Gore Refuses to take The Pledge

[maineman]

It seems whenever I post articles that blows your liberal talking points out of the water - you have a cow

you post articles that argue against the human influence on global warming. Do you HONESTLY think that I could not inundate this thread with articles that argue FOR that influence?


We could spend all day cutting and pasting articles containing other people's words or we could discuss the issue with one another using our own words.

Please stop fighting like the tarbaby.

I am asking nicely.

 

[red states rule]

you post articles that argue against the human influence on global warming. Do you HONESTLY think that I could not inundate this thread with articles that argue FOR that influence?


We could spend all day cutting and pasting articles containing other people's words or we could discuss the issue with one another using our own words.

Please stop fighting like the tarbaby.

I am asking nicely.

Anything that goes against your predetermined views you dismiss

Please make sure you are using only one sheet of toilet paper like a good little liberal

 

[maineman]

Anything that goes against your predetermined views you dismiss

Please make sure you are using only one sheet of toilet paper like a good little liberal

I do not DISMISS anything. I fully understand that there exists differing opinions about global warming. I would love to discuss them with you. I am trying to establish a basic level of facts that we can agree on. I started by asking you if you understood that ocean currents impact the climate in areas away from the tropics. You don't want to discuss anything - BECAUSE YOU CAN'T. You can't string two sentences together of your own creation. YOu can't argue any intellectual issue with your own words because you have a intelllectual deficit. If you think that is a harsh and inaccurate assessment, all you have to do to prove me wrong is to start conversing with me about global warming.....or troop surges.... or Iranian support for Al Qaeda....or any of the other myriad topics I have tried to talk with you about. The ball is in YOUR court. I have offered to carry on a civil discussion with you on any and every issue..... all you have to do is take me up on it.

 

[red states rule]

I do not DISMISS anything. I fully understand that there exists differing opinions about global warming. I would love to discuss them with you. I am trying to establish a basic level of facts that we can agree on. I started by asking you if you understood that ocean currents impact the climate in areas away from the tropics. You don't want to discuss anything - BECAUSE YOU CAN'T. You can't string two sentences together of your own creation. YOu can't argue any intellectual issue with your own words because you have a intelllectual deficit. If you think that is a harsh and inaccurate assessment, all you have to do to prove me wrong is to start conversing with me about global warming.....or troop surges.... or Iranian support for Al Qaeda....or any of the other myriad topics I have tried to talk with you about. The ball is in YOUR court. I have offered to carry on a civil discussion with you on any and every issue..... all you have to do is take me up on it.

The myth about global warming is falling apart and the envro wackos are once again changing their talking points

Here it is May and it is cold this morning and to drop into the 30's tonight

 

[maineman]

The myth about global warming is falling apart and the envro wackos are once again changing their talking points

Here it is May and it is cold this morning and to drop into the 30's tonight

so you really have no desire to discuss this issue? you really have no desire to debate global warming with me? Is that right?

 

[red states rule]

so you really have no desire to discuss this issue? you really have no desire to debate global warming with me? Is that right?

I knew facts would have this effect on you

I am sorry




Ok...... I am not sorry

 

[maineman]

I knew facts would have this effect on you

I am sorry




Ok...... I am not sorry

there are many different theories and opinions about global warming. I would love to discuss them with you but you refuse. My patience is wearing thin.

 

[red states rule]

there are many different theories and opinions about global warming. I would love to discuss them with you but you refuse. My patience is wearing thin.

What patience?

You have patience only with those who agree with you

 

[maineman]

What patience?

You have patience only with those who agree with you

that is not so...I have been on this thread with you for weeks now trying to get you to discuss things with me.

 

[red states rule]

that is not so...I have been on this thread with you for weeks now trying to get you to discuss things with me.

and I have blown your sorry ass out of the water

 

[maineman]

and I have blown your sorry ass out of the water

no...you have posted articles which argue against human acceleration of global warming. so what? do you honestly think that I could not inundate this thread with articles that argued for that very same thing?

I am asking YOU to use YOUR words and try to carry on an intelligent conversation with me about the subject, but you are clearly unwilling and, it would appear, incapable of doing so.

 

[red states rule]

no...you have posted articles which argue against human acceleration of global warming. so what? do you honestly think that I could not inundate this thread with articles that argued for that very same thing?

I am asking YOU to use YOUR words and try to carry on an intelligent conversation with me about the subject, but you are clearly unwilling and, it would appear, incapable of doing so.

To you, an intelligent conversation is where your opponet agrees with you

Much like the reporters roundtable on the Sunday talk shows - mostly liberal (perhaps one conservative in the group_ and it sounds like the libs are correct on every issue

Global warming is a myth and it is being exposed for what it is - much like Al has been exposed

 

[red states rule]

Now the latest crime againist the enviroment.............


Supreme Global Warming Derangement: Having Large Families ‘Is an Eco-crime’
Posted by Noel Sheppard on May 6, 2007 - 21:04.
Global warming derangement syndrome has taken a disturbing turn for the worse, as The Sunday Times published an article May 6 stating that parents should only have two children in order to avert climate change.

I kid you not.

The piece, despicably titled “Having Large Families ‘is an Eco-crime,'” unbelievably began:

HAVING large families should be frowned upon as an environmental misdemeanour in the same way as frequent long-haul flights, driving a big car and failing to reuse plastic bags, says a report to be published today by a green think tank.

Amazed? That was only the beginning (emphasis added throughout):

The paper by the Optimum Population Trust (OPT) will say that if couples had two children instead of three they could cut their family’s carbon dioxide output by the equivalent of 620 return flights a year between London and New York.

John Guillebaud, co-chairman of OPT and emeritus professor of family planning at University College London, said: “The effect on the planet of having one child less is an order of magnitude greater than all these other things we might do, such as switching off lights. An extra child is the equivalent of a lot of flights across the planet.

“The greatest thing anyone in Britain could do to help the future of the planet would be to have one less child.”

Forgive me, but this is an extremely irresponsible suggestion for reasons the Times piece diplomatically addressed:

The world’s population is expected to increase by 2.5 billion to 9.2 billion by 2050. Almost all the population growth will take place in developing countries. The population of developed nations is expected to remain unchanged and would have declined but for migration.

The British fertility rate is 1.7. The EU average is 1.5. In some countries, such as France, the government is so concerned it has introduced financial incentives for women to have more than two children.

Despite this, Guillebaud says rich countries should be the most concerned about family size as their children have higher per capita carbon dioxide emissions.

Let me be less diplomatic: this proposal totally ignores the financial realities of countries like Britain, France, Japan, and many others that are facing economic crises if their populations don’t start expanding soon.

To be more specific, as most of these countries have massive entitlement programs, they’re facing huge budget shortfalls in the very near future if the number of citizens paying into the system doesn’t begin to dramatically increase. This is why countries like France have been giving tax incentives for couples to have more children.

As such, if this global warming derangement changes people's reproductive plans, the financial problems of these countries will become a storm surge significantly more devastating than anything soon-to-be-Dr. Al Gore hyped in his schlockumentary “An Inconvenient Truth.”

http://newsbusters.org/node/12564

 

[maineman]

To you, an intelligent conversation is where your opponet agrees with you

Much like the reporters roundtable on the Sunday talk shows - mostly liberal (perhaps one conservative in the group_ and it sounds like the libs are correct on every issue

Global warming is a myth and it is being exposed for what it is - much like Al has been exposed

you have no basis to say what I think an intelligent conversation is...you have never had one with me. Are you suggesting that global warming does not have a significant amount of scientific evidence to support it, or is the only scientific evidence you consider that which supports your case?

 

[red states rule]

you have no basis to say what I think an intelligent conversation is...you have never had one with me. Are you suggesting that global warming does not have a significant amount of scientific evidence to support it, or is the only scientific evidence you consider that which supports your case?

There is no scientific concensus on global warming

Only that is is overblown by the kook left

 

[maineman]

There is no scientific concensus on global warming

Only that is is overblown by the kook left

there is no scientific consensus that global warming is a hoax either...which is why we could have a discussion about it.

 

[red states rule]

there is no scientific consensus that global warming is a hoax either...which is why we could have a discussion about it.

Much more has come out to disprove it then prove it

 

[maineman]

Much more has come out to disprove it then prove it

that is your opinion... but clearly, there is no overwhelming consensus either way...so it is a subject we could discuss.... if you were capable of discussing anything, that is.....

 

[red states rule]

that is your opinion... but clearly, there is no overwhelming consensus either way...so it is a subject we could discuss.... if you were capable of discussing anything, that is.....

Everytime I post anything that disproves the global warming hype from the left - you meltdown

Neat trick as the planet is supposed to be burning up

 

[maineman]

Everytime I post anything that disproves the global warming hype from the left - you meltdown

Neat trick as the planet is supposed to be burning up

I do not meltdown...I am asking you to converse with me and not simply post stuff....I could post stuff too, but would much prefer to read what YOU have to say and respond to it...and have you respond to my statements and questions.