Originally Posted By YourPalEd There is nothing more sickening than a lying republican traitor, demanding anything.
Originally Posted By jonvn "shows you are afraid to answer a direct simple question" No. I answer direct questions all the time. It simply shows I feel responding to you is a waste of time.
Originally Posted By Beaumandy You don't answer any questions that will expose you as being the lightweight you really are. You do it all the time. STPH does the same exact thing when pressed on cetain issues. In fact, you guys are exactly the same. All bluster, no ability to back it up when confronted. Weak.
Originally Posted By BlueDevilSF It takes maturity to know when to simply walk away from a discussion when the other party has his fingers in his ears, saying "Nanny nanny boo boo." It's interesting how you consistently talk about "taking _____ to the woodshed for a smackdown" when it's apparent to everyone (but you, that is) that it's quite the opposite. Face it, Beau, you systematically destroyed virtually all of your credibility over the time you've been here, and it's difficult to take you seriously on anything anymore outside of poker and Disney.
Originally Posted By YourPalEd <<<You don't answer any questions that will expose you as being the lightweight you really are. You do it all the time.>>> Rooster fighting is illegal in america, even if you spend your money, and gamble all the time at the secret rooster fights, your values are that of an enemy creator. You are a hater of life, if you support these values.
Originally Posted By YourPalEd <<<Are you looking for customers on laughing place?>>> Typical republican always motivated by greed, and not further understanding of god.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <I remember something about "chimney rock". I forget what state its in.> Western Nebraska. Near the town and National Monument of Scottsbluff.
Originally Posted By jonvn "You don't answer any questions" I answer questions when posed by those who are interested in an answer and will respond to the answer given. The only reason I am responding to what you are saying here is a last futile effort to have you understand something, which I know will fail.
Originally Posted By YourPalEd My parents always taught me never to say, "shut up" to them. So, instead i told them to, "please, be quiet."
Originally Posted By tiggertoo <<But there really is no credible challenge to the ideas of global warming anymore. IF there were, then they'd be considered and looked at. That's absolutely important.>> But much of that is due to the fact that the tenets of cyclical climate change are currently not very well understood. Without more information, scientists cannot really make a scientific model from which to base their data. Yet, they know all too well that the has climate warmed and cooled several times during which period CO2 was on the rise, and that major changes in prehistory seemingly occurred independent of the greenhouse gases. Some of the fluctuations can be explained by volcanic activity or solar anomalies, but not all of them. So basically, they know that cyclical or natural climate changes can occur. On the other hand, CO2 emissions are being brought to the foreground is because they are fully aware of the principles of how increased CO2 emissions can affect the environment (although on such a large scale the aggregate affect is being debated). This essentially puts climatologists in a tough position—knowing how greenhouse gases affect the climate, yet, not completely understanding how natural changed occur. I seriously doubt very many scientists would discount a event they all know occurs yet don’t know a whole lot about. You linked to the EPA site in the global warming debate, which I think highlight what I’m trying to say here. <a href="http://yosemite.epa.gov/oar/globalwarming.nsf/content/climateuncertainties.html" target="_blank">http://yosemite.epa.gov/oar/gl obalwarming.nsf/content/climateuncertainties.html</a> I agree that there is consensus that CO2 gases are a large cause for global warming, but to what extent is still under debate. I find that entirely plausible. But considering the holes in the data, it’s hard to know with any certainty.
Originally Posted By YourPalEd Of course there is no debate. Republicans are criminals and traitors to the united states of america. End of Story. Only a fool would deny the immense changes caused by the gas engine. Only a fool, or a criminal, who profits at the human race, and the planet earth's destruction. These are the same toxic polluters, who have always made their money as chefs in the kitchen, but won't even pay a minimum wage job to someone to wash the dishes. So soon all of their great feasts taste terrible, cause they are served on dirty dishes with left over rotting food all over them.
Originally Posted By jonvn "But much of that is due to the fact that the tenets of cyclical climate change are currently not very well understood." That's why continued study is important, and outright denial of any of it is wrong and foolhardy. "But much of that is due to the fact that the tenets of cyclical climate change are currently not very well understood." While we don't know everything, we already do know quite a bit. And most papers on the subject say that global warming if not directly caused by human activity, has been greatly enhanced by it. The EPA says it "can not rule out" natural cycles. Well, that basically says that human activity is very much to blame. I've quoted the EPA repeatedly in this, and that's their position. Their position is also informed by political heads who have been saying the subject is still up for debate. Global warming is not up for debate at all there is no credible opposition to it. And there is a consensus amongst those who study the situation that it is human in origin. Some people in the field are saying that human activity has varying degrees of responsibility. But, again, consensus opinion states that it is human in origin. That's what I read on it. But basically to outright deny it because not every single last scientist who studies it is foolishness. And to require absolute mathematical proof on something such as this is foolishness as well.
Originally Posted By YourPalEd But there is no petition with 17,000 names on it. That is a lie. It was a concoction made up by republican traitors, who were given jobs, and paid with your tax money, by these embezzling murderers. Don't you agree?
