- Joined
- Jul 13, 2004
- Messages
- 32,369
- Reaction score
- 2,936
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 53
- Location
- In a van, down by the river...
-
Hello, this board in now turned off and no new posting.
Please REGISTER at Anabolic Steroid Forums, and become a member of our NEW community!
Al Gore Wins the Nobel Peace Prize!
- Thread starter Decker
- Start date
Don't forget use of the term "Global Warming denier" as if you're on par with denying the holocaust. Oh, and that you have to be in the pockets of evil "Big Oil" to disagree. Al even scolded the media for allowing a small amount of airtime to "Global Warming Deniers" and told them not to put on the opposing view.
- Joined
- Jul 23, 2004
- Messages
- 2,644
- Reaction score
- 34
- Points
- 0
yeah, Dems aren't big on the Bill of Rights.
hell. i'm probably one of the oldest people on im and i have 50 years to wait n see if this global warming thing come to fruition. so let's just wait and see. it seems to me than if there is a forest fire in canada and i can smell it here like it happened down the street the amount of impact all of the cars, factories, people heating their homes, etc must make some impact on the world. it is also undeniable that the earth is capable of unimaginable changes without the influence of man. there's no need to be too much of an alarmist but there's no need to pretend man doesn't have a negative impact on the environment either. unless you just want to keep raping the planet with no regard for future generations.
it's not our fault their are continents in different places than they used to be, we didn't cause the mountains to rise up or put deserts where there once were seas and vice versa, but the pollution we cause and our contribution to the exhaustion of natural resources are not a natural occurrence these things fall directly on our shoulders. will we bear the responsibility like men or deny it like swine? either way we will reap what we sow.
it's not our fault their are continents in different places than they used to be, we didn't cause the mountains to rise up or put deserts where there once were seas and vice versa, but the pollution we cause and our contribution to the exhaustion of natural resources are not a natural occurrence these things fall directly on our shoulders. will we bear the responsibility like men or deny it like swine? either way we will reap what we sow.
Last edited:
lame
ok i fixed it for youbut the pollution we cause and our contribution to the exhaustion of natural resources
i supposed if a girl told you to eat her pussy you'd assume she meant for you to actually chew n swallow it and she'd have to clarify that for you also
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2004
- Messages
- 32,369
- Reaction score
- 2,936
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 53
- Location
- In a van, down by the river...
hell. i'm probably one of the oldest people on im and i have 50 years to wait n see if this global warming thing come to fruition. so let's just wait and see. it seems to me than if there is a forest fire in canada and i can smell it here like it happened down the street the amount of impact all of the cars, factories, people heating their homes, etc must make some impact on the world. it is also undeniable that the earth is capable of unimaginable changes without the influence of man. there's no need to be too much of an alarmist but there's no need to pretend man doesn't have a negative impact on the environment either. unless you just want to keep raping the planet with no regard for future generations.
it's not our fault their are continents in different places than they used to be, we didn't cause the mountains to rise up or put deserts where there once were seas and vice versa, but the pollution we cause and our contribution to the exhaustion of natural resources are not a natural occurrence these things fall directly on our shoulders. will we bear the responsibility like men or deny it like swine? either way we will reap what we sow.
You're doing what Gore and his minions are doing. You're mixing in real threats of pollution and resource depletion with the crappy, pulled-out-of-my-ass, all man-made global warming.
i supposed if a girl told you to eat her pussy you'd assume she meant for you to actually chew n swallow it and she'd have to clarify that for you also
are you giving out tips?
doesnt seem to me to be that way.
seems like she is argueing we should pay more attention to the enviornment because we do have an impact on it. that i believe in. Al Gore preaching to me about it so he can make a political move i cannot get behind
i know it's a big damn planet but it seems reasonable all the shit we do that just creates heat even would warm it some.
i live in maine and it's cold as hell here already, i really wouldn't mind walking outside and seeing a palm tree out there and having the weather that goes with it. people up here say "it must be that global freezing my ass off everyone is yapping about" Ice shelf disruption
In the last several decades, glaciologist have observed consistent decreases in ice shelf extent through melt, calving, and complete disintegration of some shelves.
The Ellesmere ice shelf reduced by 90 percent in the twentieth century, leaving the separate Alfred Ernest, Ayles, Milne, Ward Hunt, and Markham Ice Shelves. A 1986 survey of Canadian ice shelves found that 48 km². (3.3 cubic kilometers) of ice calved from the Milne and Ayles ice shelves between 1959 and 1974.[1] The Ayles Ice Shelf calved entirely on August 13, 2005. The Ward Hunt Ice Shelf, the largest remaining section of thick (>10 m) land fast sea ice along the northern coastline of Ellesmere Island, lost 600 square km of ice in a massive calving in 1961-1962.[2] It further decreased by 27% in thickness (13 m) between 1967 and 1999.[3] In summer 2002, the Ward Ice Shelf experienced another major breakup. [4]
Two sections of Antarctica's Larsen Ice Shelf broke apart into hundreds of unusually small fragments (100's of meters wide or less) in 1995 and 2002.
The breakup events may be linked to the theoretical dramatic polar warming trends that are part of global warming.
i agree with "may" this might have nothing to do with man and it's stupid to think just cuz we are here the earth won't change unless we cause it, how arrogant, but i think the world is a dirtier, uglier place because of man and that doing everything we can to leave it's remaining beauty to future generations is a noble thing. a lot of the global warming data makes it sound like bullshit. but if you have an open mind both sides makes some good points.
yes, tip # 1) exercise common sense while reading or otherwise processing information
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2004
- Messages
- 32,369
- Reaction score
- 2,936
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 53
- Location
- In a van, down by the river...
i know it's a big damn planet but it seems reasonable all the shit we do that just creates heat even would warm it some.
No, you can't just assume that mankind can change the mean global temperature. Well...you could, but that wouldn't be science.
This is one of my favorite global warming topics. Because it's so easy to debunk man-made global warming with it.
You do realize that the arctic ice cap use to extend down to, what is today, the state of Wyoming, don't you? Did you know that you state of Maine was completely under a glacier 10,000 years ago? That's when the polar ice caps started to recede. That's just a bit before industrialization and SUVs.
Last edited:
Unless you want to make a private international phone call to Osama or Al-Zawahiri. They'll stand for that right.
Last edited:
just because something happens without our being part of the cause doesn't mean we cannot then become part of the cause.
hmm that guy was masturbating for years before he met her therefore it is impossible that her dancing around shaking her ass in his face has any influence on the fact he is masturbating now
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2006
- Messages
- 11,228
- Reaction score
- 1,226
- Points
- 113
that's a fucking great movie.
yes, tip # 1) exercise common sense while reading or otherwise processing information
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2006
- Messages
- 11,228
- Reaction score
- 1,226
- Points
- 113
I'll agree with you on that 110%. I'm watching it right now.
i was 18 in '79 when it came out and there weren't 100 more like it. the audio was cutting edge for it's time too and the scene where the helicopters come in from the left over the treetops was uh, a very male moment. total testosterone.
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2006
- Messages
- 11,228
- Reaction score
- 1,226
- Points
- 113
i was 18 in '79 when it came out and there weren't 100 more like it. the audio was cutting edge for it's time too and the scene where the helicopters come in from the left over the treetops was uh, a very male moment. total testosterone.
Yeah, great movie for the time. I'm watching the Redux Edition which I have on DVD. It has all of the origional scenes that they cut out for the movie. It's long as hell though.
The reason that the Iraq is so important to Iran is that the US's occupation of Iraq is illegitimate.
Why is that important? B/c if a country attacks another country and that use of force is not exercised in self defense, defense of another or defense of our property, that is a crime...a war crime...a crime against humanity.
It is the difference btn self defense and murder. And it lays the groundwork killing diplomacy.
Iran can enrich all the uranium it wants for domestic purposes.
As for the Iranians arming the insurgents allegations, the Caldwell evidence has already been debunked: an EFP factory was found in Iraq in April by troops during ???Operation Black Eagle,??? according to Army Spokesman Lt. Col Scott Bleichwehl. Also, EFPs were created by the Brits, not the Iranians. So Iran is not necessarily arming the insurgents.
As for the WMD charge, the IAEA has found no evidence that Iran is enriching uranium for weapons. "The IAEA, the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog agency, says it has been able to verify that Iran's declared nuclear material has not been diverted from peaceful use." http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/09/17/france.iran/index.html
So what do we really have here?:
1. Allegations of Iran's WMDs refuted by inspectors on the ground
2. Allegations that Iran is aiding and abetting our enemy with no supporting evidence
Boy oh boy does that sound familiar.
Where did we hear this before?
Of course the WMD inspectors left Iraq before the attack:
1. they could have hung around and been killed in the invasion or
2. they could have listened to our government's advice:
"Late last night... I was advised by the US Government to pull out our inspectors from Baghdad," the UN's chief nuclear weapons inspector Mohammed ElBaradei said on Monday.
BBC NEWS | World | Middle East | Inspectors urged to leave Iraq
Everyone saw the same "evidence" that was prettied up by Powell and feith and passed off as incontrovertible.
Bush actively ignored any countervailing evidence to the "Iraq is a deadly WMD threat to the US" charade.
Bush based his most damning WMD allegations on what a con-man cab driver from Iraq said. Remember the insider Curveball?
We went to war with Iraq largely b/c of the evidence Curveball provided.
On the "No WMD" side of the issue, we have Naji Sabri, Saddam's foreign minister.
I would say he has a bit more credibility than Curveball the cab-driver, don't you?
And who in the hell does Bush think he is to disregard any countervailing evidence re the WMDs? He should be impeached on that basis alone.
You see biochem, we don't want to start wars if we don't have to start wars. War should never be the first option. It should be the last resort. All the death, destruction and loss and what not should be avoided if possible.
Don't you think?
"On April 23, 2006, CBS's "60 Minutes" interviewed Tyler Drumheller, the former CIA chief of clandestine operations for Europe, who disclosed that the agency had received documentary intelligence from Naji Sabri, Saddam's foreign minister, that Saddam did not have WMD. "We continued to validate him the whole way through," said Drumheller. "The policy was set. The war in Iraq was coming, and they were looking for intelligence to fit into the policy, to justify the policy."
Both the French intelligence service and the CIA paid Sabri hundreds of thousands of dollars (at least $200,000 in the case of the CIA) to give them documents on Saddam's WMD programs. "The information detailed that Saddam may have wished to have a program, that his engineers had told him they could build a nuclear weapon within two years if they had fissile material, which they didn't, and that they had no chemical or biological weapons," one of the former CIA officers told me.
On the eve of Sabri's appearance at the United Nations in September 2002 to present Saddam's case, the officer in charge of this operation met in New York with a "cutout" who had debriefed Sabri for the CIA. Then the officer flew to Washington, where he met with CIA deputy director John McLaughlin, who was "excited" about the report. Nonetheless, McLaughlin expressed his reservations. He said that Sabri's information was at odds with "our best source." That source was code-named "Curveball," later exposed as a fabricator, con man and former Iraqi taxi driver posing as a chemical engineer."
http://www.salon.com/opinion/blumenthal/2007/09/06/bush_wmd/print.html
dg! Always good to see you.
I am here to remind people what a true leader looks like and how the american public is not being served by the Uniter.
decker your lasts 2 posts show me you have now reached john h status. i cant waste time with this thread anymore. its not really needed for me to point out the flaws in your logic, as they are so obvious anyone even using a passing glance at your posts will be able to see the inconsistencies.
good luck with that conspiracy stuff you have going on in your basement
good luck with that conspiracy stuff you have going on in your basement
The lies of politicians are nothing new. I believe you can't disprove anything Decker said and so you take the easy way out with ad hominem attacks.
If someone claims that Bush lied about something, then you would call them a conspiracy theorist before acknowledging the evidence. You are a true believer.
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2004
- Messages
- 32,369
- Reaction score
- 2,936
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 53
- Location
- In a van, down by the river...
NordicNacho
Registered
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2006
- Messages
- 2,414
- Reaction score
- 6
- Points
- 0
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2004
- Messages
- 32,369
- Reaction score
- 2,936
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 53
- Location
- In a van, down by the river...
I fully expected you to cut and run.
Point out my flaws in logic.
Point out my inconsistencies.
I think I've been very consistent.
You are doing exactly what you are supposed to do: decry me as feeble and obviously outside the lines of reasonable debate. Then you run away without supporting your accusations or making any reasoned, fact-based argument of your own.
So good riddance Bud, you're not adding anything to the talk anyways.
However, if you want to discuss things like a man, I'll be here.
Yeah, because it's in a JPG, it's gotta be true.
You're saying no one died when Bush lied?
