Wrong Side of History

  • Avatar

    Posted: 25 November 2009 05:36 PM #16

    But we don’t live as long as citizens do in many, perhaps most, of the industrialized countries that have universal health care.  I just thought I would stir the conservative-moderate split here a bit more!

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 25 November 2009 05:45 PM #17

    It’s easy to complain that there isn’t really a problem from one’s desk in the USA, breathing heavily regulated relatively clean air. I just spent 3 weeks in China on business, and the air pollution was insidious. It burned my eyes, nose and throat the whole time I was there. Even inside my various hotel rooms. It was bad, really bad. No blue sky, no stars at night, just gray air. I visited fireworks factories out in the hinterlands, and it struck me that there were very few birds, and virtually no birdsong. Kind of scary.

    Whether or not the burning of fossil fuels is contributing to global warming, I don’t know. What I do know is that we humans *are* having a deleterious effect on the environment through the burning of said fuels, and I applaud Apple’s recent efforts, whatever the motivation.

         
  • Posted: 25 November 2009 06:51 PM #18

    The Chinese are living in hell and we need to institute cap and trade? We have already shown them the way to burn clean. Do we want to show them how we can do socialism?

         
  • Posted: 25 November 2009 07:51 PM #19

    And…,it’s called Junk Science because that’s what it is.  It’s called the facts as we know them when there is descent science behind it.  This has nothing to do with party affiliation.

    Signature

    I don’t mind being wrong…,I just hate being wrong so FAST!

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 25 November 2009 08:28 PM #20

    No, it’s called Junk Science because right-wingers are good at putting negative labels on ideas that are contrary to their limited world view.  Most reputable climate scientists believe that global warming is here and it’s in your face.  And they base that opinion on the best available science, not the ideas of crackpots.

         
  • Posted: 25 November 2009 10:10 PM #21

    firestorm - 26 November 2009 12:28 AM

    No, it’s called Junk Science because right-wingers are good at putting negative labels on ideas that are contrary to their limited world view.  Most reputable climate scientists believe that global warming is here and it’s in your face.  And they base that opinion on the best available science, not the ideas of crackpots.

    I am far from a right winger but I use it because it adequately describes what I’m referring to.  Nothing more…,nothing less.

    Most reputable climate scientists believe that global warming is here and it’s in your face.  And they base that opinion on the best available science

    Did you miss this by any chance?

    Late last week we got the word: hackers broke into the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit server.  The stolen emails and documents were later made public—and while the University claims that some of the emails may not be authentic, the scientists whose emails were hacked admit that they were the authors.

    These emails and documents are indeed shocking.  The blog Red State reports the highlights:

    1. Prominent environmental scientists organize a boycott of scientific journals if those journals publish scholarly material from global warming dissidents.

      2. The scientists then orchestrate attacks on the dissidents because of their lack of scholarly material published in scientific journals.

      3. The scientists block from the UN’s report on global warming evidence that is harmful to the anthropogenic global warming consensus.

      4. The scientists, when faced with a freedom of information act request for their correspondence and data, delete the correspondence and data lest it be used against them.

      5. The scientists fabricate data when their data fails to prove the earth is warming. In fact, in more than one case, scientists engaged in lengthy emails on how to insert additional made up data that would in turn cause their claims to stand out as legitimate.

    Signature

    I don’t mind being wrong…,I just hate being wrong so FAST!

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 25 November 2009 10:34 PM #22

    firestorm - 25 November 2009 07:32 PM

    The move out of the Neanderthal US Chamber of Commerce was an excellent move that shows not only that Apple is a responsible corporation, but that it also cares about the values of its young customers.  Al Gore is a responsible member of the Apple board of directors, and adds solid long-term insights that are so terribly lacking in most American corporations, who care only about immediately satisfying shareholders and enriching the bank accounts of top employees.  This short-term thinking is detrimental to the future of America.  Thank God Steve Jobs is a Democrat with a long-term vision, or Apple would have long ago followed the Dell path to short-term profits, low costs, and lack of distinctive products.  Michael Dell should dissolve his Texas company and give the proceeds back to the shareholders.


    Neanderthal Chamber of Commerce? Have you given any consideration that maybe the Chamber of Commerce has looked at the laws, taxes and regulations that this global warming lie would/has placed on commerce and took a bold step to protect the business community. Al Gore is a prime example of the liberal philosophy “Failure will be rewarded”. Even in his latest of disaster movies, he wasn’t able to hide all the photoshopped satellite “evidence”. He not even a capable lier. I still believe that all Al provides is political cover for Apple. Or maybe Steve was saving some of Apples cash to buy some of Al’s “carbon credit scam”. The sooner everyone acknowledges that they have been lied to, the sooner the world can undo all the damage generated by the leaders of global warming.

     

    :apple:

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 25 November 2009 10:43 PM #23

    CaptainBoom - 25 November 2009 09:45 PM

    It’s easy to complain that there isn’t really a problem from one’s desk in the USA, breathing heavily regulated relatively clean air. I just spent 3 weeks in China on business, and the air pollution was insidious. It burned my eyes, nose and throat the whole time I was there. Even inside my various hotel rooms. It was bad, really bad. No blue sky, no stars at night, just gray air. I visited fireworks factories out in the hinterlands, and it struck me that there were very few birds, and virtually no birdsong. Kind of scary.

    Whether or not the burning of fossil fuels is contributing to global warming, I don’t know. What I do know is that we humans *are* having a deleterious effect on the environment through the burning of said fuels, and I applaud Apple’s recent efforts, whatever the motivation.


    Take a good look at the former USSR and the environmental damage caused by that government. What does the USSR and China have in common? Communism? A state where the central government controls everything? If you are fearful that we may become a polluted nation like China, then you should be fearful of a government even similar to theres.


    :apple:

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 25 November 2009 10:46 PM #24

    firestorm - 25 November 2009 09:36 PM

    But we don’t live as long as citizens do in many, perhaps most, of the industrialized countries that have universal health care.  I just thought I would stir the conservative-moderate split here a bit more!


    Yet another lie generated by liberals, just as the global warming scam was a lie, this is also.

     

    :apple:

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 25 November 2009 11:00 PM #25

    firestorm - 26 November 2009 12:28 AM

    No, it’s called Junk Science because right-wingers are good at putting negative labels on ideas that are contrary to their limited world view.  Most reputable climate scientists believe that global warming is here and it’s in your face.  And they base that opinion on the best available science, not the ideas of crackpots.


    Strangely, those reputable climate scientists overlooked one major cause of climate change and it is not human. It’s that big bright disk that rises from the east and sets into the west, everyday. The sun is the greatest source of climate change, not only for earth but all of the planets in our solar system. So ask yourself why those same great scientists would fail to factor in our sun in their predictions? Maybe it didn’t fit into their agenda or the agenda of those that provide them with grant money. These people can no longer be considered scientist but only overly educated scam artist.

     

    :apple:

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 25 November 2009 11:11 PM #26

    The liberal media spin has started. Soon the mindless zombie foot solders will fall into lockstep for their masters, repeating all of the well worn liberal catch phrases in an attempt to hide what is true. Sadly, all very predictable.

    :apple:

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 25 November 2009 11:22 PM #27

    willrob - 25 November 2009 09:05 PM

    Carbon moved from earth in whatever way into the atmosphere is blanketing the earth. No data denies that. The problem in interpreting the data begins with the idea of warming our atmosphere, when in fact the CO2 is shielding us from the sun’s heat. Lessening the amount of CO2 put into the atmosphere will cause warming. It’s a conundrum.

    But the effects of manufactured pollution are easier to measure?higher cancer rates, birth defects, loss of marine life, polluted water ways. Almost all of this is the direct result of human life on earth ? our demand for convenience, technology, animal meat (those beef, pork and chicken “farm” produce more waste than the human population) and the profits to be derived from dwindling resources.

    It would appear that the only solution is the elimination of humans from the earth. And then the earth could once again prosper. Isn’t this what the radical environmentalist movement is suggesting.

     

    :apple:

         
  • Posted: 25 November 2009 11:22 PM #28

    BillH - 26 November 2009 02:10 AM

    Did you miss this by any chance?

    Late last week we got the word: hackers broke into the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit server.  The stolen emails and documents were later made public—and while the University claims that some of the emails may not be authentic, the scientists whose emails were hacked admit that they were the authors.

    These emails and documents are indeed shocking.  The blog Red State reports the highlights:

    1. Prominent environmental scientists organize a boycott of scientific journals if those journals publish scholarly material from global warming dissidents.

      2. The scientists then orchestrate attacks on the dissidents because of their lack of scholarly material published in scientific journals.

      3. The scientists block from the UN’s report on global warming evidence that is harmful to the anthropogenic global warming consensus.

      4. The scientists, when faced with a freedom of information act request for their correspondence and data, delete the correspondence and data lest it be used against them.

      5. The scientists fabricate data when their data fails to prove the earth is warming. In fact, in more than one case, scientists engaged in lengthy emails on how to insert additional made up data that would in turn cause their claims to stand out as legitimate.

    I had not heard of this.  Are the emails just from researches at East Anglia, who might not be important researchers, or are some of the emails from prominent researchers?

    This is pretty interesting news, but before I take your or Red State’s word for it, is there a good source of info on these docs you could link to?  I wouldn’t consider a political site like Red State credible in this case.  But is there maybe a blog hosting the docs or maybe a scientist blog discussing their “shame” at these revelations?  A prominent scientist discussing the issue would be a key sign of authenticity in my book.

    Signature

    Off again, on again…

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 25 November 2009 11:53 PM #29

    firestorm - 25 November 2009 08:41 PM

    I find it interesting that a lot of people using the label “junk science” to label climate science are adherents of creationism and place the age of the earth at about 6,000 years and believe people coexisted with dinosaurs.  When the right-wing uses the words “science” or “junk science,” be aware; be very aware.

    If left wingers know how it all started,  seriously, please let us know.  But in the meantime,  like you,  we have those that are greatly ignorant,  even believing what the ignorant have been falsely adhering to as you stated above.  This Earth is millions upon millions of years old and had epochs of being a beautiful planet, as stated in Genesis 1:1 period. 

    Leave a lot of space here between paragraphs. It was a long long….................................................. time…...................................................................... Declare if thou hast understanding Job 38:4

    That this earth became void and without form,  totally destroyed in Gen 1:2…. with very local destruction throughout its history as it is written in both the geologic record and the written record. The written record being that detestable work of Art as you would think. 
    Many here follow Gore whom i have voted nay to a board position for many years and who to me is a Dinosaur as in Job 40:15…..a huge beast in the movement now, who by the way did not walk with dinosaurs, but will at some point become extinct.

    When the Left wing-nuts use the word science or junk science be aware, be very aware.

         
  • Avatar

    Posted: 25 November 2009 11:53 PM #30

    MacCube - 26 November 2009 03:11 AM

    The liberal media spin has started. Soon the mindless zombie foot solders will fall into lockstep for their masters, repeating all of the well worn liberal catch phrases in an attempt to hide what is true. Sadly, all very predictable.

    :apple:

    Sadly, you are the one that is predictable.  Virtually every sentence you wrote could have been lifted from the right-wing Republican playbook.  This would not be so bad, except that these are the folks who led us into a needless war AND almost single-handedly wrecked the economy with their hatred of government regulation; a legacy that goes back to Reagan.  You really should try reading or watching something other than the right-wing media, because you are sounding like the drones who repeat the same phrases over and over like zombies.