Dr Guy- [quote]I guess I could say I tolerate the mass sameness as that is not what I seek. But rather the "Christina's" little dives where a cold beer and a bowl of Menudo beats a burger and fries any day.[/quote] As an aside, so long as I can have a cold beer on a hot day I tend to be content with wherever it is I hang my hat at the moment! [quote]A place is not a collection of big box stores and subdivisions. If that is what you are looking for, you will surely find it
Artysim
During my travels throughout north America I've come to a rather depressing conclusion. Before I share it with you, a disclaimer; I lay no claim to being a well seasoned traveller or any such nonsense, nor have I visited every single state or lived for a prolonged period in any of the places I have visited. So you are well within your rights to call me an uninformed know-it-all gasbag and I won't take offense. So what is this dastardly scheme I have stumbled across? Everywhe
I've got the answer. A free bowl of soup AND a haircut for every new member of our cult... I mean erm, blog.
[quote]I say if you don't drive a solar power vehicle, live in a solar powered/wind powered house, eat only from the organic veggies grown in your own back yard and do most of the house chores by hand, you got no business going around screaming at people for causing Global Warming, Climate Change or what every you wanna call it.[/quote] And I agree with this statement. Nowhere in any of my articles have I "screamed" at people for causing global warming. The first step though, is in gett
I too grew up in a Southern Baptist Church (in Canada, they decided us canucks needed to be evangelized properly by some Texans... go figure!) As far as the congregation went, nicest people you'd ever meet. Most of the layfolk were average people just wanting to live a good life, mill workers and checkout counter clerks and the like. What was most telling though was looking at the example set by the church leadership. With the exception of one family, with whom I am still good frie
[quote]I find it more than intriguing that it is bad for an oil company to disagree with a position on global warming and want to get people with credentials to support them. But it is good if you are an environmentalist who recruits credentialed people to push their side of the argument. Based on what you write only the side you favor should be allowed to hire scientists to tout their side and the others should shut up.[/quote] I never said that. Any study that is commissioned wi
Daiwa- [quote] Just ask Gallileo. It is the nature of scientific inquiry that nothing is accepted as absolute, that everything is open to question and doubt, that no question is ever settled.[/quote] I agree with you 100% on this. Never have I said anything contrary to it! However, the fact is that ever since the early to mid 90's there has been a consensus in the scientific community at large! That's thousands of scientists from different countries and institutes coming toget
[quote] There is no pollution industry to fight the information that is coming out. No one is running around trying to discredit the reports in order to support big pollution. What we have are scientists that disagree with each other. One side says man is the problem but has no proof, the other side says we don’t see any proof that man is the cause but we do have proof that the Sun is the cause. Give us proof and we will see where it leads[/quote] Au contrere! Please forgiv
[quote]Yet another pointless regulatory requirement that only one out of 50 people are going to pay any freakin attention to, while the cost of their meal goes up a quarter and our taxes go up to pay the freakin enforcement nazis. Please, the government tit is not the solution to our problems, folks. What a lame-ass excuse for an idea this was, asking our masters to "save us from ourselves" yet again. On a positive note, I know I'll lose weight, 'cause I'm gonna go puke right now. [/quote]</p
[quote]All right! Now I see, it all becomes clear now. You are insane.[/quote] Hey! I resemble that remark. [quote]Yes, the European way is a good first step and over decades they slowly changed over one small town at a time. With populations of under a hundred million you can move a bit quicker. With the United States that has a population of over 300 million not including illegal’s changing over the country will not be easy or quick. Europe started its change over in the
[quote]Doc, all he does is move the goal posts. He makes a statement, you answer it, and then he moves the goal post so it is still not worth the trouble to do what is best because only half is recoverable with today’s technology but what he tries to get us to ignore is that it is more than we have now. When saving the planet every little bit helps but when drilling for oil you need the whole amount or it is not worth the trouble.[/quote] Nowhere have I said that it isn't "worth
[quote]You never answered my question. When I asked what was your point you never cleared that up.[/quote] In reference to James Hansen? I was illustrating that members of NASA have been stating that global warming is real, and most likely caused by man for years now with very little notice from government until recently. [quote]And each time I point to where this information has been published by accredited scientists, has gone through your standard of peer review, and you igno
tee hee! [quote]It is called misinformation designed to make people like you feel that there is this huge group and no one found anything wrong with the reports until politics got involved. The problem is that scientific journals produce a plethora of documents every year. This global warming hoax has been building over the years and culminated with the fourth IPCC report. Each report got bolder and more strained as people wanted to prove this global warming.[/quote] Well, I gue
[quote]Look, again one of my beefs with this is the fact that the Gov't is involved. One good reason for such a law to be bad? It starts with a simple law like "I want to know the calories in my food". This kinda of law is basically an open door to future ridiculous laws such as "I want 5 versions of this item to meet the needs of different diets" or "I want all restaurants to have 2 menus, 1 regular and one in low calories"[/quote] Using the same logic, cars should not have seatbelts
[quote]To begin with, one of the most revealing speeches about world oil reserves went unremarked in 2006. The head of the world's largest oil company, Saudi Aramco, said: “We are looking at more than four and a half trillion barrels of potentially recoverable oil. That number translates into 140 years of oil at current rates of consumption, or to put it anther way, the world has only consumed about 18 percent of its conventional oil potential. That fact alone should discredit the argum
[quote]okay, you still don’t get it, [/quote] [quote]What is your point here?[/quote] [quote]Once again you really don’t understand.[/quote] Yes, Paladin, you're absolutely right. Clearly I just don't understand. Clearly, the American Meteorological Society, the American Geophysical Union and the American Association for the Advancement of Science also don't understand. Clearly, you understand climatology far better than the above organizations, so like I keep
As per the website of the American Physical Society, who were founded in 1899 and have over 46,000 members, most of whom are credentialled scientists. Clearly a fringe group not at all indicative of most real scientists as supposedly this is all one big scam supported by a small number of politically motivated pawns!!! "Emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities are changing the atmosphere in ways that affect the Earth's climate. Greenhouse gases include carbon dioxide as well
[quote]I was trying to contradict you I was trying to make it clearer. There is one other part that you don’t understand about peer review. Politics are heavily involved.[/quote] Yes, absolutely politics are heavily involved. Especially when governments around the world have been dragging their heels for the last 30 years ignoring the data put forth by scientists. You keep going back and saying that NASA's data supports the assertion that climate change is not affected or caused
There's an interesting article over at livescience.com about many of the myths being circulated about global warming. As per usual many of these myths are being caused by folks who are simply spreading speculation to further an ideological goal without any hard science backing it up. In this particular instance, a rumour has been spreading mostly on the internet that the American Physical Society has reversed it's position on Global Warming. This simply isn't true, and in respo
[quote]A calories number does not tell you what exactly you are eating, it tells you how much energy is in it. But your body already has a calory counter built in. You don't need an external one. (If you are hungry, you need calories, if you are not hungry, you don't.) _I_ want to know what I am eating, but the government doesn't grant me my wish. I don't need to know how many calories are in the food, I need to know whether it contains pork or whether it contains meat and milk products. As f
[quote]The fact that you trust the people with the military power (IRS and Army) to protect the little man I find quite scary, and plain stupid[/quote] Where did the IRS ever come into this?!?! I never mentioned them at all. I never said that we should blindly trust the military either. I did say that the military is an example of a large publicly run organization that works well, if managed properly. These organizations are necessary for a society to function. [quote]Every mark
[quote]I wasn't going to bother to respond to it because I don't accept the premise as valid and therefore everything from there on is irrelevant to me.[/quote] That's nice
[quote]And as I have stated before this information is already published. It has already been reviewed. It has already been scientifically accepted. What you are suggesting I do is the equivalent of taking out a full page ad in every news paper in the world to inform them that there is air on the planet Earth. The only competing theory to this scientifically accepted belief is the global climate change thesis. The people that believe in global climate change are trying to supplant the belief
Paladin- [quote]The IPCC report on Global Climate Change is not anything more than a hypothesis, a guess if you will. The scientific method means it has to be proven independently by at least one outside laboratory or group of scientists[/quote] Nowhere in my comments here have I even mentioned or referred to the IPCC report on climate change. That is a political document, NOT a scientific paper. In that I agree with you 100 % However, that paper was produced because most of the
[quote]It CAN be important to know the calories you are consuming. And it's not always intuitive. Sometimes you're SHOCKED to find out how many calories are really in something that you thought was harmless (800 calorie muffin, anyone?).[/quote] T.W- I agree entirely. I think it is very important to adjust the diet to nutritional requirements. For example, there was a time in my life when I ate mcdonald's 5 days a week and was perfectly healthy- but it was because I was working a