"Gene" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 15:27:26 -0800, jps wrote:

Using your logic, we should sit on our hands until its positively
proven we have some net effect on the atmosphere.

Talking points again? Using my logic, we need to know WHAT to do,
unless just *anything* would make you feel better.....

In that case, why the hell should we cut emissions? I think we should
bring back all the flourocarbons. I miss 'em.

Thanks for making my point.....
--
It is usually futile to try to talk facts and analysis to people who are
enjoying a sense of moral superiority in their ignorance.
-Thomas Sowell

Grady-White Gulfstream, out of Oak Island, NC.

Homepage
http://pamandgene.tranquilrefuge.net/boating/the_boat/my_boat.htm

Forté Agent 6.00 Build 1186


Gene, we KNOW what to do. Knowing the exact % of humans on the environment
isn't the issue. It's a big %, and we need to act.

--
Nom=de=Plume

On Dec 19, 6:56*pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
"Gene" wrote in message

...



On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 15:27:26 -0800, jps wrote:

Using your logic, we should sit on our hands until its positively
proven we have some net effect on the atmosphere.

Talking points again? Using my logic, we need to know WHAT to do,
unless just *anything* would make you feel better.....

In that case, why the hell should we cut emissions? *I think we should
bring back all the flourocarbons. *I miss 'em.

Thanks for making my point.....
--
It is usually futile to try to talk facts and analysis to people who are
enjoying a sense of moral superiority in their ignorance.
-Thomas Sowell

Grady-White Gulfstream, out of Oak Island, NC.

Homepage
http://pamandgene.tranquilrefuge.net/boating/the_boat/my_boat.htm

Forté Agent 6.00 Build 1186

Gene, we KNOW what to do. Knowing the exact % of humans on the environment
isn't the issue. It's a big %, and we need to act.

--
Nom=de=Plume

"Amazingly stupid response from you."

TopBassDog wrote:
On Dec 19, 6:56 pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
"Gene" wrote in message

...



On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 15:27:26 -0800, jps wrote:
Using your logic, we should sit on our hands until its positively
proven we have some net effect on the atmosphere.
Talking points again? Using my logic, we need to know WHAT to do,
unless just *anything* would make you feel better.....
In that case, why the hell should we cut emissions? I think we should
bring back all the flourocarbons. I miss 'em.
Thanks for making my point.....
--
It is usually futile to try to talk facts and analysis to people who are
enjoying a sense of moral superiority in their ignorance.
-Thomas Sowell
Grady-White Gulfstream, out of Oak Island, NC.
Homepage
http://pamandgene.tranquilrefuge.net/boating/the_boat/my_boat.htm
Forté Agent 6.00 Build 1186
Gene, we KNOW what to do. Knowing the exact % of humans on the environment
isn't the issue. It's a big %, and we need to act.

--
Nom=de=Plume

"Amazingly stupid response from you."

This surprises you?

On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 22:16:55 -0800 (PST), TopBassDog
wrote:

On Dec 19, 6:56*pm, "nom=de=plume" wrote:
"Gene" wrote in message

...



On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 15:27:26 -0800, jps wrote:

Using your logic, we should sit on our hands until its positively
proven we have some net effect on the atmosphere.

Talking points again? Using my logic, we need to know WHAT to do,
unless just *anything* would make you feel better.....

In that case, why the hell should we cut emissions? *I think we should
bring back all the flourocarbons. *I miss 'em.

Thanks for making my point.....
--
It is usually futile to try to talk facts and analysis to people who are
enjoying a sense of moral superiority in their ignorance.
-Thomas Sowell

Grady-White Gulfstream, out of Oak Island, NC.

Homepage
http://pamandgene.tranquilrefuge.net/boating/the_boat/my_boat.htm

Forté Agent 6.00 Build 1186

Gene, we KNOW what to do. Knowing the exact % of humans on the environment
isn't the issue. It's a big %, and we need to act.

--
Nom=de=Plume

"Amazingly stupid response from you."

Another 'ah-ha' light comes on!

Soon there'll be enough for our own rec.boats Christmas tree.
--

Have a Super Christmas and a Spectacular New Year!

John H

Gene, we KNOW what to do. Knowing the exact % of humans on the
environment
isn't the issue. It's a big %, and we need to act.

--
Nom=de=Plume

Needing to act would mean installing technology to cope with the situation.
Needing to act means doing sensible things that involve hardware and
technology. It does not mean issuing what is essentially Monopoly money to
foreign governments. Carbon credits? Sounds like transference of money to
me, just under another name. All it's going to cost is $100 billion a year.
And where does that money come from? And who gets a cut? ALGORE for one.
Lord Moncton. Rothschilds. It goes on from there. It's hypocritical to be
talking about taking action when flying in an obsolete GulfStream jet, and
having a global warming conference in the middle of a blizzard. Especially
when you're spouting that Americans are energy hogs and need to cut back the
thermostat, wear more clothes while indoors, and use less fuel in
transportation. But that's only for the little people. The lower class.
Were you born this stupid, or were you educated into it?

Steve

"Steve B" wrote in message
...


Gene, we KNOW what to do. Knowing the exact % of humans on the
environment
isn't the issue. It's a big %, and we need to act.

--
Nom=de=Plume

Needing to act would mean installing technology to cope with the
situation. Needing to act means doing sensible things that involve
hardware and technology. It does not mean issuing what is essentially
Monopoly money to foreign governments. Carbon credits? Sounds like
transference of money to me, just under another name. All it's going to
cost is $100 billion a year. And where does that money come from? And who
gets a cut? ALGORE for one. Lord Moncton. Rothschilds. It goes on from
there. It's hypocritical to be talking about taking action when flying in
an obsolete GulfStream jet, and having a global warming conference in the
middle of a blizzard. Especially when you're spouting that Americans are
energy hogs and need to cut back the thermostat, wear more clothes while
indoors, and use less fuel in transportation. But that's only for the
little people. The lower class. Were you born this stupid, or were you
educated into it?

Steve

Technology is part of the answer, obviously.

Transfer of money... what a horrible thing. Western nations destroying 3rd
world countries' environments, then leaving them on their own to deal with
it. Yes, that seems fair.

Were you born or did you just fall out of the sky?

--
Nom=de=Plume

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Steve B" wrote in message
...


Gene, we KNOW what to do. Knowing the exact % of humans on the
environment
isn't the issue. It's a big %, and we need to act.

--
Nom=de=Plume

Needing to act would mean installing technology to cope with the
situation. Needing to act means doing sensible things that involve
hardware and technology. It does not mean issuing what is essentially
Monopoly money to foreign governments. Carbon credits? Sounds like
transference of money to me, just under another name. All it's going to
cost is $100 billion a year. And where does that money come from? And
who gets a cut? ALGORE for one. Lord Moncton. Rothschilds. It goes on
from there. It's hypocritical to be talking about taking action when
flying in an obsolete GulfStream jet, and having a global warming
conference in the middle of a blizzard. Especially when you're spouting
that Americans are energy hogs and need to cut back the thermostat, wear
more clothes while indoors, and use less fuel in transportation. But
that's only for the little people. The lower class. Were you born this
stupid, or were you educated into it?

Steve

Technology is part of the answer, obviously.

Transfer of money... what a horrible thing. Western nations destroying 3rd
world countries' environments, then leaving them on their own to deal with
it. Yes, that seems fair.

Were you born or did you just fall out of the sky?

--
Nom=de=Plume

I think a lot of these clowns were 'hatched'.

"Don White" wrote in message
...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Steve B" wrote in message
...


Gene, we KNOW what to do. Knowing the exact % of humans on the
environment
isn't the issue. It's a big %, and we need to act.

--
Nom=de=Plume

Needing to act would mean installing technology to cope with the
situation. Needing to act means doing sensible things that involve
hardware and technology. It does not mean issuing what is essentially
Monopoly money to foreign governments. Carbon credits? Sounds like
transference of money to me, just under another name. All it's going to
cost is $100 billion a year. And where does that money come from? And
who gets a cut? ALGORE for one. Lord Moncton. Rothschilds. It goes on
from there. It's hypocritical to be talking about taking action when
flying in an obsolete GulfStream jet, and having a global warming
conference in the middle of a blizzard. Especially when you're spouting
that Americans are energy hogs and need to cut back the thermostat, wear
more clothes while indoors, and use less fuel in transportation. But
that's only for the little people. The lower class. Were you born this
stupid, or were you educated into it?

Steve

Technology is part of the answer, obviously.

Transfer of money... what a horrible thing. Western nations destroying
3rd world countries' environments, then leaving them on their own to deal
with it. Yes, that seems fair.

Were you born or did you just fall out of the sky?

--
Nom=de=Plume

I think a lot of these clowns were 'hatched'.

Hey chickens are the descendents of dinosaurs, and some of these people are
really afraid, so it kinda fits.

--
Nom=de=Plume

Don White wrote:
wrote in message

Technology is part of the answer, obviously.

Transfer of money... what a horrible thing. Western nations destroying 3rd
world countries' environments, then leaving them on their own to deal with
it. Yes, that seems fair.

Were you born or did you just fall out of the sky?

--
Nom=de=Plume

I think a lot of these clowns were 'hatched'.



Don't try to *think* - that's your problem.

"Don White" wrote in message
...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Steve B" wrote in message
...


Gene, we KNOW what to do. Knowing the exact % of humans on the
environment
isn't the issue. It's a big %, and we need to act.

--
Nom=de=Plume

Needing to act would mean installing technology to cope with the
situation. Needing to act means doing sensible things that involve
hardware and technology. It does not mean issuing what is essentially
Monopoly money to foreign governments. Carbon credits? Sounds like
transference of money to me, just under another name. All it's going to
cost is $100 billion a year. And where does that money come from? And
who gets a cut? ALGORE for one. Lord Moncton. Rothschilds. It goes on
from there. It's hypocritical to be talking about taking action when
flying in an obsolete GulfStream jet, and having a global warming
conference in the middle of a blizzard. Especially when you're spouting
that Americans are energy hogs and need to cut back the thermostat, wear
more clothes while indoors, and use less fuel in transportation. But
that's only for the little people. The lower class. Were you born this
stupid, or were you educated into it?

Steve

Technology is part of the answer, obviously.

Transfer of money... what a horrible thing. Western nations destroying
3rd world countries' environments, then leaving them on their own to deal
with it. Yes, that seems fair.

Were you born or did you just fall out of the sky?

--
Nom=de=Plume

The term "fair" seems to be a buzz word for liberals. I think that all
children should learn two things by age five. One, life is not fair. Two,
there is no justice in the world. But, we have these nannying interrupting
parents and caregivers who give the child the false sense that there is a
higher authority to go to when someone takes their doll or truck. Then as
we age, we carry this over, and somehow think that we can have justice. I
won't speak for anyone but myself, but I have had situations in my life
where I got the very short end of the stick, and got no justice even though
I was right.

I think that the liberals shout the word "FAIR" so that they attract the
injured child in everyone who will fall for it, and they will fall in line
once more expecting fairness and justice.

So, what WOULD be fair? To intervene in these third world's politics and
governments to insure fairness? Well, it sure worked in the middle east
when oil was discovered in 1948, didn't it? The little people all ended up
hating us, and we just supported puppet tyrants who would sell us cheap oil.
There has not been one country's affairs we became involved in to try to
insure fairness where we haven't come out the villains and hated.

We're destroying THEIR environments? They're the ones practicing slash and
burn farming, overgrazing, deforestation, and the like. Or did you not
notice?

I am through with you. You may go. I will not converse with anyone so
ignorant of facts and insisting on talking of fairness and emotion.

Plink. I already have you plonked, that just means this conversation is
over.

Steve