer, so he
asked "but does this mean that man is causing global warming?" The
weather guy answered "No, it doesn't, but it doesn't mean that man has
NOT caused global warming. Again, there is a LOT of data suggesting
that man's pollutants and co2 levels have had an affect on warming. We
just don't know how much." These may not be exact quotes, but that was
from the horses mouth! So what did Hannity do? Changed the subject of
course.

One thing the hard right has to be applauded for is thier ability to stick
together no matter what. And to blindly follow the party line.

Copenhagen, not Geneva.

reply:

Typical lib not to even know the major details of the conversation.

Geneva. That's rich.

Steve

That's rich?

The distance between Geneva to Copenhagen is about the same as Salt
Lake to Hayden Lake.

You'd be real comfy there.

On Dec 18, 11:33*am, "Steve B" wrote:
"Frogwatch" wrote in message

...
On Dec 18, 10:09 am, "mmc" wrote:





"Loogypicker" wrote in message

...

And to think many on the right believe every word he utters....

Last evening on my drive home, I was listening to Hannity. He made a
statement about the weather in Geneva where they are having the
climate talks. Well, this idiot said something to the affect that
global warming is a hoax because the weather in Geneva was supposed to
be a record cold! THEN he had the guy that is the head of AccuWeather
on. Now if you listen to Hannity, he'll ask questions in such a manner
that it will help in HIS discussion. Well the weather guy was asked by
Hannity something like well, if the weather in Geneva is this record
cold, doesn't this disspell the global warming debate? The weather
guy, who is Hannity's friend replied, "no, it doesn't mean anything
like that. As a matter of fact, there is very real evidence that
global warming IS real." Now, Hannity didn't like this answer, so he
asked "but does this mean that man is causing global warming?" The
weather guy answered "No, it doesn't, but it doesn't mean that man has
NOT caused global warming. Again, there is a LOT of data suggesting
that man's pollutants and co2 levels have had an affect on warming. We
just don't know how much." These may not be exact quotes, but that was
from the horses mouth! So what did Hannity do? Changed the subject of
course.

One thing the hard right has to be applauded for is thier ability to stick
together no matter what. And to blindly follow the party line.

Copenhagen, not Geneva.

reply:

Typical lib not to even know the major details of the conversation.

Geneva. *That's rich.

Steve- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yeah, yeah, typical right winger, attack the messenger instead of the
message.

Loogypicker wrote:
On Dec 18, 11:33 am, "Steve B" wrote:
"Frogwatch" wrote in message

...
On Dec 18, 10:09 am, "mmc" wrote:





"Loogypicker" wrote in message
...
And to think many on the right believe every word he utters....
Last evening on my drive home, I was listening to Hannity. He made a
statement about the weather in Geneva where they are having the
climate talks. Well, this idiot said something to the affect that
global warming is a hoax because the weather in Geneva was supposed to
be a record cold! THEN he had the guy that is the head of AccuWeather
on. Now if you listen to Hannity, he'll ask questions in such a manner
that it will help in HIS discussion. Well the weather guy was asked by
Hannity something like well, if the weather in Geneva is this record
cold, doesn't this disspell the global warming debate? The weather
guy, who is Hannity's friend replied, "no, it doesn't mean anything
like that. As a matter of fact, there is very real evidence that
global warming IS real." Now, Hannity didn't like this answer, so he
asked "but does this mean that man is causing global warming?" The
weather guy answered "No, it doesn't, but it doesn't mean that man has
NOT caused global warming. Again, there is a LOT of data suggesting
that man's pollutants and co2 levels have had an affect on warming. We
just don't know how much." These may not be exact quotes, but that was
from the horses mouth! So what did Hannity do? Changed the subject of
course.
One thing the hard right has to be applauded for is thier ability to stick
together no matter what. And to blindly follow the party line.
Copenhagen, not Geneva.

reply:

Typical lib not to even know the major details of the conversation.

Geneva. That's rich.

Steve- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yeah, yeah, typical right winger, attack the messenger instead of the
message.

And aren't you attacking the "messenger" in this case?

On Dec 18, 11:43*am, "D.Duck" wrote:
Loogypicker wrote:
On Dec 18, 11:33 am, "Steve B" wrote:
"Frogwatch" wrote in message

....
On Dec 18, 10:09 am, "mmc" wrote:

"Loogypicker" wrote in message
....
And to think many on the right believe every word he utters....
Last evening on my drive home, I was listening to Hannity. He made a
statement about the weather in Geneva where they are having the
climate talks. Well, this idiot said something to the affect that
global warming is a hoax because the weather in Geneva was supposed to
be a record cold! THEN he had the guy that is the head of AccuWeather
on. Now if you listen to Hannity, he'll ask questions in such a manner
that it will help in HIS discussion. Well the weather guy was asked by
Hannity something like well, if the weather in Geneva is this record
cold, doesn't this disspell the global warming debate? The weather
guy, who is Hannity's friend replied, "no, it doesn't mean anything
like that. As a matter of fact, there is very real evidence that
global warming IS real." Now, Hannity didn't like this answer, so he
asked "but does this mean that man is causing global warming?" The
weather guy answered "No, it doesn't, but it doesn't mean that man has
NOT caused global warming. Again, there is a LOT of data suggesting
that man's pollutants and co2 levels have had an affect on warming. We
just don't know how much." These may not be exact quotes, but that was
from the horses mouth! So what did Hannity do? Changed the subject of
course.
One thing the hard right has to be applauded for is thier ability to stick
together no matter what. And to blindly follow the party line.
Copenhagen, not Geneva.

reply:

Typical lib not to even know the major details of the conversation.

Geneva. *That's rich.

Steve- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yeah, yeah, typical right winger, attack the messenger instead of the
message.

And aren't you attacking the "messenger" in this case?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

No. There was no message.

On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 08:52:58 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker
wrote:

No. There was no message.

LOL!! Dude - the Hannity screed was one huge blast against a
messenger.

Look, you're on the wrong side of this issue - you know it, you just
don't want to accept it.

The "science" isn't "settled" because it's based on a fraudulent
premise with amateur data mining done by amateur programmers to fit an
agenda that created a job worth millions. Your guys have been proven
wrong on so many climate issues that it should be embarrassing.

And please don't do your usual prove a negative schtick - it's really
old.

On 12/18/09 5:13 PM, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 08:52:58 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker
wrote:

No. There was no message.

LOL!! Dude - the Hannity screed was one huge blast against a
messenger.

Look, you're on the wrong side of this issue - you know it, you just
don't want to accept it.


Tom-Tom's trying to bull his way through the china shoppe.

On Dec 18, 5:13*pm, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 08:52:58 -0800 (PST), Loogypicker

wrote:
No. There was no message.

LOL!! Dude - the Hannity screed was one huge blast against a
messenger.

No. Not at all. It was an actual dialogue between Hannity and the
Accuweather founder.

Look, you're on the wrong side of this issue - you know it, you just
don't want to accept it.

The "science" isn't "settled" because it's based on a fraudulent
premise with amateur data mining done by amateur programmers to fit an
agenda that created a job worth millions. *Your guys have been proven
wrong on so many climate issues that it should be embarrassing.

And please don't do your usual prove a negative schtick - it's really
old.

Every time someone here shows you actual data that shows FOR A FACT
the direct correlation between CO2 levels and warming trends you sweep
it under the carpet, saying that the only "honest science" is that the
fits your right wing agenda.