Bored

Dahlonega, GA

#8312 Apr 30, 2013
Oh my wrote:
<quoted text>
Apparently you don't even know what you posted, the term "global warming activists" was a direct quote from your cut and paste extravaganza.

And apparently you didnt read all the posts either, the cut and paste also mentioned global climate activists. Why dont you educate us in opinions about the difference since you're so smart. But oh no, that might put a spotlight on you and everyone knows you dont like that.


Bored

Dahlonega, GA

#8313 Apr 30, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
And just to show how the knee jerk reaction now is that EVERYTHING must be connected to global warming, let's turn to CNN's Deb Feyerick's interview with Bill Nye about the close pass of a large asteroid in February.
Feyerick: "Talk about something else that's falling from the sky and that is an asteroid....Is this an effect of, perhaps, of global warming or is this just some meteoric occasion?"
http://theothermccain.com/2013/02/10/cnn-anch...

I've got a water leak in my plumbing, dam that global warming!

Since: Jul 12

Villa Rica, GA

#8314 Apr 30, 2013
This is a up to date article about global warming.
It will be my last.I see no sense in beating a dead horse. It shows that only 37% of the scientist now think man is causing any global warming. It is short and sweet. Scientist are being attacked just as I have been for expressing such views.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2013/...
Bored

Dahlonega, GA

#8315 Apr 30, 2013

"When asked about second term failures, President Barack Obama responded by saying, "Maybe I should just pack up and go home. Golly.""


Poor old Obama, doncha feel sorry for him.

But then says this...
"Obama pledges renewed push on Gitmo."

"I'm going to go back at this," he said Tuesday. "I've asked my team to review everything that's currently being done in Guantanamo, everything that we can do administratively, and I'm going to re-engage with Congress to try to make the case that this is not something that's in the best interests of the American people."


And this is the same administration that allowed miranda rights to the boston bomber before the 48 hours was up they had promised to let the FBI question him.


And he wonders why he has a failed Presidency.

I say let Biden take over.
Bored

Dahlonega, GA

#8316 Apr 30, 2013
Bigdave1 wrote:
This is a up to date article about global warming.
It will be my last.I see no sense in beating a dead horse. It shows that only 37% of the scientist now think man is causing any global warming. It is short and sweet. Scientist are being attacked just as I have been for expressing such views.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2013/...

For some reason I'm never able to open any links to forbes.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#8317 Apr 30, 2013
Climate change alarmists love to talk about the existence of a scientific "consensus" that global warming -oh, excuse me - climate change is man made. A whole lot of that can be blamed on what happens when you dare to question the dogma that must be adhered to in both academia and even in the media. Anybody remember when The Weather Channel's Heidi Cullen called for the American Meteorological Society to revoke certification of any broadcast meteorologist who did not believe in man made climate change? That is tantamount to having to sign an article of faith before you can work. And it became very common to equate man made climate change skeptics to Holocaust deniers - truly reprehensible.
But that same attitude is prevalent in our universities and it takes some very brave people to stand up to that kind of pressure when it is easier just to stay silent - and not risk losing either your position or your grant money.
Kind of like some on here who keep claiming that those of us who are skeptical of MMCC don't believe in science and believe the Earth is only 6,000 years old - funny thing though - no one has made either of those claims - surprise, surprise. Gotta love those straw men.
And there are even some that have gone so far as to call for the arrest of skeptics and/or "Nuremberg style trials" - Is that the extreme fringe, of course, but it shows the levels some are willing to go to. The following links might be of interest to some and the links themselves provide other links to follow. Unfortunately, not all the links are still valid for some reason, but most are.

http://www.epw.senate.gov/public/...

http://www.epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm...

http://www.epw.senate.gov/fact.cfm...

http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php...

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#8318 Apr 30, 2013
Bored wrote:
"When asked about second term failures, President Barack Obama responded by saying, "Maybe I should just pack up and go home. Golly.""
The country should be so lucky.(hmm, except that leaves a President Biden - Shades of Dumb and Dumber)
ChicknButt

Decatur, GA

#8319 Apr 30, 2013
Bigdave1 wrote:
This is a up to date article about global warming.
It will be my last.I see no sense in beating a dead horse. It shows that only 37% of the scientist now think man is causing any global warming. It is short and sweet. Scientist are being attacked just as I have been for expressing such views.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2013/...
It's an opinion piece. With language like:

"Global warming alarmists, desperate to restore the shattered remains of their fictitious global warming consensus, spent the last week in overdrive expressing outrage and attacking the scientists participating in the survey."

Do you think his opinion is a little biased?

The OPINION piece is written by James Taylor. He's heavily involved with the Heartland Institute whom we've already covered.
They receive their funding from "The Heartland Institute does not disclose its funding sources. According to its brochures, Heartland receives money from approximately 1,600 individuals and organizations, and no single corporate entity donates more than 5% of the operating budget,[38] although the figure for individual donors can be much higher, with a single anonymous donor providing $4.6 million in 2008, and $979,000 in 2011, accounting for 20% of Heartland's overall budget, according to reports of a leaked fundraising plan."

A SINGLE ANONYMOUS DONOR gave them 4.6 MILLION. Nobody gives away 4.6 million unless they have an interest at stake. Maybe people like ones below:

MediaTransparency reported that Heartland received funding from politically conservative foundations such as the Castle Rock Foundation, the Sarah Scaife Foundation, the John M. Olin Foundation, and the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation.[41] In 2011, the Institute received $25,000 from the Charles G. Koch Foundation.[14] The Charles Koch Foundation states that the contribution was "$25,000 to the Heartland Institute in 2011 for research in healthcare, not climate change, and this was the first and only donation the Foundation made to the institute in more than a decade".[42]

Oil and gas companies have contributed to the Heartland Institute, including over $600,000 from ExxonMobil between 1998 and 2005.[43] Greenpeace reported that Heartland received almost $800,000 from ExxonMobil.

In February 2012 environmentalist scientist and president of the Pacific Institute, Peter Gleick, obtained internal Heartland Institute documents and divulged them, together with an additional document he later claimed to have received from an unknown source, to public websites.[48] The documents contained the 2012 Heartland budget, a fundraising plan and board materials.[49] The documents disclosed the names of a number of donors to the institute including the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation, tobacco companies Altria and Reynolds American, drug firms GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer and Eli Lilly, Microsoft, liquor companies, and an anonymous donor who had given $13 million over the past five years.[50][5] Some of the documents also contained details of payments to climate skeptics and financial support to skeptics' research programs, namely the founder of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change Craig Idso ($11,600 per month).

Remember Idso - The big-coal guy?

Again: These are not scientists views you're reading. These are paid lobbyists and propaganda artists for big-oil and big-coal.
These are the same people that published false reports for the benefit of the tobacco industry.

You're being a pawn! You're being played as a sucker! Quit reading that crap from people who are trying to sway your opinion with lies for their financial benefit.

You can't say it hasn't been explained to you at this point.
Bored

Dahlonega, GA

#8320 Apr 30, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
Climate change alarmists love to talk about the existence of a scientific "consensus" that global warming -oh, excuse me - climate change is man made. A whole lot of that can be blamed on what happens when you dare to question the dogma that must be adhered to in both academia and even in the media. Anybody remember when The Weather Channel's Heidi Cullen called for the American Meteorological Society to revoke certification of any broadcast meteorologist who did not believe in man made climate change? That is tantamount to having to sign an article of faith before you can work. And it became very common to equate man made climate change skeptics to Holocaust deniers - truly reprehensible.
But that same attitude is prevalent in our universities and it takes some very brave people to stand up to that kind of pressure when it is easier just to stay silent - and not risk losing either your position or your grant money.
Kind of like some on here who keep claiming that those of us who are skeptical of MMCC don't believe in science and believe the Earth is only 6,000 years old - funny thing though - no one has made either of those claims - surprise, surprise. Gotta love those straw men.
And there are even some that have gone so far as to call for the arrest of skeptics and/or "Nuremberg style trials" - Is that the extreme fringe, of course, but it shows the levels some are willing to go to. The following links might be of interest to some and the links themselves provide other links to follow. Unfortunately, not all the links are still valid for some reason, but most are.
http://www.epw.senate.gov/public/...
http://www.epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm...
http://www.epw.senate.gov/fact.cfm...
http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php...


Dam, I believe one of those quotes were from IO. I swear it sounds just like him.
ChicknButt

Decatur, GA

#8322 Apr 30, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
And just to show how the knee jerk reaction now is that EVERYTHING must be connected to global warming, let's turn to CNN's Deb Feyerick's interview with Bill Nye about the close pass of a large asteroid in February.
Feyerick: "Talk about something else that's falling from the sky and that is an asteroid....Is this an effect of, perhaps, of global warming or is this just some meteoric occasion?"
http://theothermccain.com/2013/02/10/cnn-anch...
In this case you've unearthed a single bubble-headed news reporter saying something stupid about Global Warming. What possible conclusions can we draw from this?

1. Global Warming is FAKE!
2. All Women are Global Warming Alarmists
3. Some reporters sometimes say stupid things on live TV.

Logic says we're going to have to with Option 3.
golds

Warrior, AL

#8323 Apr 30, 2013
big news wrote:
republican
yes
Informed Opinion

Lehigh Acres, FL

#8324 Apr 30, 2013
ChicknButt wrote:
<quoted text>It's an opinion piece. With language like:

"Global warming alarmists, desperate to restore the shattered remains of their fictitious global warming consensus, spent the last week in overdrive expressing outrage and attacking the scientists participating in the survey."

Do you think his opinion is a little biased?

The OPINION piece is written by James Taylor. He's heavily involved with the Heartland Institute whom we've already covered.
They receive their funding from "The Heartland Institute does not disclose its funding sources. According to its brochures, Heartland according to reports of a leaked fundraising plan."

A SINGLE ANONYMOUS DONOR gave them 4.6 MILLION. Nobody gives away 4.6 million unless they have an interest at stake. Maybe people like ones below:

MediaTransparency reported that Heartland received funding from politically conservative foundations such as the Castle Rock more than a decade".[42]

Oil and gas companies have contributed to the Heartland Institute, including over $600,000 from ExxonMobil between 1998 and 2005.[43] Greenpeace reported that Heartland received almost $800,000 from ExxonMobil.

In February 2012 environmentalist scientist and president of the Pacific Institute, Peter Gleick, documents also contained details of payments to climate skeptics and financial support to skeptics' research programs, namely the founder of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change Craig Idso ($11,600 per month).

Remember Idso - The big-coal guy?

Again: These are not scientists views you're reading. These are paid lobbyists and propaganda artists for big-oil and big-coal.
These are the same people that published false reports for the benefit of the tobacco industry.

You're being a pawn! You're being played as a sucker! Quit reading that crap from people who are trying to sway your opinion with lies for their financial benefit.

You can't say it hasn't been explained to you at this point.
Great post.

These Right Wing Wackos, even as their corporate masters and the uberrich financially and environmentally rape the country, are so anxious to identify with their masters, that they have to accept anything they are told to believe.

It reminds me of when management would negotiate with our police union, always explaining that it would be good if the salary distribution made the chief rich, at the officers' expense, because, after all, anyone could get to be chief.

Scary enough, many otherwise rational officers actually believed that of hundreds of officers, they were destined to be chief, and so screw their fellow officers, it's every man for himself.

These guys would sell their fellow officers our in a heartbeat to get ahead - what irony it was when management sold them out - as inevitably happened - nobody likes scabs- then, like Right Wingers do today, they came running to the rest of us for protection.

Yep, Right Wingers, its smart to put your faith in Goldman Sachs, G.E., Walmart, Exxon Mobil, British Pet., Pfizer, Hedge Function managers, and their hired mouth pieces, after all, they've proven how much they care about the little guy.

Yep, we should sell them yellow armbands with KAPO stenciled in black - after all, what "Libtard" doesn't believe that "work shall set you free".

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#8325 Apr 30, 2013
ChicknButt wrote:
<quoted text>
In this case you've unearthed a single bubble-headed news reporter saying something stupid about Global Warming. What possible conclusions can we draw from this?
1. Global Warming is FAKE!
2. All Women are Global Warming Alarmists
3. Some reporters sometimes say stupid things on live TV.
Logic says we're going to have to with Option 3.
In a study by William Trenchant of Federal Elections Commission records for donations by journalists, he found that 235 of 255 studied sent donations to Democrat candidates. Bill Dedman of MSNBC conducted a similar study that found that 125 of 143 journalists he studied donated money to Democrat candidates. Given that it can be reasonably inferred that 87-92% of journalists are Democrat, I would say your statement #3 that "Some reporters sometimes say stupid things on live TV." is a virtual certainty. Congratulations.(#1 would be a close second.)

Since: Jul 12

Villa Rica, GA

#8326 Apr 30, 2013
Bored wrote:
<quoted text>
For some reason I'm never able to open any links to forbes.
I just checked the web link and it is good.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#8327 Apr 30, 2013
Informed Opinion wrote:
<quoted text>

Yep, we should sell them yellow armbands with KAPO stenciled in black - a
Every time I think you can't get more vile, you somehow find a way. You are disgusting.

Since: Jul 12

Villa Rica, GA

#8328 Apr 30, 2013
ChicknButt wrote:
<quoted text>
It's an opinion piece. With language like:
"Global warming alarmists, desperate to restore the shattered remains of their fictitious global warming consensus, spent the last week in overdrive expressing outrage and attacking the scientists participating in the survey."
Do you think his opinion is a little biased?
The OPINION piece is written by James Taylor. He's heavily involved with the Heartland Institute whom we've already covered.
They receive their funding from "The Heartland Institute does not disclose its funding sources. According to its brochures, Heartland receives money from approximately 1,600 individuals and organizations, and no single corporate entity donates more than 5% of the operating budget,[38] although the figure for individual donors can be much higher, with a single anonymous donor providing $4.6 million in 2008, and $979,000 in 2011, accounting for 20% of Heartland's overall budget, according to reports of a leaked fundraising plan."
A SINGLE ANONYMOUS DONOR gave them 4.6 MILLION. Nobody gives away 4.6 million unless they have an interest at stake. Maybe people like ones below:
MediaTransparency reported that Heartland received funding from politically conservative foundations such as the Castle Rock Foundation, the Sarah Scaife Foundation, the John M. Olin Foundation, and the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation.[41] In 2011, the Institute received $25,000 from the Charles G. Koch Foundation.[14] The Charles Koch Foundation states that the contribution was "$25,000 to the Heartland Institute in 2011 for research in healthcare, not climate change, and this was the first and only donation the Foundation made to the institute in more than a decade".[42]
Oil and gas companies have contributed to the Heartland Institute, including over $600,000 from ExxonMobil between 1998 and 2005.[43] Greenpeace reported that Heartland received almost $800,000 from ExxonMobil.
In February 2012 environmentalist scientist and president of the Pacific Institute, Peter Gleick, obtained internal Heartland Institute documents and divulged them, together with an additional document he later claimed to have received from an unknown source, to public websites.[48] The documents contained the 2012 Heartland budget, a fundraising plan and board materials.[49] The documents disclosed the names of a number of donors to the institute including the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation, tobacco companies Altria and Reynolds American, drug firms GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer and Eli Lilly,
Remember Idso - The big-coal guy?
Of course the article is biased. Since anything that doesn't agree with you must be biased and written by someone from some organization that you don't approve of. You won't even give a nod of approval to the Russian scientist that say the earths temperature hasn't risen in 12 years and that it is getting colder. Now that one really puzzles me. Just because people that don't go along with the global warming crowd are being crucified, just as you and every liberal on here have done me. Who gives a damn who wrote it? I could say the same thing about every piece of propaganda that you send to me. The idea is government sponsored studies being paid for by the government and driven by government politics. If you want to keep your job then you had better march in step with the rest of you so called academic elitist. So don't give me any more arguments about it. Even the article explains in it that the global warming crowd use the same excuses and the same tactics that you are using at this moment. All of you must have been taught to say and do the same things to everyone that doesn't think or believe as you. The article looked as if they knew you and had been reading all of your post. After reading the article it became clear that you have been tutored. We must say and think as you do or we will be put out in the cold.The article nailed you dead on didn't it? LOL

Since: Jul 12

Villa Rica, GA

#8329 Apr 30, 2013
ChicknButt wrote:
<quoted text>
It's an opinion piece. With language like:
"Global warming alarmists, desperate to restore the shattered remains of their fictitious global warming consensus, spent the last week in overdrive expressing outrage and attacking the scientists participating in the survey."
Do you think his opinion is a little biased?
The OPINION piece is written by James Taylor. He's heavily involved with the Heartland Institute whom we've already covered.
They receive their funding from "The Heartland Institute does not disclose its funding sources. According to its brochures, Heartland receives money from approximately 1,600 individuals and organizations, and no single corporate entity donates more than 5% of the operating budget,[38] although the figure for individual donors can be much higher, with a single anonymous donor providing $4.6 million in 2008, and $979,000 in 2011, accounting for 20% of Heartland's overall budget, according to reports of a leaked fundraising plan."
A SINGLE ANONYMOUS DONOR gave them 4.6 MILLION. Nobody gives away 4.6 million unless they have an interest at stake. Maybe people like ones below:
MediaTransparency reported that Heartland received funding from politically conservative foundations such as the Castle Rock Foundation, the Sarah Scaife Foundation, the John M. Olin Foundation, and the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation.[41] In 2011, the Institute received $25,000 from the Charles G. Koch Foundation.[14] The Charles Koch Foundation states that the contribution was "$25,000 to the Heartland Institute in 2011 for research in healthcare, not climate change, and this was the first and only donation the Foundation made to the institute in more than a decade".[42]
Oil and gas companies have contributed to the Heartland Institute, including over $600,000 from ExxonMobil between 1998 and 2005.[43] Greenpeace reported that Heartland received almost $800,000 from ExxonMobil.
In February 2012 environmentalist scientist and president of the Pacific Institute, Peter Gleick, obtained internal Heartland Institute documents and divulged them, together with an additional document he later claimed to have received from an unknown source, to public websites.[48] The documents contained the 2012 Heartland budget, a fundraising plan and board materials.[49] The documents disclosed the names of a number of donors to the institute including the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation, tobacco companies Altria and Reynolds American, drug firms GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer and Eli Lilly, Microsoft, liquor companies, and an anonymous donor who had given $13 million over the past five years.[50][5] Some of the documents also contained details of payments to climate skeptics and financial support to skeptics' research programs, namely the founder of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change Craig Idso ($11,600 per month).
Remember Idso - The big-coal guy?
Again: These are not scientists views you're reading. These are paid lobbyists and propaganda artists for big-oil and big-coal.
These are the same people that published false reports for the benefit of the tobacco industry.
You're being a pawn! You're being played as a sucker! Quit reading that crap from people who are trying to sway your opinion with lies for their financial benefit.
You can't say it hasn't been explained to you at this point.
I guess I am not to say anymore, as I just posted a quite good and lengthy reply to have it zapped into la,la land. So I quit

Since: Jul 12

Villa Rica, GA

#8330 Apr 30, 2013
Well I'll be darn there it is. It did finally post. I guess I am getting gun shy. Egg on my face I guess. My apologies to Topix.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#8331 Apr 30, 2013
Bigdave1 wrote:
Well I'll be darn there it is. It did finally post. I guess I am getting gun shy. Egg on my face I guess. My apologies to Topix.
It did that to me in the last day or so. Didn't post for at least 5 minutes, so I reposted only to then have both post. Annoying.
ChicknButt

Douglasville, GA

#8332 Apr 30, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
In a study by William Trenchant of Federal Elections Commission records for donations by journalists, he found that 235 of 255 studied sent donations to Democrat candidates. Bill Dedman of MSNBC conducted a similar study that found that 125 of 143 journalists he studied donated money to Democrat candidates. Given that it can be reasonably inferred that 87-92% of journalists are Democrat, I would say your statement #3 that "Some reporters sometimes say stupid things on live TV." is a virtual certainty. Congratulations.(#1 would be a close second.)
And you like to throw the word "strawman" around?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Jesup Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
ChristineBailey 13 hr icu 4
joseph rawlins (Feb '10) Jan 21 Rawlins 6
Teacher Jan 18 Belle 1
Anyone want a free dog? (Jan '12) Jan 10 Joe 6
The Billy Crowder Case (Mar '12) Jan 9 boopdude 92
Melanie Robinson Dec '14 CathyJo 2
Muslim Compound near Odum? (May '07) Dec '14 Local Hunter 70
Jesup Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Jesup People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 8:15 am PST

ESPN 8:15AM
Jaguars hire Greg Olson as O-coordinator
Bleacher Report10:45 AM
Olson an Uninspiring Choice for OC, Bortles' Future
NFL11:39 AM
Cosell: Jags 'probably need to start over' with Bortles
Bleacher Report 3:54 PM
2015 Falcons Draft Pick Profile: WR Phillip Dorsett
Bleacher Report 8:55 PM
Falcons Potential Draft Pick: LB Denzel Perryman