Inauguration Highlights

[Modbert]

I thought it was ironic that he stumbled through his oath...that was priceless.

Roberts already took the blame for that one. I agree with what Midcan said though.

 

[jreeves]

Just got back from the event itself. Freezing and poorly managed in terms of coordinating and facilitating the movement of millions of people (not to mention zero security), but the speech was good and the moment, however full of orchestrated, expensive pageantry was eventful and memorable.

FYI, it was actually, Chief Justice Roberts was the one who stumbled through the oath. Obama had it memorized, and eyed Roberts when he read it incorrectly... hence the "stumble."

Pretty graceful and respectful of Obama if you ask me to laugh it off that way when someone else's mistake made him look bad at one of the most significant and viewed moments of his new presidency.

Pretty typical and ignorant of those who didn't know that Roberts misspoke to make it seem like an Obama blunder, or representative of a great orator's supposed poor speaking skills.

Rick Warren was still a dodgy choice, particularly given the short thrift and disrespectful treatment of the gay pastor at the Inaugural concert Sunday, but the tone of the speech was better than I expected from an incomping president I view with very cautious, wary, and reserved optimism.

Like I have said on this board recently, the Democrats will become the party of excuses. Roberts stumbled....Bush left us a horrible economy.....etc...

 

[frazzledgear]

Why?

Why? You are joking, right? The ONE politician who has decided to invest his entire career and political future on trying to convince the world that not only is the world experiencing global WARMING, but that it is entirely the fault of human activity? ROFLMAO! That shot of Gore blowing on his hands to warm them up was absolutely priceless. Hope he uses it at the next lecture he gives. Global warming activists try to get around the fact the temperatures aren't actually doing what they so dramatically predicted and the fact that we are experiencing some historic COLD temperatures -as "proof" that global warming is happening even sooner and more dramatically than even they predicted. Its all bullshit.

It isn't called the "theory of global getting warmer in some spots and a lot colder in other spots and let's all pretend the temperatures don't fluctuate over a wide range every few years just like it always does every decade or so", is it? Its called GLOBAL warming. As in "the entire earth". LOL

I enjoy nothing more than some global warming whacko trying to insist that not only can such trends be determined on the basis of just a few years when it requires hundreds -but that the theory of global warming actually predicts COLDER temperatures when it does no such thing. The theory predicts more temperate and UNIFORM temperatures on a global basis -which isn't occurring. Nothing contributes to human suffering more than POLITICIANS who have invested their careers in the current fad of some unproven scientific THEORY. But for some reason, this is a lesson of history the left refuses to learn.

 

[Chris]

Why? You are joking, right? The ONE politician who has decided to invest his entire career and political future on trying to convince the world that not only is the world experiencing global WARMING, but that it is entirely the fault of human activity? ROFLMAO! That shot of Gore blowing on his hands to warm them up was absolutely priceless. Hope he uses it at the next lecture he gives. Global warming activists try to get around the fact the temperatures aren't actually doing what they so dramatically predicted and the fact that we are experiencing some historic COLD temperatures -as "proof" that global warming is happening even sooner and more dramatically than even they predicted. Its all bullshit.

It isn't called the "theory of global getting warmer in some spots and a lot colder in other spots and let's all pretend the temperatures don't fluctuate over a wide range every few years just like it always does every decade or so", is it? Its called GLOBAL warming. As in "the entire earth". LOL

I enjoy nothing more than some global warming whacko trying to insist that not only can such trends be determined on the basis of just a few years when it requires hundreds -but that the theory of global warming actually predicts COLDER temperatures when it does no such thing. The theory predicts more temperate and UNIFORM temperatures on a global basis -which isn't occurring. Nothing contributes to human suffering more than POLITICIANS who have invested their careers in the current fad of some unproven scientific THEORY. But for some reason, this is a lesson of history the left refuses to learn.

Here's a lesson for you....

Data @ NASA GISS: GISS Surface Temperature Analysis: 2007 Summation

 

[frazzledgear]

Here's a lesson for you....

Data @ NASA GISS: GISS Surface Temperature Analysis: 2007 Summation

And here are some for you:

The Myth Of Global Warming

Global Warming Myths and Facts - Global Warming - Environmental Defense Fund

Top 10 'Global-Warming' Myths - HUMAN EVENTS

Washington Times - Global-warming myth

I would also refer you to Michael Crichton's book "State of Fear" -which while the plot itself is a work of fiction, relies on very real documented scientific FACTS which are all listed. Some real eye opening indisputable scientific facts in fact.

I have some really important news for you -something I know liberals have a really hard time dealing with. But scientific theories are NOT a religion. I am not required to worship at the altar of UNPROVEN scientific theories. Even when that theory predicts DIRE consequences in the future. And THIS theory was, has and CONTINUES to be challenged on all sorts of fronts by SCIENTISTS -from the premise it exists at all to the premise that it is due to human activity to the premise that changing human activity can possibly change the outcome.

I know liberals just LOVE scientific theories and insist they are "proven facts" by simply being proposed by some scientist. Especially the ones that blame human beings in some way. But this is how science works and scientific truths are actually discovered. A theory is offered and other scientists try to prove it is wrong. Only after scientists have been unable to prove it wrong on every conceivable front over the course of MANY, MANY years it is even possible to be considered a POSSIBLE scientific truth. The theory of evolution is still called a THEORY because scientists have presented hard evidence and scientific facts that dispute and contradict some of the major premises of this THEORY. The theory of evolution isn't a scientific "fact" either and because of those scientific facts that contradict the very foundations and premises of the theory -it never will be. But let's pretend a theory that has existed less than a quarter as long -IS? In spite of the fact there is already plenty of legitimate research that contradicts this theory as well? LOL

In spite of Al Gore chanting that this is "settled science" -it is anything BUT. A MAJOR Gore lie. While you whackos chant about Bush deliberately lying to people when he simply repeated the known intelligence -THIS one is a deliberate lie. A lie that will eventually and inevitably be discovered as long as other scientists are ALLOWED to challenge any aspect of this theory -so the politically invested politicians demand no scientists be allowed to challenge it without suffering greatly for doing so.

Liberal politicians are demanding that all further challenges and research questioning THIS theory - be HALTED. People like Gore and Pelosi -who aren't scientists by any stretch of the imagination -yet DEMANDING that any scientist, any group or company that dares finance any scientific challenge to this theory on ANY level - suffer severe financial harm on an international basis. Not just in this country but EVERYWHERE in the world. How can anyone who believes that politics should never dictate science actually support that? But LIBERALS do.

Yet this is actually NO different from the beliefs of old when the Catholic Church once excommunicated and ruined the reputation of any scientist who did not accept the theory the earth was flat as a "scientific truth". Hasn't the species learned YET that politics should NEVER determine what is and is not scientific "truth"? Science has only moved forward and resulted in increases in human knowledge BECAUSE scientists challenged the politicians and blindly accepted beliefs of the day. Liberals are simply the new "flat earth" thinkers -who demand that any who don't subscribe to their new "religion" be excommunicated and punished!

The THEORY of global warming is just that -a THEORY. Unproven. Not a scientific fact by any stretch of the imagination. Or it wouldn't be called a THEORY. If it were an accepted scientific fact among scientists themselves -it would be called a scientific FACT. But it ISN'T a scientific fact for some really, really important reasons. The science and research -just aren't showing what the political activists insists are true, unchallengable, indisputable facts after all. As the years go by, that becomes only more evident as they continually adjust their predictions -ALWAYS in the downward and less dire direction. Not once the other way -gee I wonder why they keep having to do that when this is "settled science". That isn't a problem for scientists because most are not politically invested in the outcome here except those trying to protect their only source of income -government grants. But it sure is a problem for politicians and political activists who hitched their wagon to this theory and will NOT tolerate or contemplate the mere idea that perhaps they jumped the starting gun -much less engaged in unethical and uncalled for drama queen hysterics. Those who have politically invested themselves into insisting a scientific theory is a proven indisputable scientific FACT -have everything to lose. Hence the demand to worship at their altar.

The only thing accomplished by those demanding we all worship at the altar of whatever the new scientific theory d'jour they have personally adopted -is an increase in human suffering. Too often that has been on a massive scale. And it isn't just the US that has paid the price for that. So did 6 MILLION Jews at the hands of Nazi Germany who insisted the theory of eugenics was scientific "truth". So did the Soviets with their unquestioning belief in a scientific theory about how to increase the yield in their wheat crops. And some Russians STILL insist it is "proven scientific fact" in spite of the indisputable and colossal FAILURE of that theory!

It is a FACT -that scientists get it wrong on average 2000 times before getting something even partially correct. But liberals are the worst for pretending that some scientist got it 100% correct the very first time out of the gate. Time and again. Like sure -that is how scientific discoveries have always worked. LOL But in THIS case, they have a real problem and one that will not be avoidable for very much longer.

Surface temperatures taken by what ALL scientists agree is THE most accurate means -show that some areas of the globe are slightly cooler than in previous years and some areas of the globe are slightly warmer than in previous years -but that NEITHER are statistically significant. ONLY by taking surface with THE most inaccurate method known -can global warming enthusiasts even pretend this theory has been supported by science. But it hasn't. And they can't even offer a reason for relying on THE most inaccurate means of taking surface temperatures except that their religion requires it -or their religion is dead. Just as with the "flat earth" demanders of the past got the bulk of scientists to fall in line with their threats -so have many scientists today -who know their grants are going to be too often decided by those who are politically invested in this theory and seeing the vicious attacks on those who challenge any aspect of theory -and will not challenge it. That isn't science then -its POLITICS.

So just how many more years before global warming enthusiasts finally admit the truth here? And I say "enthusiasts" because these are people who WANT the earth to be getting warmer -but ONLY if it is the "fault" of human activity. Otherwise, they aren't interested at all. The reason they NEED it to be the fault of humans is another post -but their religion requires that human beings be blamed.

 

[jreeves]

Here's a lesson for you....

Data @ NASA GISS: GISS Surface Temperature Analysis: 2007 Summation

More lessons.....
Global Warming Hoax: News / Comments / More Than 650 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims

“I am a skeptic…Global warming has become a new religion.” - Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever.

“Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly….As a scientist I remain skeptical. “The main basis of the claim that man’s release of greenhouse gases is the cause of the warming is based almost entirely upon climate models. We all know the frailty of models concerning the air-surface system” - Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a PhD in meteorology, and formerly of NASA, who has authored more than 190 studies and has been called “among the most preeminent scientists of the last 100 years.”

Warming fears are the “worst scientific scandal in the history…When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.” - UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD environmental physical chemist

“The IPCC has actually become a closed circuit; it doesn’t listen to others. It doesn’t have open minds… I am really amazed that the Nobel Peace Prize has been given on scientifically incorrect conclusions by people who are not geologists,” - Indian geologist Dr. Arun D. Ahluwalia at Punjab University and a board member of the UN-supported International Year of the Planet

“So far, real measurements give no ground for concern about a catastrophic future warming.” - Scientist Dr. Jarl R. Ahlbeck, a chemical engineer at Abo Akademi University in Finland, author of 200 scientific publications and former Greenpeace member.

“Anyone who claims that the debate is over and the conclusions are firm has a fundamentally unscientific approach to one of the most momentous issues of our time.” - Solar physicist Dr. Pal Brekke, senior advisor to the Norwegian Space Centre in Oslo. Brekke has published more than 40 peer-reviewed scientific articles on the sun and solar interaction with the Earth.

“It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of scientists who don’t buy into anthropogenic global warming.” - U.S Government Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane Research Division of NOAA.

“Even doubling or tripling the amount of carbon dioxide will virtually have little impact, as water vapour and water condensed on particles as clouds dominate the worldwide scene and always will.” – . Geoffrey G. Duffy, a professor in the Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering of the University of Auckland, NZ.

“After reading [UN IPCC chairman] Pachauri's asinine comment [comparing skeptics to] Flat Earthers, it's hard to remain quiet.” - Climate statistician Dr. William M. Briggs, who specializes in the statistics of forecast evaluation, serves on the American Meteorological Society's Probability and Statistics Committee and is an Associate Editor of Monthly Weather Review.

Global Warming gets the Cold Freeze
Arctic Ice Melt has Reversed

One of the most dramatic results of the record cold over much of the planet is the reversal of the much-reported melt of the icebergs in the Arctic Ocean. Last autumn the world was alarmed to hear from certain climatologists that the ice in the Arctic had melted to its "lowest levels on record.” What was carefully omitted from those scare stories was the fact that those records only date back as far as 1972, and that there is anthropological and geological evidence of much greater melts in the past.

Now, as a result of the recent record cold weather, the ice is back. According to Gilles Langis, a senior forecaster with the Canadian Ice Service in Ottawa, the Arctic winter has been so severe the ice has not only recovered, it is actually 10 to 20 cm thicker in many places than at this time last year.

What few people know and what the Global Warming lobby seems at pains to keep known is the fact that there is considerable seasonal variation in how much pack ice of the Arctic ice pack covers the Arctic Ocean. Much of the ocean is also covered in snow for about 10 months of the year. The maximum snow cover is in March or April — about 20 to 50 centimeters over the frozen ocean. The thickness is not one of the universal constants, never was.

Admit flawed Climate Model

There is also admission by several intellectually honest climatologists that their predictive models are flawed. Robert Toggweiler of the Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory at Princeton University and Joellen Russell, assistant professor of biogeochemical dynamics at the University of Arizona, two very prominent climate modellers, recently admitted that the computer models that show polar ice-melt cooling the oceans, stopping the circulation of warm equatorial water to northern latitudes and triggering another Ice Age (as in the fictional movie The Day After Tomorrow) are wrong. In a recent interview Russell said, “It's not ice melt, but rather wind circulation that drives ocean currents northward from the tropics. Climate models until now have not properly accounted for the wind's effects on ocean circulation, so researchers have compensated by over-emphasizing the role of man-made warming on polar ice melt.” Now that’s very interesting.

 

[frazzledgear]

Roberts already took the blame for that one. I agree with what Midcan said though.

Obama stumbling through the oath showed nothing except that these are real human beings involved in government after all -people who make simple fumbles and slips of the tongue and not the gods their ideological supporters hold them out to be. Such mistakes are not a measure of a person's intelligence and abilities whatsoever. I actually thought it was endearing when Obama stumbled over the oath since I could easily imagine stumbling through an oath of that historic magnitude myself.

BTW -it can't be Robert's fault since the person being sworn in is not supposed to repeat the words being said by the Justice -until that Justice stops speaking.

 

[Chris]

The Washington Times?

Quoting the Moonie newspaper?

The Rev. Moon believes he is the Second Coming of Christ.

 

[Chris]

Global warming is not a theory. CO2 in the atmosphere causes the earth to retain heat. We have increased the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere by 40% in the last 200 years. So we have warmed the earth. The only question is, how much?

We are at the down part of the solar cycle and the Southern Oscillation. As these pick up over the next few years, we will see additonal warmups. Melting glaciers and ice caps don't lie. Only people lie.

 

[Luissa]

Obama stumbling through the oath showed nothing except that these are real human beings involved in government after all -people who make simple fumbles and slips of the tongue and not the gods their ideological supporters hold them out to be. Such mistakes are not a measure of a person's intelligence and abilities whatsoever. I actually thought it was endearing when Obama stumbled over the oath since I could easily imagine stumbling through an oath of that historic magnitude myself.

BTW -it can't be Robert's fault since the person being sworn in is not supposed to repeat the words being said by the Justice -until that Justice stops speaking.

I would have to agree with the stumbling part making him look human! If I had to get up in front of that many people I would do more then stumble on my words.The guy has probably never been so nervous in his life.

 

[bk1983]

It seems as though Roberts delivered it fine. It was Obama who didn't have a clue....Ironic considering all the liberal acid that was spewed toward Bush over the last eight years regarding his speaking skills.

Uhh, it was Roberts who screwed up, hence the pause from Obama.

This is what Roberts said, “execute the office of president to the United States faithfully,”

this is what the oath actually says “faithfully execute the office of president of the United States”

That is why Obama paused and grinned, apparently a few idiots took it upon themselves to blame Obama, before even realizing what really happened.

 

[jreeves]

Uhh, it was Roberts who screwed up, hence the pause from Obama.

This is what Roberts said, “execute the office of president to the United States faithfully,”

this is what the oath actually says “faithfully execute the office of president of the United States”

That is why Obama paused and grinned, apparently a few idiots took it upon themselves to blame Obama, before even realizing what really happened.

Poor Obama, bumbled through the oath due to Roberts. I am sure that he had no prep.....
This is only one of many bumbles he has made...but I am sure you have excuses for the numerous other bumbles as well right?

 

[jreeves]

Global warming is not a theory. CO2 in the atmosphere causes the earth to retain heat. We have increased the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere by 40% in the last 200 years. So we have warmed the earth. The only question is, how much?

We are at the down part of the solar cycle and the Southern Oscillation. As these pick up over the next few years, we will see additonal warmups. Melting glaciers and ice caps don't lie. Only people lie.

Thicker ice cover doesn't lie....10 to 20 cm thicker....

 

[bk1983]

Poor Obama, bumbled through the oath due to Roberts. I am sure that he had no prep.....
This is only one of many bumbles he has made...but I am sure you have excuses for the numerous other bumbles as well right?

It is not excuses, you claimed Roberts delivered it fine. Which in fact is a complete lie, he fumbled clearly.. Read the oath, then read what Roberts said, of course I know you will not do this, as it interferes with your partisan rant.. Carry on..

 

[DiveCon]

It is not excuses, you claimed Roberts delivered it fine. Which in fact is a complete lie, he fumbled clearly.. Read the oath, then read what Roberts said, of course I know you will not do this, as it interferes with your partisan rant.. Carry on..

uh, he is a democrat

 

[bk1983]

uh, he is a democrat

As usual, what is the point of your post?

 

[QUENTIN]

Poor Obama, bumbled through the oath due to Roberts. I am sure that he had no prep.....
This is only one of many bumbles he has made...but I am sure you have excuses for the numerous other bumbles as well right?

You're actually a fucking idiot.

So is anyone else who tries to pass off this ignorant bullshit that it was in any way a stumble, bumble, or mistake by Obama.

Obama had been prepped, he had the oath memorized, he'd been over it many times. Robert MISREAD THE OATH, this is provably true. The Oath and what Roberts said differ, what Roberts said makes less sense. Not something you'd want to say as an OATH. Obama eyed Roberts and paused and went over the line hesitantly because he is supposed to repeat what Roberts says, but not repeat a line that Roberts mis-says.

It is no big deal at all, it was a simple, minor mistake by Roberts in a high stress, highly viewed moment. But the "blame" is solely on Roberts, not Obama, who simply recognized that Roberts stumbled and tried to ease over it with stride and say the correct line in his swearing in.

 

[DiveCon]

As usual, what is the point of your post?

how is he being a partisan, he is a democrat, being critical of a democrat


how is it you dont understand the simple meaning os "partisan"?

 

[bk1983]

how is he being a partisan, he is a democrat, being critical of a democrat


how is it you dont understand the simple meaning os "partisan"?

Regardless of what party he is, picking at something so stupid, is well stupid. Anybody who was actually listening, and had a clue could tell Roberts fumbled, it is no big deal. But I don't understand why anybody would try and make it out to be something of relevancy.

I see the fat fingers got to you again, get off the computer stumpy..

 

[bk1983]

how is he being a partisan, he is a democrat, being critical of a democrat


how is it you dont understand the simple meaning os "partisan"?

How is it you don't understand the simple meaning? Partisan applies not only to political parties, but also a cause,person,or ideas. So just because he is a Democrat and criticizing Obama, doesn't make him free from being a partisan hack.