The Great Global Warming Swindle

[CARLSON-JET]

I was checking a few things out and found this. Very interesting video. long but worth watching. (1hr 14min.)
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4499562022478442170&q=The+Great+Global+Warming+Swindle

[Poster X]

Perhaps you could sum it up? I didn't even give Al Gore and 1hr 15min.
However, I believe logic dictates 200 hundred years of unlimited building and exhaustive use of natural resources coupled with mind-boggling pollution and over population, easily indicate mankind has to either become responsible for his environment, or risk losing it. I don't need Al Gore or whoever the heck that is in your link to give me an all warm and fuzzy.

[CARLSON-JET]

You can turn it on and just listen to what they say in the background while posting/posing ect. :jawdrop:
And no, Al Gore is only included as an example of what is wrong. As usual he is just another political dimwit following the money trail. The only thing Green about Gore is it's what he likes to line his pockets with.

[asch]

Perhaps you could sum it up? I didn't even give Al Gore and 1hr 15min.
However, I believe logic dictates 200 hundred years of.....
Always with the history from you.:rolleyes: What gives??
I fail to see how industrial production and resultant Co2 is changing global weather patterns.

[Poster X]

It's an endless circle jerk. The local brain trust can find plenty of umbrella wearing pundits and pseudo scientists to tell them global warming is a plot by the left to somehow swindle them out of their rights to rip apart Lake Tahoe and the Yosemite National Park for a years worth of diesel oil. And I can find plenty of pseudo scientists and pundits that say just the opposite. That y'all want to live for the day. To hell with what you leave in your wake.
I guess it's back to instinct?

[Old Texan]

It's an endless circle jerk. The local brain trust can find plenty of umbrella wearing pundits and pseudo scientists to tell them global warming is a plot by the left to somehow swindle them out of their rights to rip apart Lake Tahoe and the Yosemite National Park for a years worth of diesel oil. And I can find plenty of pseudo scientists and pundits that say just the opposite. That y'all want to live for the day. To hell with what you leave in your wake.
I guess it's back to instinct?
So what's your personal contribution to saving the environment, "Paper or Plastic"?

[Poster X]

You wouldn't believe it if I told you. So I won't. ;)

[SmokinLowriderSS]

So now well-reputed, highly experienced METEOROLOGICAL scientists are "pseudo-scientists" and, as usual, poser has nothing of value to add.
Kinda like the people who take the word of a philosophy and astro-physics professor about why a 110 story building on fire fell instead of a man with 30 years of practical experience making large buildings fall down.
I can guarantee that film will NOT be seeing any Oscar nominations any time soon, yet Algore and Mikey Moore get nominated, and the liberal thinkers and socialists think that is somehow not unusual.:idea:

[Blown 472]

You wanna see global warming? come to this effin frozen tundra of a state I live in, if buring tires and shit would warm it up, I am going to burn all I can.:mad:

[Poster X]

So now well-reputed, highly experienced METEOROLOGICAL scientists are "pseudo-scientists" and, as usual, poser has nothing of value to add.
Kinda like the people who take the word of a philosophy and astro-physics professor about why a 110 story building on fire fell instead of a man with 30 years of practical experience making large buildings fall down.
I can guarantee that film will NOT be seeing any Oscar nominations any time soon, yet Algore and Mikey Moore get nominated, and the liberal thinkers and socialists think that is somehow not unusual.:idea:
Aren't you afraid you'll hurt my feelings?
Between googling "Republicans on parole" and "being conservative for dummies", take some time out and see how many legitimate scientists believe global warming is a concern compared to those who don't. Political aspirations aside. Global warming isn't your real concern anyway. What you're worried about is potential lost profits from exploitating natural resources. You don't give a shit what kind of world you leave behind. That's basically it. Something you'll never admit. But something we know anyway. So, that being said, I'll not waste time getting you to care about something you think was put here for your personal use and no one else's. What's unbelievable is most of you have kids. Screw all the politician assholes. Walk out in the world and make a decision on your own based on your own observations. Quit googling for some asshole with a financial agenda to agree with you.

[SmokinLowriderSS]

Aren't you afraid you'll hurt my feelings?
Not in the slightest, no.
Walk out in the world and make a decision on your own based on your own observations.
This wonderfully scientific method led to the "comon knowledge" of the earth being flat, the sun revolving arround the earth, the "fact" that there were only 4 elememts that made up everything (Earth, Fire, Water, Air), Sorcery and Witchcraft, the "Martian Canals", the body containing 4 "humors" (Melancholy or Black Bile, Blood, Choler or Yellow Bile, and Phlegm) and "medicinal bloodletting" would restore balance to the "humors" and thus cure disease/mental and emotional illness/imbalance, etc, etc, etc.

[Nicked prop]

the issue is not whether or not the earth is warming. Without the aid and benefit of internal combustion engines, coal fired power plants, etc. Mars is warming as well. This issue is whether or not mankind's contribution to global warming is significant. Keep in mind, global warming and cooling have taken place long before man spewed his first hydrocarbon into the air. If one actually studies the science of global warming, rather than the emotion of global warming one can't help but conclude man does contribute to global warming, but on an insignificant level. Completely eliminating man from the face of the earth would not eliminate future climate change.

[SmokinLowriderSS]

First learn the difference between real science and Pseudo-Science.
Distinguishing Science and Pseudoscience (http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/pseudo.html)
Rory Coker, PhD.
Pseudoscience displays an indifference to facts.
Pseudoscience "research" is invariably sloppy.
Pseudoscience begins with a hypothesis—usually one which is appealing emotionally, and spectacularly implausible—and then looks only for items which appear to support it
Pseudoscience is indifferent to criteria of valid evidence.
Pseudoscience relies heavily on subjective validation.
Pseudoscience depends on arbitrary conventions of human
culture, rather than on unchanging regularities of nature.
Pseudoscience always achieves a reduction to absurdity if pursued far enough.
Pseudoscience always avoids putting its claims to a meaningful test.
Pseudoscience often contradicts itself, even in its own terms.
Pseudoscience deliberately creates mystery where none
exists, by omitting crucial information and important details.
Pseudoscience does not progress.
Pseudoscience attempts to persuade with rhetoric, propaganda, and
misrepresentation rather than valid evidence (which presumably does not exist).
Pseudoscience argues from ignorance, an elementary fallacy.
Pseudoscience argues from alleged exceptions, errors, anomalies, strange events, and suspect claims—rather than from well-established regularities of nature.
Pseudoscience appeals to false authority, to emotion,
sentiment, or distrust of established fact.
Pseudoscience makes extraordinary claims and advances fantastic
theories that contradict what is known about nature.
Pseudoscience appeals to the truth-criteria of scientific
methodology while simultaneously denying their validity.
Pseudoscience claims that the phenomena it studies are "jealous."
Pseudoscientific "explanations" tend to be by scenario.
Pseudoscientists often appeal to the ancient human habit of magical thinking.
Pseudoscience relies heavily on anachronistic thinking.
In fact, a short definition of pseudoscience is "a method for excusing, defending, and preserving errors."

[asch]

Walk out in the world and make a decision on your own based on your own observations.
Umm.....That's the problem.
Subjective observations and interpretations aren't what is needed. Rather, objective, factual evidence.
What you're suggesting is everyone should just go out their front door and ON THEIR OWN, ignorant or otherwise, come to some conclusion about c02 emissions and it's effect.
I don't see that Algore's predictions, suggestions, interpretations and presentation are any different from yours. Other than he has money to present it in a more sophisticated way.

[ULTRA26 # 1]

First learn the difference between real science and Pseudo-Science.
Distinguishing Science and Pseudoscience (http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/pseudo.html)
Rory Coker, PhD.
Pseudoscience displays an indifference to facts.
Pseudoscience "research" is invariably sloppy.
Pseudoscience begins with a hypothesis—usually one which is appealing emotionally, and spectacularly implausible—and then looks only for items which appear to support it
Pseudoscience is indifferent to criteria of valid evidence.
Pseudoscience relies heavily on subjective validation.
Pseudoscience depends on arbitrary conventions of human
culture, rather than on unchanging regularities of nature.
Pseudoscience always achieves a reduction to absurdity if pursued far enough.
Pseudoscience always avoids putting its claims to a meaningful test.
Pseudoscience often contradicts itself, even in its own terms.
Pseudoscience deliberately creates mystery where none
exists, by omitting crucial information and important details.
Pseudoscience does not progress.
Pseudoscience attempts to persuade with rhetoric, propaganda, and
misrepresentation rather than valid evidence (which presumably does not exist).
Pseudoscience argues from ignorance, an elementary fallacy.
Pseudoscience argues from alleged exceptions, errors, anomalies, strange events, and suspect claims—rather than from well-established regularities of nature.
Pseudoscience appeals to false authority, to emotion,
sentiment, or distrust of established fact.
Pseudoscience makes extraordinary claims and advances fantastic
theories that contradict what is known about nature.
Pseudoscience appeals to the truth-criteria of scientific
methodology while simultaneously denying their validity.
Pseudoscience claims that the phenomena it studies are "jealous."
Pseudoscientific "explanations" tend to be by scenario.
Pseudoscientists often appeal to the ancient human habit of magical thinking.
Pseudoscience relies heavily on anachronistic thinking.
In fact, a short definition of pseudoscience is "a method for excusing, defending, and preserving errors."
Smokin,
This is exactly what I referred to in a previous post.
"First learn the difference between real science and Pseudo-Science".
Pseudo: being apparently rather than actually as stated(Webster)
Wouldn't this simple explanation have sufficed?

[SmokinLowriderSS]

Smokin,
This is exactly what I referred to in a previous post.
"First learn the difference between real science and Pseudo-Science".
Pseudo: being apparently rather than actually as stated(Webster)
Wouldn't this simple explanation have sufficed?
No.
Simple enough for ya? :D

[SmokinLowriderSS]

First learn the difference between real science and Pseudo-Science.
Distinguishing Science and Pseudoscience (http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/pseudo.html)
Rory Coker, PhD.
Pseudoscience displays an indifference to facts.
Pseudoscience "research" is invariably sloppy.
Pseudoscience begins with a hypothesis—usually one which is appealing emotionally, and spectacularly implausible—and then looks only for items which appear to support it
Pseudoscience is indifferent to criteria of valid evidence.
Pseudoscience relies heavily on subjective validation.
Pseudoscience depends on arbitrary conventions of human
culture, rather than on unchanging regularities of nature.
Pseudoscience always achieves a reduction to absurdity if pursued far enough.
Pseudoscience always avoids putting its claims to a meaningful test.
Pseudoscience often contradicts itself, even in its own terms.
Pseudoscience deliberately creates mystery where none
exists, by omitting crucial information and important details.
Pseudoscience does not progress.
Pseudoscience attempts to persuade with rhetoric, propaganda, and
misrepresentation rather than valid evidence (which presumably does not exist).
Pseudoscience argues from ignorance, an elementary fallacy.
Pseudoscience argues from alleged exceptions, errors, anomalies, strange events, and suspect claims—rather than from well-established regularities of nature.
Pseudoscience appeals to false authority, to emotion,
sentiment, or distrust of established fact.
Pseudoscience makes extraordinary claims and advances fantastic
theories that contradict what is known about nature.
Pseudoscience appeals to the truth-criteria of scientific
methodology while simultaneously denying their validity.
Pseudoscience claims that the phenomena it studies are "jealous."
Pseudoscientific "explanations" tend to be by scenario.
Pseudoscientists often appeal to the ancient human habit of magical thinking.
Pseudoscience relies heavily on anachronistic thinking.
In fact, a short definition of pseudoscience is "a method for excusing, defending, and preserving errors."
Oh, and the bold ones, seem to apply VERY CLOSELY to the global warming issue, that was half of the point. :idea:
I could have left out the others, but didn't wish to be accused of "picking" my data. :)

[ULTRA26 # 1]

No.
Simple enough for ya? :D
Matter of opinion I guess
And yes

[SmokinLowriderSS]

Matter of opinion I guess
For the moment, yes, and in less than 2 decades, it will be a matter of scientific fact I believe.
Now, which direction it will take, is a matter of opinion.
To clear up one more thing, I think your personal movements at conservation are fine, wonderful, great, there is nothing wrong with the idea, or the activity. The home mods you have done, the vehicles you have denied yourself, admirable and honorable.
My issue is the force-feeding to you and I and others of an idea, pushed by simple fear-mongering of "save the planet for your children", which is nowhere near proven, which is entirely likely to be false, and, the steps some want to take will be both destructive to the economy in the short term and (depending on which fear-monger you listen to) pointless because "global warming" cannot be stopped, regardless of what we do.
If you are conserving for the sake of conservation, great, more power to you.
If you are conserving to stop "global warming", I believe time will prove you to have been mis-guided in your purpose.
We shall both see.
With the exception of the last line, the above is unsourceable, as it is purely Smokin's opinion, locatable from time to time on ***boat's and other message boards internet wide. :D

[ULTRA26 # 1]

For the moment, yes, and in less than 2 decades, it will be a matter of scientific fact I believe.
Now, which direction it will take, is a matter of opinion.
To clear up one more thing, I think your personal movements at conservation are fine, wonderful, great, there is nothing wrong with the idea, or the activity. The home mods you have done, the vehicles you have denied yourself, admirable and honorable.
My issue is the force-feeding to you and I and others of an idea, pushed by simple fear-mongering of "save the planet for your children", which is nowhere near proven, which is entirely likely to be false, and, the steps some want to take will be both destructive to the economy in the short term and (depending on which fear-monger you listen to) pointless because "global warming" cannot be stopped, regardless of what we do.
If you are conserving for the sake of conservation, great, more power to you.
If you are conserving to stop "global warming", I believe time will prove you to have been mis-guided in your purpose.
We shall both see.
With the exception of the last line, the above is unsourceable, as it is purely Smokin's opinion, locatable from time to time on ***boat's and other message boards internet wide. :D
Based on the evidence, I believe that global warming is a matter of fact today. Because some argue scientific theory to the contrary doesn't make it any less real in my view. I don't believe that the movement to slow negative atmospheric changes, is a selfish ploy or corporate scheme. Many believe that this issue is so big, that only something as powerful as the Govt can begin to create a fix. Then there are those like many of you in this forum who don't believe that the Govt should do anything except preach Christian morality and fight wars. An oxymoron isn't it?
I see nothing but positive resulting from burring less fuel which is where reducing negative atmospheric changes begins. So why don't we all just get started? Because people like you characterize this issue as political, and call it left verses right and anything viewed as left must be contradicted at all costs.
Isn't time to come down from our political soap boxin and start viewing things as right and wrong instead of right and left. Burning less fuel is the right thing to do and you are aware of this.

[Moneypitt]

Based on the evidence, I believe that global warming is a matter of fact today. Because some argue scientific theory to the contrary doesn't make it any less real in my view. I don't believe that the movement to slow negative atmospheric changes, is a selfish ploy or corporate scheme. Many believe that this issue is so big, that only something as powerful as the Govt can begin to create a fix. Then there are those like many of you in this forum who don't believe that the Govt should do anything except preach Christian morality and fight wars. An oxymoron isn't it?
I see nothing but positive resulting from burring less fuel which is where reducing negative atmospheric changes begins. So why don't we all just get started? Because people like you characterize this issue as political, and call it left verses right and anything viewed as left must be contradicted at all costs.
Isn't time to come down from our political soap boxin and start viewing things as right and wrong instead of right and left. Burning less fuel is the right thing to do and you are aware of this.
This is so much Bullshit I shouldn't even respond.....The absolute total man caused greenhouse gasses are LESS than 5% of the gasses created here on earth...LESS than 5%......So take your "the sky is falling" retoric to your next algore book signing.........If you want to conserve natural resourses, that is a good thing. But do it for the sake of conservation, not because of some fairy tale about the sky is falling. The earth has gone through these heating/cooling cycles for billions of years. How pompus of modern man to think he could actually change anything...........Remember 10 or 15 years ago? These same morons were screaming about a coming ICE AGE!!! Try, as everyone who believes this shit will, you will not find a SINGLE qualified SCIENTIST to agree with you..........Ray

[ULTRA26 # 1]

This is so much Bullshit I shouldn't even respond.....The absolute total man caused greenhouse gasses are LESS than 5% of the gasses created here on earth...LESS than 5%......So take your "the sky is falling" retoric to your next algore book signing.........If you want to conserve natural resourses, that is a good thing. But do it for the sake of conservation, not because of some fairy tale about the sky is falling. The earth has gone through these heating/cooling cycles for billions of years. How pompus of modern man to think he could actually change anything...........Remember 10 or 15 years ago? These same morons were screaming about a coming ICE AGE!!! Try, as everyone who believes this shit will, you will not find a SINGLE qualified SCIENTIST to agree with you..........Ray
Like I said, when something is viewed as coming from the left, you folks will do anything to contradict it, even make fools out of yourselves. Your right you shouldn't have even responded.
"you will not find a SINGLE qualified SCIENTIST to agree with you" This comment is as inane as your entire response.

[gochappy]

So what's your personal contribution to saving the environment, "Paper or Plastic"?
I take the paper...my family are loggers.....

[Schiada76]

Bridge for sale! I've got a bridge for sale!
Any libs here wanna buy a bridge?:D

[ULTRA26 # 1]

Bridge for sale! I've got a bridge for sale!
Any libs here wanna buy a bridge?:D
More 2 year old dribble. Schiada76, I have to give you credit for being consistant. Do you actually believe that your lib this or lib that BS makes you look any smarter than the stupid libs you so ofter describe? You are an embarrassment to the right.

[Schiada76]

I would expect no other answer from a fool.:D
Get it? That's why I post like that. You don't get it do you?
Dealing with liberals is just dealing with fools. You try to say global warming hysteria isn't political but that's all that is.
You ignore history, you ignore facts and run around like your hair's on fire in a panic over nothing but a sack of bullshit that you've bought into and are pissed that people that aren't brainwashed don't agree with you.
The earth is going to warm and cool with or without us, nothing we can do about. You know it and still repeat the Algores mantra.:rolleyes:
Now try to stay on topic, either deabte global warming or debate pollution. This is a global warming thread, try starting a pollution thred and see what kind of response you get.

[Schiada76]

You wanna see global warming? come to this effin frozen tundra of a state I live in, if buring tires and shit would warm it up, I am going to burn all I can.:mad:
Hey! Welcome back!

[eliminatedsprinter]

You are an embarrassment to the right.
Since the "Right" is, by definition, any ideology other than Communisim or Socialism, it is possible for us to have many forms of embarrassment as well as much to be proud of on the political "Right". However, since the "Left" is, by definition, those who embrace those two authoritarian and mostly failed ideologies, it is a national embarrassment, that America even has a political "Left".:)
I honestly wish "Liberalism" had not been taken over by "Leftism" in this country.
It is always good to have opposing ideologies, however I just wish someone would come up with a new and intellegent ideology, to embrace, when they decide to oppose the Conservatives and the status quo.:(

[Old Texan]

Then there are those like many of you in this forum who don't believe that the Govt should do anything except preach Christian morality and fight wars.
Although off topic, I would really like to hear how you arrive at the above conclusion.

[SmokinLowriderSS]

I could go through them piecemeal, but I'd rather mow the yard.
Once again, we are back to ultra, doing the following:
Pseudoscience displays an indifference to facts.
Pseudoscience begins with a hypothesis—usually one which is appealing emotionally, and spectacularly implausible—and then looks only for items which appear to support it
Pseudoscience is indifferent to criteria of valid evidence.
Pseudoscience relies heavily on subjective validation.
Pseudoscience depends on arbitrary conventions of human
culture, rather than on unchanging regularities of nature.
Pseudoscience does not progress.
Pseudoscience attempts to persuade with rhetoric, propaganda, and
misrepresentation rather than valid evidence (which presumably does not exist).
Pseudoscience argues from ignorance, an elementary fallacy.
Pseudoscience argues from alleged exceptions, errors, anomalies, strange events, and suspect claims—rather than from well-established regularities of nature.
Pseudoscience appeals to false authority, to emotion,
sentiment, or distrust of established fact.
Pseudoscience makes extraordinary claims and advances fantastic
theories that contradict what is known about nature.
Pseudoscience appeals to the truth-criteria of scientific
methodology while simultaneously denying their validity.
So I guess in the interest of burnig less fossil fuel, you'll be selling the boat, and the truck that tows it?
You going to take credit in 15 years when the earth is cooling off Ultra and we are headed for an Ice Age (like 1978, again)?

[SmokinLowriderSS]

Pseudoscience displays an indifference to facts.
Little things like the fact that none of the climactic changes in the last 1,000 years can be explained by CO2 levels in the atmosphere, especially when CO2 levels were higher than now, and temperatures were lower.
Little things like MARS WARMING UP, right now, with a distinct LACK of human-generated CO2.
Pseudoscience begins with a hypothesis—usually one which is appealing emotionally, and spectacularly implausible—and then looks only for items which appear to support it
Like "The planet is warming/cooling and we people are so powerful that we MUST be causing it, and we can fix it."
Pseudoscience is indifferent to criteria of valid evidence. Like extreemely iffy computer models, which have been found to be using invalid rules that just happen to be in violation of observed physics.
Pseudoscience relies heavily on subjective validation.
"Just go outside and decide for yourself."
Pseudoscience depends on arbitrary conventions of human
culture, rather than on unchanging regularities of nature. The incessant ignoring of past climactic changes, that vastly PREDATE human industry which currently stands blamed.
Pseudoscience often contradicts itself, even in its own terms. Such as we must stop global warming, yet it is inevitable, and we cannot stop it.
Pseudoscience attempts to persuade with rhetoric, propaganda, and misrepresentation rather than valid evidence (which presumably does not exist).
Speaks for itself, we see the behavior only every single day.
Pseudoscience argues from alleged exceptions, errors, anomalies, strange events, and suspect claims—rather than from well-established regularities of nature. Yet again, abject denial of history that does not fit the global warming blame game.
Pseudoscience appeals to false authority, to emotion,
sentiment, or distrust of established fact. See 3 of the above 4 statements.
Pseudoscience makes extraordinary claims and advances fantastic
theories that contradict what is known about nature. Yet again, ignoring and quiet denial of the factual history of earth climactic change that predates the 19th century.
Pseudoscience appeals to the truth-criteria of scientific
methodology while simultaneously denying their validity.
The claims of numbers of scientists who claim it exists, so it MUST be real, and the vast majority of scientists qualified to have a respected opinion on the climate and weather activity, (Yes, scientists are not qualified to speak on anything they fancy, only on their areas of expertise) are NOT in agreement with the GW crowd.
Pseudoscientific "explanations" tend to be by scenario. Every GW pusher I have heard interviewed, does exactly this, including the most recent one I heard on the way to Guard Drill last Sunday morning.

[ULTRA26 # 1]

Nice try Smokin,
You have no facts to the contrary, as there are none.
Your words "For the moment, yes, and in less than 2 decades, it will be a matter of scientific fact I believe"
Your opinion is not based on any more factual information than mine.
Look another long post from Smokin. Smokin's long posts are always full of facts NOT
Go mow your lawn and have a great day

[SmokinLowriderSS]

Then there are those like many of you in this forum who don't believe that the Govt should do anything except preach Christian morality and fight wars.
Strangely enough, the one thing your opinion of Global Warming has, is exactly what religious followers, of ALL RELIGIONS have, and it is the only thing that they have, because proof of their religious beliefs is impossible to come by.
Faith.
Because people like you characterize this issue as political, and call it left verses right and anything viewed as left must be contradicted at all costs.
You should look in the mirror while posting on Global Warming sometime Ultra, while contradicting the historical scientific evidence with your opinion that GW is a "settled, proven, issue".

[Schiada76]

SLSS
He's right you know.
It's never been hotter than now, nope, never.
In the seventies he was positive there was an ice age coming too.
Silent Spring and The Population Bomb are his bibles.:rolleyes:
Just another disciple worshipping at the temple of THE ALGORE.
We must all kneel before him.:eek: :sqeyes: :D :D

[Blown 472]

Nice try Smokin,
You have no facts to the contrary, as there are none.
Your words "For the moment, yes, and in less than 2 decades, it will be a matter of scientific fact I believe"
Your opinion is not based on any more factual information than mine.
Look another long post from Smokin. Smokin's long posts are always full of facts NOT
Go mow your lawn and have a great day
He has goats for that.

[Blown 472]

:D Hey! Welcome back!
Hey thanks.:D

[SmokinLowriderSS]

Your opinion is not based on any more factual information than mine.
Which factual details would you like to debate, specifically?
The fact that CO2 levels TRAIL the historical global temperature changes, yet some would tell you & I that they precede the changes, which is a direct contradiction to the actual scientific data?
The fact that there is a very CLOSE RELATIONSHIP between earth temperature changes and solar output?
The fact that 5% of the atmosphere is CO2, and 0.54% of THAT 5% (.00027%) of the atmosphere is MAN-MADE CO2, yet it is heating the planet?
The fact that, in the last 100 years, human CO2 output was very low prior to 1940, yet most of the global warming in the last century PREDATES 1940?
The fact that as CO2 emmissions increased HUGELY after 1940, the planet COOLED from 1940 untill 1980?
The fact that there was a midevil warm period, warmer than now, that occured in the 1300's, centuries BEFORE human industry?
The fact that the above midevil warm period, as well as the "little ice age" durring the Maunder Minimum is quietly IGNORED by the global warming pushers, even to the point of removing it from charts?
The fact that a scientist who resigned from the IPCC, whose name was put on a report he had nothing to do with, HAD TO THREATEN TO SUE to get the IPCC to remove his name from the list of contributors?
And he isn't the only one of "the 2500" to be a "supporter" who does not support G.W.
Discussing the concept has displayed people's positions.
Go ahead, start us in discussing the FACTS. Pick a fact.
Just the facts, not the concept, or the socialist anti-capitolist politics driving it.

[ULTRA26 # 1]

Which factual details would you like to debate, specifically?
The fact that CO2 levels TRAIL the historical global temperature changes, yet some would tell you & I that they precede the changes, which is a direct contradiction to the actual scientific data?
The fact that there is a very CLOSE RELATIONSHIP between earth temperature changes and solar output?
The fact that 5% of the atmosphere is CO2, and 0.54% of THAT 5% (.00027%) of the atmosphere is MAN-MADE CO2, yet it is heating the planet?
The fact that, in the last 100 years, human CO2 output was very low prior to 1940, yet most of the global warming in the last century PREDATES 1940?
The fact that as CO2 emmissions increased HUGELY after 1940, the planet COOLED from 1940 untill 1980?
The fact that there was a midevil warm period, warmer than now, that occured in the 1300's, centuries BEFORE human industry?
The fact that the above midevil warm period, as well as the "little ice age" durring the Maunder Minimum is quietly IGNORED by the global warming pushers, even to the point of removing it from charts?
The fact that a scientist who resigned from the IPCC, whose name was put on a report he had nothing to do with, HAD TO THREATEN TO SUE to get the IPCC to remove his name from the list of contributors?
And he isn't the only one of "the 2500" to be a "supporter" who does not support G.W.
Discussing the concept has displayed people's positions.
Go ahead, start us in discussing the FACTS. Pick a fact.
Just the facts, not the concept, or the socialist anti-capitolist politics driving it.
Smokin,
Don't have the time to debate details with you on the internet. Everyone
already knows that you are the Heavy Weight Champion of Hot Boat. Debating issues pertaining to negative atmospheric changes, in detail could take years, since neither of are experts.
Here's something for you to ponder,
I believe that we agree that the scientific community is still out on this one. Obviously there is compelling evidence on both sides of the issue, otherwise we would agree.
If the American people treat this issue as if it doesn't exist, little more will be done to reduce the production of emissions. If this belief proven to be invalid, further damage will have been done?
If the American people treat this issue as if it does exist, substantially more will be done to reduce the production of emissions. If this belief proven to be invalid, what damage will have been done?
It's common sense, isn't it?

[Old Texan]

It's common sense, isn't it?
It's common sense to not pollute. It's not common sense to blindly follow unproven theories into economic and social oblivion.
Your unwavering faith of what "must" be and stubborness to be influenced otherwise or even consider GW theory may be tainted, are amazing. You stereotype anyone not in agreement with your personal beliefs with all the monikers typically thrown about by the liberal left and then complain about the division between parties and the populace.
Your frustration with Smokin' is almost comical from the standpoint of how you discount all of what he throws at you as wrong, yet turn back around and refuse to offer any valid evidence other than personal opinion why he is wrong. And the personal opinion is based almost completely on "because THEY said so". Blind faith is very dangerous.
Please don't assume those disagreeing with your opinions don't care about the environment and don't assume those that disagree with you are blindly following any leader or philosophy. Those of opposing view just often times question the amazing amount of "social consciousness", "flavor of the day" issues that come to dominate our every waking moment. If you aren't careful they often cover up the real issues.

[Blown 472]

It's not common sense to blindly follow unproven theories into economic and social oblivion.
And you support gdumbya???

[Schiada76]

It's not common sense to blindly follow unproven theories into economic and social oblivion.
And you support gdumbya???
There you go as soon as you get back you're off on a BDS rant.
Did he cause global warming? That turd keith olberman actually said he caused the V Tech massacre.:rolleyes:

[ULTRA26 # 1]

It's common sense to not pollute. It's not common sense to blindly follow unproven theories into economic and social oblivion.
Your unwavering faith of what "must" be and stubborness to be influenced otherwise or even consider GW theory may be tainted, are amazing. You stereotype anyone not in agreement with your personal beliefs with all the monikers typically thrown about by the liberal left and then complain about the division between parties and the populace.
Your frustration with Smokin' is almost comical from the standpoint of how you discount all of what he throws at you as wrong, yet turn back around and refuse to offer any valid evidence other than personal opinion why he is wrong. And the personal opinion is based almost completely on "because THEY said so". Blind faith is very dangerous.
Please don't assume those disagreeing with your opinions don't care about the environment and don't assume those that disagree with you are blindly following any leader or philosophy. Those of opposing view just often times question the amazing amount of "social consciousness", "flavor of the day" issues that come to dominate our every waking moment. If you aren't careful they often cover up the real issues.
Tex,
Smokin is well aware of scientific evendence that contrdicts much of the evidence he represents in this regard. Smokinevidencecontradicts has stated that we arer 20 years from knowing the truth. "it's a mtter of opinion For the moment, yes, and in less than 2 decades, it will be a matter of scientific fact I believe." He can post all of the eveidence that he liikes, and as I said, he and I are both aware that are that I can post evidence to the contary. A pissing contest which I have no time or desire to engage in
You can view my thoughts or posts as comical if you would like. It should be clear that my intent is to advocate the reductioin of the production of exhaust. I'm surely not alone in my belief that exhaust is harmfull to te envirement. The global warming movement advocates positive enviomental changes. Eliminating or reducing our dependence on forien oil. Further development of renewable enegy sources and many other postive changes. I haven't heard of any other movement from the right that addresses these issues. The vast majority of those in this forum do everything to discount and disprove any view that any left or lib involvement. Enviomentalists are referred to as lib tree huggers. This surely doesn't suggest enviormental concern, now does it.
You all have no problem suggesting that I'm a idiot, lying lib fool, or as you put is, comical in my response to Smokin.
I asked the following questions and for some reason find nothing comical about them.
If the American people treat this issue as if it doesn't exist, little more will be done to reduce the production of emissions. If this belief proven to be invalid, further damage will have been done?
If the American people treat this issue as if it does exist, substantially more will be done to reduce the production of emissions. If this belief proven to be invalid, what damage will have been done?
BTW opinions on GW are very partisin. If the right is so conerned about the enviorment, as you have so indicated, please explain to all of us blind followers, what's they're doing to improve things.

[Old Texan]

Tex,
Smokin is well aware of scientific evendence that contrdicts much of the evidence he represents in this regard. Smokinevidencecontradicts has stated that we arer 20 years from knowing the truth. "it's a mtter of opinion For the moment, yes, and in less than 2 decades, it will be a matter of scientific fact I believe." He can post all of the eveidence that he liikes, and as I said, he and I are both aware that are that I can post evidence to the contary. A pissing contest which I have no time or desire to engage in
You can view my thoughts or posts as comical if you would like. It should be clear that my intent is to advocate the reductioin of the production of exhaust. I'm surely not alone in my belief that exhaust is harmfull to te envirement. The global warming movement advocates positive enviomental changes. Eliminating or reducing our dependence on forien oil. Further development of renewable enegy sources and many other postive changes. I haven't heard of any other movement from the right that addresses these issues. The vast majority of those in this forum do everything to discount and disprove any view that any left or lib involvement. Enviomentalists are referred to as lib tree huggers. This surely doesn't suggest enviormental concern, now does it.
You all have no problem suggesting that I'm a idiot, lying lib fool, or as you put is, comical in my response to Smokin.
I asked the following questions and for some reason find nothing comical about them.
If the American people treat this issue as if it doesn't exist, little more will be done to reduce the production of emissions. If this belief proven to be invalid, further damage will have been done?
If the American people treat this issue as if it does exist, substantially more will be done to reduce the production of emissions. If this belief proven to be invalid, what damage will have been done?
BTW opinions on GW are very partisin. If the right is so conerned about the enviorment, as you have so indicated, please explain to all of us blind followers, what's they're doing to improve things.
First a prime example of my view of and interpretation of comical: You "assumed" I viewed you as an idiot and a lying fool. I did no such thing nor would I. The comical is how your frustration level spills over into your communications. I just envision you throwing up your hands when Smokin' floods you with retorts. I'm not laughing at you, I'm laughing at your somewhat typical reaction. I laugh at myself all the time, it's human nature. So don't take offense as none was given.
As far as "what has the Right done to protect the environment and reduce emissions", you really need to think this one out. Here I'll make an assumption, which I don't believe true but maybe you do, Right= Industry. That's basically is what you infer. "I" don't view industry as either right or left.
Industry, technology, science, et al have given us catalyst technologies used in virtually all applications where gases are expelled into the atmosphere. The most common are in your vehicle's exhaust system. SCR technology is being used in coal fired power plants which we stopped discussing the day you claimed your research showed them to be "horrible pollutors". Remember this was your claim that Houston's poor air quality was due to PP's when in fact the study you referenced pertained to automobile urban smog.
Do a little research on the auto industry and see how they choose sites for new plants. They review industry surveys on air and water qualities and pick sites favorable to the least impact for expansion. That's why they rarely locate directly in major urban areas.
The list is long of what is being done by industry to fight and limit environmental impact, it just doesn't sell as much advertising as the sensational protrayals of GW, so the general public doesn't catch on to what is really happening. Al Gore and his comedy tour are pathetic in what they know and how they distort reality so why would anyone take GW as serious when it's taken from their script? I wager Gore knows very little about the industry in his homestate of TN where the real environmental heros work. I've been in every corner of TN and I can tell you that TN industry cares and their plants are state of the art.
"Tree Huggers" are extremists that feel cutbacks and tolerable levels are taboo. They want to eliminate everything even remotely connected to environmental harm. Think about what your life would be like without electricity. Many a "Tree Hugger" would like you to live that way. The key word here is "extremist".
John I assure you I view you far differently than you assume I do, and that holds true for the majority here. Hell Shiada whom you seem to despise is just jackin' with you and if you'd learn to lighten up, you could see it coming. Trust me the overwhelming majority care just as much about this country and the world's environment, far more than you give credit for and if you'd open your mind up a little you'd realize it.

[Schiada76]

I don't agree with Smokin often but the facts presented in this post are right on, no fear mongering or other political crap....just facts.
Could global warming BS be a ruse by the government to keep the sheeple pre-occupied on something other than what the gov is doing?
Holy Chit!:sqeyes:
If Canuck agrees with SLSS tht makes it a consensus.
This debate is officially over.
Resume normal programming.
I'll start:
I HATE BUSH ! He's an idiot!!!!!!:D :D

[ULTRA26 # 1]

First a prime example of my view of and interpretation of comical: You "assumed" I viewed you as an idiot and a lying fool. I did no such thing nor would I. The comical is how your frustration level spills over into your communications. I just envision you throwing up your hands when Smokin' floods you with retorts. I'm not laughing at you, I'm laughing at your somewhat typical reaction. I laugh at myself all the time, it's human nature. So don't take offense as none was given.
As far as "what has the Right done to protect the environment and reduce emissions", you really need to think this one out. Here I'll make an assumption, which I don't believe true but maybe you do, Right= Industry. That's basically is what you infer. "I" don't view industry as either right or left.
Industry, technology, science, et al have given us catalyst technologies used in virtually all applications where gases are expelled into the atmosphere. The most common are in your vehicle's exhaust system. SCR technology is being used in coal fired power plants which we stopped discussing the day you claimed your research showed them to be "horrible pollutors". Remember this was your claim that Houston's poor air quality was due to PP's when in fact the study you referenced pertained to automobile urban smog.
Do a little research on the auto industry and see how they choose sites for new plants. They review industry surveys on air and water qualities and pick sites favorable to the least impact for expansion. That's why they rarely locate directly in major urban areas.
The list is long of what is being done by industry to fight and limit environmental impact, it just doesn't sell as much advertising as the sensational protrayals of GW, so the general public doesn't catch on to what is really happening. Al Gore and his comedy tour are pathetic in what they know and how they distort reality so why would anyone take GW as serious when it's taken from their script? I wager Gore knows very little about the industry in his homestate of TN where the real environmental heros work. I've been in every corner of TN and I can tell you that TN industry cares and their plants are state of the art.
"Tree Huggers" are extremists that feel cutbacks and tolerable levels are taboo. They want to eliminate everything even remotely connected to environmental harm. Think about what your life would be like without electricity. Many a "Tree Hugger" would like you to live that way. The key word here is "extremist".
John I assure you I view you far differently than you assume I do, and that holds true for the majority here. Hell Shiada whom you seem to despise is just jackin' with you and if you'd learn to lighten up, you could see it coming. Trust me the overwhelming majority care just as much about this country and the world's environment, far more than you give credit for and if you'd open your mind up a little you'd realize it.
Tex,
Whether you and I agree about the issues in most cases is a non issue to me. You communicate like an adult no matter what you position. The left lib liar really wasn't directed at you. Schiada76 and a few others do annoy me you are spot on wtih that observation. I truely believe that if Gore was not a Dem, all of you that think he is such a POS would view him differently. I surely don't think that Gore's movement isn't flawed. But I also see his visions has having some reality. I don't like term Global Warming for the matter I am addressing Negative atmospheric changes. is a better description.
Auto makers, with the support of the White House, are back peddlng on matters of emissions and fuel economy.
Tex again I ask these questions
If the American people treat this issue as if it doesn't exist, little more will be done to reduce the production of emissions. If this belief proven to be invalid, further damage will have been done?
If the American people treat this issue as if it does exist, substantially more will be done to reduce the production of emissions. If this belief proven to be invalid, what damage will have been done?

[CARLSON-JET]

Holy Chit!:sqeyes:
If Canuck agrees with SLSS tht makes it a consensus.
This debate is officially over.
Resume normal programming.
I'll start:
I HATE BUSH ! He's an idiot!!!!!!:D :D
Don't be killing my thread. :D There is alot more to discuss here. One of the intersting parts to this puzzle is at the end of the docu about how the green activists are trying to force the third world countries to not develope themselves as the US and other well developed countries have in the past. What is their solution. impose draconian measures upon them such as wanting to force them to use wind and solar power. These types of energy, although renewable are 4 times the cost of coal and natural gas and about the opposite in reliability.(4 times as unreliable) There's also a pretty big cost in setting up nuclear power that these developing countries have no capitol or the means to aquire it for getting them set up. Since there is no profit involved, there's nobody willing to even begin to spend any capitol to get it into production. We as one of the richest nations in the world have not put any nuke plants into production for over 20 years. Examples like wpps in Washington state show how getting one of these plants on-line is a monumental task that could fail and most 3rd world countries can not take that risk.
Old texan wrote. It's common sense to not pollute. It's not common sense to blindly follow unproven theories into economic and social oblivion.
I couldn't agree with this more.
When science becomes political, the dynamic changes.
Another strong argument about whether this trend is politically motivated is at the begining where they discuss the global cooling scare in the seventies. It's talks about who set up the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Margaret Thatcher. She empowered the U.K. Meteorological Office to begin global climate change research, a move that eventually led to the 1988 creation of the IPCC. That United Nations group has come to be the “official” international agency for global warming alarmism. This in itself could be a thread, but it relates to this discussion. Alot of information about the IPCC is readily available.
Because the general accepted movement to clean up the earth has become so mainstream, the inviro nuts have gone to more extreme tactics to make themselves stand out to show they are the world leaders in pro earth/ green movements. I find they are well entrenched in this fiasco.

[Schiada76]

Oh for fuks sake!!!!:mad:
You really are an idiot John. The Algore is a two bit lying stealing politician that YOU love just because he's a liberal. Thats it and you know it.
The difference between you leftists and we normal thinking people is that we want all crooked politicians thrown out of office. You on the other hand will blindly follow anyone who spews the dogma you find palatable.
I'll say it again ANYONE that belives the bullshit the Algore is spewing is an imbecile beyond accepting anything factual no matter how it is presented to them.
Now go sit in the corner and listen to your heart and your feelings and your oh my I just believe it so it's true fantasy or find some facts to back up your dogmatic, blind, fanatic belief in a known liar and crook. Not a made up one either there is plenty of fact to show what algore really is and none of it was forged by Dan Rather.
What a simpleton.

[ULTRA26 # 1]

Oh for fuks sake!!!!:mad:
You really are an idiot John. The Algore is a two bit lying stealing politician that YOU love just because he's a liberal. Thats it and you know it.
The difference between you leftists and we normal thinking people is that we want all crooked politicians thrown out of office. You on the other hand will blindly follow anyone who spews the dogma you find palatable.
I'll say it again ANYONE that belives the bullshit the Algore is spewing is an imbecile beyond accepting anything factual no matter how it is presented to them.
Now go sit in the corner and listen to your heart and your feelings and your oh my I just believe it so it's true fantasy or find some facts to back up your dogmatic, blind, fanatic belief in a known liar and crook. Not a made up one either there is plenty of fact to show what algore really is and none of it was forged by Dan Rather.
What a simpleton.
Your the man.
"The difference between you leftists and we normal thinking people is that we want all crooked politicians thrown out of office". And you normal thinking people support Pres Shitforbrains You calling me a simpleton, is pretty funny.
"You really are an idiot John". I guess so, if you say so
YOU love just because he's a liberal. Thats it and you know it .
Again, I guess so if you say so
You are an embarassment to Conseratives. Oh I forgot, you are one of those normal thinking people.
I'm done

[Old Texan]

If the American people treat this issue as if it doesn't exist, little more will be done to reduce the production of emissions. If this belief proven to be invalid, further damage will have been done?
If the American people treat this issue as if it does exist, substantially more will be done to reduce the production of emissions. If this belief proven to be invalid, what damage will have been done?
Reminds of Rush Limbaugh's statement when we were preparing to invade Iraq. Something like this as I recall- "If there are weapons of mass destruction our invasion stopped disaster and we did good. If there aren't weapons of mass destruction, then we ridded the country of a ruthless dictator. A win win situation."
Nice to know you and Rush theorize along the same lines, eh...:D
Anyway I agree with your motive, I just feel the country has far more people aware of the environment than many realize or will admit too. We don't need a hyped up theory to push everyone to change. They are fully capable of making their own personal decisions.
As for Al Gore, it makes no matter what party he subscribes to. The man is a huckster and a babbling fool. He is trying to use the whole GW issue for personal and financial gain, plain and simple. I don't believe there are many within the Democratic party that care for him. I know the Clinton's despise the soil he crawls on. Al is the hoped for legacy of a once proud family, but sadly he has failed to live up to the linage. TN was through with him and now the DC crowd has pushed him out. He's relagated himself to a traveling medicine man show and one day, soon hopefully, he and his wagon full hogwash will disappear over a cliff.

[Schiada76]

Thanks for further proof there Johnny boy!:D
President shit for brains? Then why can't you and your ilk come up with one lie or one crime that you all keep crying about? The closest you leftists have come are the forged Dan Blather docs.
Just because you don't agree with him doesn't make him dumb or a criminal. In this world anyway, but I'm sure I don't smoke the same chit you seem to be.:D :D

[ULTRA26 # 1]

Reminds of Rush Limbaugh's statement when we were preparing to invade Iraq. Something like this as I recall- "If there are weapons of mass destruction our invasion stopped disaster and we did good. If there aren't weapons of mass destruction, then we ridded the country of a ruthless dictator. A win win situation."
Nice to know you and Rush theorize along the same lines, eh...:D
Anyway I agree with your motive, I just feel the country has far more people aware of the environment than many realize or will admit too. We don't need a hyped up theory to push everyone to change. They are fully capable of making their own personal decisions.
Nice to know you and Rush theorize along the same lines:) Just a slightly different concept
Thanks for further proof there Johnny boy!:D
President shit for brains? Then why can't you and your ilk come up with one lie or one crime that you all keep crying about? The closest you leftists have come are the forged Dan Blather docs.
Just because you don't agree with him doesn't make him dumb or a criminal. In this world anyway, but I'm sure I don't smoke the same chit you seem to be.:D :D
God you're stupid. How can you continue to defend this man? Ignorance is the only explanation. And you are one of the normal thinking people. I'm sorry that I don't buy that the majority of the American view normal as being unable to see past their nose due to a ring of crap on the end of it from
having stuck up Mr. Bushes behind, as yourself. Go find some more crooked lying cheeting POS lib, leftist, to rag on, oh honest and nornal one.
"Just because you don't agree with him doesn't make him dumb or a criminal". You're right. Mr. Bush is completely responsable for this, all by himself. Your belief that every liberal idea or thought is useless, makes you stupid. Simple as that, Kepernacus
Again, I'm through talikng with you.

[Schiada76]

I've yet to defend the POTUS in any of my response's.
I have put the onus on you to provide backup to your allegations of lying, idiocy and criminal behavior on his part and you have yet to show proof of any of the above.
Again, this is a thread on global warming. You can neither stay on topic nor show backup for your BDS.:rolleyes: :D :D

[Schiada76]

Easy to prove.....when your lips move.....
Yup, liberal "proof" right there. Then again poof is more apt for a lib.:D

[SmokinLowriderSS]

Holy Chit!:sqeyes:
If Canuck agrees with SLSS tht makes it a consensus.
This debate is officially over.
Resume normal programming.
LMAO, Agreement between Canuck1 and I IS a definite rarity, and probably worthy of an official day of note on the calendar. :D
And just think, Earth Day is Sunday. :D

[Schiada76]

Lets celebrate by burning a greenpeace flag
I was thinking maybe a Greenpeace member.:idea: :jawdrop: :D
Which leads me to a true confession I once was young and very very ignorant.
I actually.............oh chit this hurts to admit.........................I actually...................................donated ............................money................. ................to................................ ...aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrgggggghhh hhhhhhhhhhhhhhh green peace. Oh sh it that hurt! I need a drink.:D :D
See lib boys I can talk as much sh it as I want for I have walked both sides of the line. I voted for Reagan I voted for Klintoon (not that little jiminy catuh **** though!). I voted for GW twice but wouldn't again.
I want to know if the lib boys here can claim the same?:D :D

[Blown 472]

Lets celebrate by burning a greenpeace flag
Can we shoot some hippies? shove a berkenstock up the ass of some dumb suv driving green bumper sticker broad??

[Schiada76]

Gawddamnit! We've found something we can all agree on!:eek: :sqeyes: :D
Lets fawk up some hippie bark eating scum!:D
Armageddon must be at hand! Wait a minute, isn't this thread all about Armageddon?:idea: The liberal perception of Armageddon but Armageddon none the less. I think I'm on to something!:idea:

[Blown 472]

Gawddamnit! We've found something we can all agree on!:eek: :sqeyes: :D
Lets fawk up some hippie bark eating scum!:D
Armageddon must be at hand! Wait a minute, isn't this thread all about Armageddon?:idea: The liberal perception of Armageddon but Armageddon none the less. I think I'm on to something!:idea:
wtf is armageddon?

[SmokinLowriderSS]

I have put the onus on you to provide backup to your allegations of lying, idiocy and criminal behavior on his part and you have yet to show proof of any of the above.
I did the same thing, on human-caused Global Warming Schiada, and the same result occured, a complete failure to support his positions, because he's to busy to research the facts, but he's not too busy to just continue the "If it's good, then do it, and if it happens to have been unneeded, it was good anyhow", urinating contest.
Don't feel alone dude. :D
Have to see if I can find a Greenpiece flag online and get it fed-ex'd (uses jetfuel, and lots of it to deliver on time).
I have some extra Diesel fuel I can use as an accelerant/anti-fire-retardant. :idea: 15 or 20 gallons or so. :D

[SmokinLowriderSS]

There you go as soon as you get back you're off on a BDS rant.
Did he cause global warming? That turd keith olberman actually said he caused the V Tech massacre.:rolleyes:
Some things never change Schiada, constants in the world. :idea:
Idiotberman got that from me. I started that rumor, Tuesday, right here on HB. :D

[steelcomp]

Oh for fuks sake!!!!
You really are an idiot John. The Algore is a two bit lying stealing politician that YOU love just because he's a liberal. Thats it and you know it.
The difference between you leftists and we normal thinking people is that we want all crooked politicians thrown out of office. You on the other hand will blindly follow anyone who spews the dogma you find palatable.
I'll say it again ANYONE that belives the bullshit the Algore is spewing is an imbecile beyond accepting anything factual no matter how it is presented to them.
Now go sit in the corner and listen to your heart and your feelings and your oh my I just believe it so it's true fantasy or find some facts to back up your dogmatic, blind, fanatic belief in a known liar and crook. Not a made up one either there is plenty of fact to show what algore really is and none of it was forged by Dan Rather.
What a simpleton.
Simply fockin classic!!! LMFAO!!!
Hey Ultra...I got global warming for you...it snowed in Santa Barbara today. :notam:
You and Sen. Harry Reid make a good pair.
Simpleton...too funny!
Baaaaaaaaa, Baaaaaaaaa....

[ULTRA26 # 1]

You all are funny.
If the American people treat this issue as if it doesn't exist, little more will be done to reduce the production of emissions. If this belief proven to be invalid, further damage will have been done?
If the American people treat this issue as if it does exist, substantially more will be done to reduce the production of emissions. If this belief proven to be invalid, what damage will have been done?
It's simple.
Filling the air with shit isn't a good thing, I don't care what you do or don't call it.
But to most of you, this is just more of my leftist lib ignorant BS :)

[Schiada76]

You all are funny.
If the American people treat this issue as if it doesn't exist, little more will be done to reduce the production of emissions. If this belief proven to be invalid, further damage will have been done?
If the American people treat this issue as if it does exist, substantially more will be done to reduce the production of emissions. If this belief proven to be invalid, what damage will have been done?
It's simple.
Filling the air with shit isn't a good thing, I don't care what you do or don't call it.
But to most of you, this is just more of my leftist lib ignorant BS :)
Thick as a brick but consistent.
Do you know the difference between the global warming hysteria debate and pollution? I'll answer for you, nope.:D

[Schiada76]

wtf is armageddon?
The Christian belief that God will end the world and only Christians will be accepted into heaven (more or less).
Tree hugging fagot bark eaters think humans will destroy the planet, Mother Gaia, and all life will cease to exist.
Same concept different nuts.:D

[Schiada76]

Who the fukk agrees with you on anything? You seem to enjoy that post up your ass from that fence you are sitting on....:D
Well you do for one, reference tree hugging faggots.:D
If you think I'm siting on the fence politically as in I have moderate, middle of the road views, you haven't read any of my posts.:confused: :D

[steelcomp]

Filling the air with shit isn't a good thing, I don't care what you do or don't call it. I don't think anyone will disagree with that, but what does it have to do with global warming? What "shit" are yout talking about in context with, and related to "global warming"??
BTW...it's nothing compared to the shit that the libs spew...they're on borrowed credits when it comes to their verbal pollution.
There's another one thye're missing...bull$hit credits.
Purchased any lately, ULTRA? :)
I gotta add one more thing here...you got a little Al Gore in you, there ULTRA26 #1. How much "shit" do you think that big ass boat of yours spews every time you take it out? Or how about the tow rig towing it? How 'bout you get rid of that pig and do your part to lessen emissions? Surely you don't need that thing. :notam:
Where are your sacrafices?

[wsuwrhr]

I gotta agree here.
I read your posts, followed by the image of your boat, and I can't help to wonder the same thing.....
Aren't YOU part of the problem #1?
I gotta add one more thing here...you got a little Al Gore in you, there ULTRA26 #1. How much "shit" do you think that big ass boat of yours spews every time you take it out? Or how about the tow rig towing it? How 'bout you get rid of that pig and do your part to lessen emissions? Surely you don't need that thing. :notam:
Where are your sacrafices?

[SmokinLowriderSS]

Ho humm ... is this wall denting? My head's getting a sore spot. :rolleyes:
If the American people treat this issue as if it doesn't exist, little more will be done to reduce the production of emissions. If this belief proven to be invalid, further damage will have been done?
Just what will be accomplished by reducing CO2 emmissions by .00027% Ultra?That's all we emit, total, out of all the natural CO2 emmissions.
If the American people treat this issue as if it does exist, substantially more will be done to reduce the production of emissions.
.00027% reduction, MAX, IF we closed the world down tonight at midnight.
If this belief proven to be invalid, what damage will have been done?
.00027% improvement.
It's simple.
Filling the air with shit isn't a good thing, I don't care what you do or don't call it.
How long does it take to fill the air, at .00027% a year?
But to most of you, this is just more of my leftist lib ignorant BS :)
Thx for noting my exception. :D
Incedentally, for comaritive visualization, the distance from LA to New York City is 2462 miles.
.00027% of that, is 35 FEET, 10 feet longer than the length of your boat.
35.098272 feet, exactly
From LA to Honolulu, 2551 miles, .00027% is 36.37', another 1 foot 4 inches.

[SmokinLowriderSS]

.
I gotta add one more thing here...you got a little Al Gore in you, there ULTRA26 #1. How much "shit" do you think that big ass boat of yours spews every time you take it out? ?
He has an Ultra-Efficient Fuel Injection System on it Steel, so it's got a far smaller "carbon footprint" that my old Holley-carbed Taylor. :D
Maybe he'll buy the cat manifolds for it next winter, and make it even better.
.Or how about the tow rig towing it? How 'bout you get rid of that pig and do your part to lessen emissions? Surely you don't need that thing. :notam:
Where are your sacrafices?
I asked him about those, twice, and was ignored. I bet you are too, unless THIS PROD annoys him enough. :D
He has solar on his house too.
He's much greener than I am. I burn trees to heat the farmhouse in the wintertime. (wood-fired central heat furnace sitting right next to the back-up, elec central heat.:D )
Oh, and I burn up gasoline (2-stroke oil in it too) sawing up the firewood.
I've got anough carbon footprint for the state of Rhode Island. :D :D
Does it help if I tow my Taylor with a V-6 Dodge Dakota that's fuel injected instead of my V-8 F-150 that's fuel injected?

[Blown 472]

The Christian belief that God will end the world and only Christians will be accepted into heaven (more or less).
Tree hugging fagot bark eaters think humans will destroy the planet, Mother Gaia, and all life will cease to exist.
Same concept different nuts.:D
What if satan comes first and kills all the hyprocrite christians? That would rock.:devil:

[SmokinLowriderSS]

What if satan comes first and kills all the hyprocrite christians? That would rock.:devil:
If, on the other hand, God shows up and just wipes out ALL the hypocrites, you may find this list a bit less "entertaining".:idea:

[ULTRA26 # 1]

. I don't think anyone will disagree with that, but what does it have to do with global warming? What "shit" are yout talking about in context with, and related to "global warming"??
BTW...it's nothing compared to the shit that the libs spew...they're on borrowed credits when it comes to their verbal pollution.
There's another one thye're missing...bull$hit credits.
Purchased any lately, ULTRA? :)
I gotta add one more thing here...you got a little Al Gore in you, there ULTRA26 #1. How much "shit" do you think that big ass boat of yours spews every time you take it out? Or how about the tow rig towing it? How 'bout you get rid of that pig and do your part to lessen emissions? Surely you don't need that thing. :notam:
Where are your sacrafices?
I drive a Civic not an SVT Cobra, like a did a years ago That big ol boat gets better fuel economy than those little jets. Stock Merc Ultra low emission power No longer driving a boat with a blown 502 The truck lives in a different state, with the boat. it only tows the boat. Much of my household lighting is LED. My appliances and systems are all energy efficient. All duel payne windows. I'm using less than half of the energy and fuel I did 2 years ago. Probablly make much more effort, in this regard, than yourself, Mr. Comp
Still can't get an answer
If the American people treat this issue as if it doesn't exist, little more will be done to reduce the production of emissions. If this belief proven to be invalid, further damage will have been done?
If the American people treat this issue as if it does exist, substantially more will be done to reduce the production of emissions. If this belief proven to be invalid, what damage will have been done?
He has an Ultra-Efficient Fuel Injection System on it Steel, so it's got a far smaller "carbon footprint" that my old Holley-carbed Taylor. :D
Maybe he'll buy the cat manifolds for it next winter, and make it even better.
I asked him about those, twice, and was ignored. I bet you are too, unless THIS PROD annoys him enough. :D
He has solar on his house too.
He's much greener than I am. I burn trees to heat the farmhouse in the wintertime. (wood-fired central heat furnace sitting right next to the back-up, elec central heat.:D )
Oh, and I burn up gasoline (2-stroke oil in it too) sawing up the firewood.
I've got anough carbon footprint for the state of Rhode Island. :D :D
Does it help if I tow my Taylor with a V-6 Dodge Dakota that's fuel injected instead of my V-8 F-150 that's fuel injected?
Smokin,
Make fun if you feel the need. Giving a shit us a start. It's a shame you don't.

[Blown 472]

I drive a Civic not an SVT Cobra, like a did a years ago That big ol boat gets better fuel economy than those little jets. Stock Merc Ultra low emission power No longer driving a boat with a blown 502 The truck lives in a different state, with the boat. it only tows the boat. Much of my household lighting is LED. My appliances and systems are all energy efficient. All duel payne windows. I'm using less than half of the energy and fuel I did 2 years ago. Probablly make much more effort, in this regard, than yourself, Mr. Comp
Still can't get an answer
If the American people treat this issue as if it doesn't exist, little more will be done to reduce the production of emissions. If this belief proven to be invalid, further damage will have been done?
If the American people treat this issue as if it does exist, substantially more will be done to reduce the production of emissions. If this belief proven to be invalid, what damage will have been done?
Smokin,
Make fun if you feel the need. Giving a shit us a start. It's a shame you don't.
Thats cuz no one told him he should.

[Blown 472]

If, on the other hand, God shows up and just wipes out ALL the hypocrites, you may find this list a bit less "entertaining".:idea:
I will miss you.

[SmokinLowriderSS]

Ho humm ... is this wall denting? My head's getting a sore spot. :rolleyes:
Just what will be accomplished by reducing CO2 emmissions by .00027% Ultra?That's all we emit, total, out of all the natural CO2 emmissions.
.00027% reduction, MAX, IF we closed the world down tonight at midnight.
.00027% improvement.
How long does it take to fill the air, at .00027% a year?
Thx for noting my exception. :D
Incedentally, for comaritive visualization, the distance from LA to New York City is 2462 miles.
.00027% of that, is 35 FEET, 10 feet longer than the length of your boat.
35.098272 feet, exactly
From LA to Honolulu, 2551 miles, .00027% is 36.37', another 1 foot 4 inches.
Comical is back, with time to post up responses to my crass and sarcastic intent to spew up all the carbon he is not spewing, but won't address ANYTHING HARD like the above, or steelcomp's noting of his own hipocrisy of the dualie and the 25' x 496CID boat.
At least one of us is ballsy enough to reson out WHY I "don't give a shi+" instead of simply running on faith.
Keep telling yourself that blown, just keep telling yourself that. Best blinders on the board.

[Marty Gras]

If the USA stops all life "as we know it" and we all go back to walking and candle light, who will join us? China (the largest polluter), India, Russia, Iran, Korea, FRANCE??? I don't think that any other country will change. Historically, "global warming" was/is the period of time between ICE AGES. I understand that the "hole in the ozone" changes minute to minute. It changes with air pressure, temperature, moisture, rotation. I also don't think that "global warming" will be changed if Gore, H. Clinton, and Edwards did move into separate tents! But I must admit that I like "their point of view, on the world outside of their castles!" "it's good to be king!" Prevent global warming, CHILL OUT

[steelcomp]

Still can't get an answer
If the American people treat this issue as if it doesn't exist, little more will be done to reduce the production of emissions. If this belief proven to be invalid, further damage will have been done?
If the American people treat this issue as if it does exist, substantially more will be done to reduce the production of emissions. If this belief proven to be invalid, what damage will have been done?
The questions are irrelevant, because they don't have anything to do with fact. The "issue" of Global Warming does not exist as AlGore, you, and the rest of the mindless, coolaid drinking, non-thinking extremists are trying to pass off as fact. It's purely a political agenda being promoted by the left, and supported by the media, as another scare tactic to try and control the public's political opinion. Just like they did to Regan and the Soviets. Too bad they don't learn their lesson...that backfired so badly (the Dem's) lost everything politically back then.
Fortunately, with newer and more reliable sources for information, the public is beginning to wake up to the bill of goods they're being sold about "global warming", and taking a second lok at the facts.
Another point is, you act as if this thing about emissions is a NEW CONCEPT. Where were you in the 60's and 70's? Do you have any idea what emission levels have done since then? The American people (both voluntarily, and in-voluntarily) have been treating this "issue" as if it does exist for thirty years or more. Cars today have near ZERO emissions, and the US is by far the cleanest of the major manufacturing countries in the world. So much to the point that we (local companies) can't even afford to manufacture in our own country because standards have become unrealistically high. Our impact as humans on the global climate has effectively zero impact, as evidence of global warming shows to have existed thousands of years ago...long before we were here. How do you explain that?
Here's another little tidbit you might just choke on...Your boat's gas consumption isn't it's only "carbon footprint" (to coin a useless phrase) although it's no surprise that's all the further you can see past yourself. What kind of pollution do you think results in the manufacturing of just one of your boats? How many hundreds of gallons of resin do you think is in there? How many thousands of gallons of fuel were used to manufacture and transport all the necessary materials, parts, and hardware to build just one?
Your boat, and that blown truck you tow it with SUCK gas, no matter how "efficient" you say they are, and both are perfect examples of the arrogant excess you live in. You can save your pathological, self congratulating pats on the back of being more "energy conscious" than the rest of us...all you're trying to do is ease your own guilty conscience, because to try and make us think you really give a shit is a joke...you and big Al, alike. You live in total excess because you can afford to, for which I applaud you, but your self righteous justification is pure BS. And to let you know, my 820hp jet boat uses about 3 gals of gas in an entire racing weekend. You can't drive out of the 5 mph zone on 3 gals. :notam:
BTW...Where's your answer??I don't think anyone will disagree with that, but what does it have to do with global warming? What "shit" are you talking about in context with, and related to "global warming"??More of your hypocrisy...you avoid answering every question posted to you that, by answering truthfully, would expose you for the phony you are.
Typical.

[steelcomp]

or steelcomp's noting of his own hipocrisy of the dualie and the 25' x 496CID boat.
He's not towing with a dualy...the idiot tows a 15K+ lb boat with a freekin F150 Lightning!! LOL!!!:eek:

[steelcomp]

Quote: ULTRA That big ol boat gets better fuel economy than those little jets. You're just unbelievably stupid if you really believe that.

[SmokinLowriderSS]

He's not towing with a dualy...the idiot tows a 15K+ lb boat with a freekin F150 Lightning!! LOL!!!:eek:
Thx for the call on that Steel, I hadn't looked closely enough at the picture. :)

[SmokinLowriderSS]

Solar/sunspot cycles shorten when intensity/solar temperature increases.
Layman's terms:
Sunspots appear in roughly 11 year cycles from a LOT to very few, and then back again.
Shorter cycles happen in times of increased brightness/temperature.
The comparison of sunspot cycle time to global temperatures.
http://www-ssc.igpp.ucla.edu/IASTP/43/image6th.gif
Interesting, might call that "correlation".
The same comparison researched back to 1580.
http://www-ssc.igpp.ucla.edu/IASTP/43/image7th.gif
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.
Compare that temperature charting, especially the 1940 to 1980 "we're gonna have an ice age" temperature DROP to the chartings of "greenhouse gasses" of the past century.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/b/bb/Major_greenhouse_gas_trends.png/350px-
NOT a good match, but that's just my opinion.
Coud cover (a MAJOR temperature controll element) and Cosmic radiation output from the sun from 1980 thru 1995.
http://www-ssc.igpp.ucla.edu/IASTP/43/image9th.gif
Hmmmmmm Interesting I think.
Atmospheric gasses, or solar output. As one genious on the board here said before running and hiding, "see for yourself and make up your mind". :D
Oh, by the way, in reducing CO2 emmissions, the Italians should start. They have vents (holes) in the ground, spewing CO2 in enourmous ammounts, directly into the air. Very dangerous areas to be in (lethal atmosphere).
Here's a bit of it:
"We estimate that there are between 150 and 200 carbon dioxide vents in this area of Italy," says Kerrick. "One vent east of Naples emits over 200 tons of carbon dioxide per day."
The researchers note that emissions from some vents are equivalent to that of some volcanoes. The flux from the vent east of Naples is equivalent to the combined crater and diffuse flux from Vulcano, a volcanic island near Sicily.
When looking at diffuse degassing, the researchers found one area that measured less than a tenth of a square mile, yet emits 150 tons of carbon dioxide per day. The rest of the story from Penn State Univ. (http://www.psu.edu/ur/NEWS/SCIENCETECH/italy.html)
There are more areas like these, in South America, here in the US at Mammoth Mountain/horseshoe lake, and elsewhere arround the world.
Humans stopping ALL human CO2 release will do what? Reduce CO2 emmissions by .00027%. :idea:
That'll do a LOT, yesiree bob, it will. :rolleyes:

[SmokinLowriderSS]

The UN report on global warming from last year says Human CO2 production is NOT the worst problem.
The worst global warming greenhouse gas is:
Methane, from:
Cow Farts
Sheep Farts
Pig Farts
Goat Farts
Horse Farts
Chicken Farts
Goose Farts
Duck Farts
Deer/Elk/Caribou/Moose/Whale/Seal/Otter/Raccoon/every warm-blooded animal live including Dog and Cat FARTS.
According to a new report published by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, the livestock sector generates more greenhouse gas emissions as measured in CO2 equivalent – 18 percent – than transport.
So cows are worst than cars, and we all have to become VEGAN and walk to save the planet.
Gimme another cheeseburger over here, gotta "fuel up" before going water skiing. :D
Oh, just so as to not confuse ya Ultra, this post is mocking, both Global Warming AND the UN, the previous 2 were serious.

[ULTRA26 # 1]

He's not towing with a dualy...the idiot tows a 15K+ lb boat with a freekin F150 Lightning!! LOL!!!:eek:
The boat weighs 4600 pounds you moron,
The boat uses less fuel and pollutes less than thiose ltttle jets, fact not fiction.
and my questions must be to difficult for that little pea brain of yours
I'm not Al Gore and my belieif that it is time for mankind to reduce emmisions is hardly extreme.

[SmokinLowriderSS]

The boat weighs 4600 pounds you moron.
Mine weighs 1900 pounds.

[Blown 472]

Solar/sunspot cycles shorten when intensity/solar temperature increases.
Layman's terms:
Sunspots appear in roughly 11 year cycles from a LOT to very few, and then back again.
Shorter cycles happen in times of increased brightness/temperature.
The comparison of sunspot cycle time to global temperatures.
http://www-ssc.igpp.ucla.edu/IASTP/43/image6th.gif
Interesting, might call that "correlation".
The same comparison researched back to 1580.
http://www-ssc.igpp.ucla.edu/IASTP/43/image7th.gif
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.
Compare that temperature charting, especially the 1940 to 1980 "we're gonna have an ice age" temperature DROP to the chartings of "greenhouse gasses" of the past century.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/b/bb/Major_greenhouse_gas_trends.png/350px-
NOT a good match, but that's just my opinion.
Coud cover (a MAJOR temperature controll element) and Cosmic radiation output from the sun from 1980 thru 1995.
http://www-ssc.igpp.ucla.edu/IASTP/43/image9th.gif
Hmmmmmm Interesting I think.
Atmospheric gasses, or solar output. As one genious on the board here said before running and hiding, "see for yourself and make up your mind". :D
Oh, by the way, in reducing CO2 emmissions, the Italians should start. They have vents (holes) in the ground, spewing CO2 in enourmous ammounts, directly into the air. Very dangerous areas to be in (lethal atmosphere).
Here's a bit of it:
"We estimate that there are between 150 and 200 carbon dioxide vents in this area of Italy," says Kerrick. "One vent east of Naples emits over 200 tons of carbon dioxide per day."
The researchers note that emissions from some vents are equivalent to that of some volcanoes. The flux from the vent east of Naples is equivalent to the combined crater and diffuse flux from Vulcano, a volcanic island near Sicily.
When looking at diffuse degassing, the researchers found one area that measured less than a tenth of a square mile, yet emits 150 tons of carbon dioxide per day. The rest of the story from Penn State Univ. (http://www.psu.edu/ur/NEWS/SCIENCETECH/italy.html)
There are more areas like these, in South America, here in the US at Mammoth Mountain/horseshoe lake, and elsewhere arround the world.
Humans stopping ALL human CO2 release will do what? Reduce CO2 emmissions by .00027%. :idea:
That'll do a LOT, yesiree bob, it will. :rolleyes:
Jesus H Christ do you need a life.

[ULTRA26 # 1]

Solar/sunspot cycles shorten when intensity/solar temperature increases.
Layman's terms:
Sunspots appear in roughly 11 year cycles from a LOT to very few, and then back again.
Shorter cycles happen in times of increased brightness/temperature.
The comparison of sunspot cycle time to global temperatures.
http://www-ssc.igpp.ucla.edu/IASTP/43/image6th.gif
Interesting, might call that "correlation".
The same comparison researched back to 1580.
http://www-ssc.igpp.ucla.edu/IASTP/43/image7th.gif
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.
Compare that temperature charting, especially the 1940 to 1980 "we're gonna have an ice age" temperature DROP to the chartings of "greenhouse gasses" of the past century.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/b/bb/Major_greenhouse_gas_trends.png/350px-
NOT a good match, but that's just my opinion.
Coud cover (a MAJOR temperature controll element) and Cosmic radiation output from the sun from 1980 thru 1995.
http://www-ssc.igpp.ucla.edu/IASTP/43/image9th.gif
Hmmmmmm Interesting I think.
Atmospheric gasses, or solar output. As one genious on the board here said before running and hiding, "see for yourself and make up your mind". :D
Oh, by the way, in reducing CO2 emmissions, the Italians should start. They have vents (holes) in the ground, spewing CO2 in enourmous ammounts, directly into the air. Very dangerous areas to be in (lethal atmosphere).
Here's a bit of it:
"We estimate that there are between 150 and 200 carbon dioxide vents in this area of Italy," says Kerrick. "One vent east of Naples emits over 200 tons of carbon dioxide per day."
The researchers note that emissions from some vents are equivalent to that of some volcanoes. The flux from the vent east of Naples is equivalent to the combined crater and diffuse flux from Vulcano, a volcanic island near Sicily.
When looking at diffuse degassing, the researchers found one area that measured less than a tenth of a square mile, yet emits 150 tons of carbon dioxide per day. The rest of the story from Penn State Univ. (http://www.psu.edu/ur/NEWS/SCIENCETECH/italy.html)
There are more areas like these, in South America, here in the US at Mammoth Mountain/horseshoe lake, and elsewhere arround the world.
Humans stopping ALL human CO2 release will do what? Reduce CO2 emmissions by .00027%. :idea:
That'll do a LOT, yesiree bob, it will. :rolleyes:
Smokin,
You and I both know that I can cut and paste evidence to the contrary, you can respond with more of the same, then me, then you and so on. It's a waste of time. Your lying if you say that you don't see this issue isn't as one of left vs right. The same goes for you too Steel.
And yes I could do more and probabally will in the future. Reducing exhaust is a good thing and it's a shame that your politics won't allow you to see this.
Now I'm going to go enjoy my 15K pound boat that uses 3 gallons of fuel every 5 minutes, at idle, and hope to burn your sorry asses of the planet. :) Is that better?:)
later

[Blown 472]

Smokin,
You and I both know that I can cut and paste evidence to the contrary, you can respond with more of the same, then me, then you and so on. It's a waste of time. Your lying if you say that you don't see this issue isn't as one of left vs right. The same goes for you too Steel.
And yes I could do more and probabally will in the future. Reducing exhaust is a good thing and it's a shame that your politics won't allow you to see this.
Now I'm going to go enjoy my 15K pound boat that uses 3 gallons of fuel every 5 minutes, at idle, and hope to burn your sorry asses of the planet. :) Is that better?:)
later
Dude, you forgot f uck the poor, those bastards in new orleans had it coming, kill all the arabs, and WHITE POWER, then you will fit right in.:idea:

[bigq]

The UN report on global warming from last year says Human CO2 production is NOT the worst problem.
The worst global warming greenhouse gas is:
Methane, from:
Cow Farts
Sheep Farts
Pig Farts
Goat Farts
Horse Farts
Chicken Farts
Goose Farts
Duck Farts
Deer/Elk/Caribou/Moose/Whale/Seal/Otter/Raccoon/every warm-blooded animal live including Dog and Cat FARTS.
According to a new report published by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, the livestock sector generates more greenhouse gas emissions as measured in CO2 equivalent – 18 percent – than transport.
So cows are worst than cars, and we all have to become VEGAN and walk to save the planet.
Gimme another cheeseburger over here, gotta "fuel up" before going water skiing. :D
Oh, just so as to not confuse ya Ultra, this post is mocking, both Global Warming AND the UN, the previous 2 were serious.
Hey man don't be bagging on my food source.Who knows where that could lead..:D

[Schiada76]

Dude, you forgot f uck the poor, those bastards in new orleans had it coming, kill all the arabs, and WHITE POWER, then you will fit right in.:idea:
The poor f**k themselves, the bastards in New Orleans knew it was coming (and will again even worse), What? Only black brown yellow power is ok with you?:idea:

[Blown 472]

The poor f**k themselves, the bastards in New Orleans knew it was coming (and will again even worse), What? Only black brown yellow power is ok with you?:idea:
Fine with me but I dont fit in with the crowd here.:)

[bigq]

Smokin,
You and I both know that I can cut and paste evidence to the contrary, you can respond with more of the same, then me, then you and so on. It's a waste of time. Your lying if you say that you don't see this issue isn't as one of left vs right. The same goes for you too Steel.
And yes I could do more and probabally will in the future. Reducing exhaust is a good thing and it's a shame that your politics won't allow you to see this.
Now I'm going to go enjoy my 15K pound boat that uses 3 gallons of fuel every 5 minutes, at idle, and hope to burn your sorry asses of the planet. :) Is that better?:)
later
Post it up, I would like to see it.
I see nothing wrong with trying to conserve energy or have cleaner and renewable energy, but to me Global warming debate is all about power and money, but if it leads to the US getting rid of oil based fuel it might be a good thing.

[steelcomp]

My bad on the 15K (LOL...I guess that makes me a moron. It's big, obnoxious, and ugly, that's all I know)...with the trailer weight, it's still stupid to tow that thing with a stepside F150, but that's you. You'll argue that like you argue everything else you argue. Your boat can't possibly use less fuel than a 1500lb jet boat. It's physically impossible, so that's another one of your pathological self-congratulating lies.
Like I said above. Your questions aren't difficult, they're irrelevant. Yes, we have no banannas. Still, I answered, but you have yet to answer any of the hundred or so that have been thrown your way.
Smokin,
You and I both know that I can cut and paste evidence to the contrary, you can respond with more of the same, then me, then you and so on. It's a waste of time. Your lying if you say that you don't see this issue isn't as one of left vs right. The same goes for you too Steel.
Then why don't you? (I don't think you can) PLEASE show us your rebuttal to these facts, so we can again see what a MORON you are.
And I've clearly stated, and it's obvious to most of those who use their heads for more than bean counting, that this is CLEARLY a political issue.
BTW...emissions is spelled with one M and two S's, dipshit, and "your" in that context uses an "e". You write and spell like a 4th grader, so you probably shouldn't throw the "moron" around too much. (check out the red highlights) Kinda' like livin' in a glass house and throwin' rocks...really stupid.:)
The boat weighs 4600 pounds you moron,
The boat uses less fuel and pollutes less than thiose ltttle jets, fact not fiction.
and my questions must be to difficult for that little pea brain of yours
I'm not Al Gore and my belieif that it is time for mankind to reduce emmisions is hardly extreme.
You and AlGore are very like-minded, both in your stupidity and your arrogance, along with your hypocracy and double standard. Like I said before, (which you refuse to acknowledge) the idea of reducing emissions has been around a very long time...for you to keep saying the time is now, just shows how far off your thinking is.
I stopped reading the BS you spew a month or so ago, and it's just like a soap opera...come back a month later and hear you are with Blown, suckin on your nuts, still spewing the same stupid BS.
You two make a great couple.
Blown, wipe your chin...you got Johnny jiz on it.

[steelcomp]

Dude, you forgot f uck the poor, those bastards in new orleans had it coming, kill all the arabs, and WHITE POWER, then you will fit right in.:idea:
Never miss a chance to spew your hatred, eh Blowjob? :notam:
Must suck to be you.

[Blown 472]

Never miss a chance to spew your hatred, eh Blowjob? :notam:
Must suck to be you.
Just repeating everything that has been said on here.
It does, you dont know my anguish, how can I be like you?

[steelcomp]

Just repeating everything that has been said on here.
It does, you dont know my anguish, how can I be like you?Pulleeezzz...I wouldn't wish that curse on anyone...not even you.

[SmokinLowriderSS]

Smokin,
You and I both know that I can cut and paste evidence to the contrary,
So, you know of some alternate versions of history that you want to use as proof. Interesting.
Post it. I'm curious.
Your lying if you say that you don't see this issue isn't as one of left vs right.
I possess the exact sane distain for a conservative that is fool enough to believe in this crazed environmental-nut anti-capitolist agenda, BUT, you ARE correct that it IS to a very great extent left/right in that the left are pushing the GW as real (take note of Gore and the environmentalists) and the right are looking at history and history shows so many problems with the left's "facts" that the right are unconvinced.

[ULTRA26 # 1]

My bad on the 15K (LOL...I guess that makes me a moron. It's big, obnoxious, and ugly, that's all I know)...with the trailer weight, it's still stupid to tow that thing with a stepside F150, but that's you. You'll argue that like you argue everything else you argue. Your boat can't possibly use less fuel than a 1500lb jet boat. It's physically impossible, so that's another one of your pathological self-congratulating lies.
Like I said above. Your questions aren't difficult, they're irrelevant. Yes, we have no banannas. Still, I answered, but you have yet to answer any of the hundred or so that have been thrown your way.
Smokin,
You and I both know that I can cut and paste evidence to the contrary, you can respond with more of the same, then me, then you and so on. It's a waste of time. Your lying if you say that you don't see this issue isn't as one of left vs right. The same goes for you too Steel.
Then why don't you? (I don't think you can) PLEASE show us your rebuttal to these facts, so we can again see what a MORON you are.
And I've clearly stated, and it's obvious to most of those who use their heads for more than bean counting, that this is CLEARLY a political issue.
BTW...emissions is spelled with one M and two S's, dipshit, and "your" in that context uses an "e". You write and spell like a 4th grader, so you probably shouldn't throw the "moron" around too much. (check out the red highlights) Kinda' like livin' in a glass house and throwin' rocks...really stupid.:)
You and AlGore are very like-minded, both in your stupidity and your arrogance, along with your hypocracy and double standard. Like I said before, (which you refuse to acknowledge) the idea of reducing emissions has been around a very long time...for you to keep saying the time is now, just shows how far off your thinking is.
I stopped reading the BS you spew a month or so ago, and it's just like a soap opera...come back a month later and hear you are with Blown, suckin on your nuts, still spewing the same stupid BS.
You two make a great couple.
Blown, wipe your chin...you got Johnny jiz on it.
You talk like a jealous little boy. Grow up child
The poor f**k themselves, the bastards in New Orleans knew it was coming (and will again even worse), What? Only black brown yellow power is ok with you?:idea:
Steel, I bet you make your mother and father very proud. They raised a ignorent, racist, radical Good job mom and dad.
I see nothing wrong with trying to conserve energy or have cleaner and renewable energy, but to me Global warming debate is all about power and money, but if it leads to the US getting rid of oil based fuel it might be a good thing.
Well put. There are countless reasons to rely less on oil, our freedom and independence being just a couple.
So, you know of some alternate versions of history that you want to use as proof. Interesting.
Post it. I'm curious.
Smokin,
There is no history that includes climate changes relaated massive amounts of emissions.
Not going to waste time engaging in a cut and paste war with you. Everyone knows you are the Heavyweight Champion of Hot Boat, me included. Now your opinion is fact? As I recall you opined that the there would be a scientific conclusion within 2 decades. Damn, time really does fly when you get older. Seems like you just made that comment a few days ago

[steelcomp]

You talk like a jealous little boy. Grow up child Typical...don't address the message, attack the messenger. That's right about your intelectual limit, isn't it?
Trust me, old man, you're nothing to be jealous of. Like I've said before, you're an embarassment to your generation. (and probably your family)
Originally Posted by Schiada76
The poor f**k themselves, the bastards in New Orleans knew it was coming (and will again even worse), What? Only black brown yellow power is ok with you?
Steel, I bet you make your mother and father very proud. They raised a ignorent, racist, radical Good job mom and dad. Why are you quoting Schiada76, and addressing me?
BTW...my mother is passed away, and my father dosen't judge me, he just loves me.

[steelcomp]

Originally Posted by bigq
I see nothing wrong with trying to conserve energy or have cleaner and renewable energy, but to me Global warming debate is all about power and money, but if it leads to the US getting rid of oil based fuel it might be a good thing.
ULTRA:Well put. There are countless reasons to rely less on oil, our freedom and independence being just a couple.
So you're admitting the Global Warming farse is about politics (power and money). You DO have a brain. Oh wait, you think alternative energy will ensure our freedom and independance.
Never mind. :notam:

[SmokinLowriderSS]

Smokin,
There is no history that includes climate changes relaated massive amounts of emissions.
Wrong, yet again.
There IS historical CO2/temperature history, that the LEFT IS USING to push this agenda. It is the way thay LIE ABOUT IT that is a problem.
They CLAIM it shows CO2 emmissions PRECEEDING temperature increase w3hile the reality of it is that they have shifted the charting TO REMOVE THE FACT THAT THE INCREASE FOLLOWS TEMPERATURE INCREASE BY ROUGHLY 200 YEARS.
The earth warms, water requires a HUGE ammount of energy input to increase it's temperature (high-school physics), and THEN the warmed ocean water outgasses some of it's CO2. It is HISTORY.
Here's 542 MILLION YEARS of history, with CO2 levels in excess of 10 TIMES current levels. Current time is ON THE LEFT.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/7/76/Phanerozoic_Carbon_Dioxide.png/300px-
Not going to waste time engaging in a cut and paste war with you.
Short on refuting "evidence" eh?
Everyone knows you are the Heavyweight Champion of Hot Boat, me included.
Oh spare me your arrogant condecention from upon high. Prove me wrong and drop me down a peg or 30.
Now your opinion is fact?
No, My opinion IS BASED IN FACT, unlike yours, which is based on feel-good.
As I recall you opined that the there would be a scientific conclusion within 2 decades. Damn, time really does fly when you get older. Seems like you just made that comment a few days ago According to you, the conclusion was final a few years ago, wasn't it.
More arrogance, wonderful at display, like a strutting peacock or one of my cockerels. Steel's right, you have a lot in comon with Al and Breck Girl Edwards. I have just stayed with smacking you with facts and not playing personal like YOU and SCHIADA.

[SmokinLowriderSS]

Steel, I bet you make your mother and father very proud. They raised a ignorent, racist, radical Good job mom and dad.
Oh, and you need to re-read the instructions that came with your Rev. Jesse Jackson Race Card. Very poor usage.
Looks like you have some comonality with him and his budies Al and Lou too. :idea:

[jimslade]

Sorry there is no way to accurately measure CO2 levels beyond polar ice cap data(not millions of years) maybe a couple thousand at best. Why do people believe a theory and then do everything to prove it? If the earth was 10 million years old we would have 2 miles thick of meteorite dust. Also the seas would be a block of salt given the rate a sallination. I challenge people to look at information with an open mind and try and to understand the data. Theories are usually based on limited data and not on compilations of such. The simple fact is that we need to break away from relying on foreign energy sources, so we don't have to sacrifice our children to live stable lives.

[Schiada76]

Typical...don't address the message, attack the messenger. That's right about your intelectual limit, isn't it?
Trust me, old man, you're nothing to be jealous of. Like I've said before, you're an embarassment to your generation. (and probably your family)
Why are you quoting Schiada76, and addressing me?
BTW...my mother is passed away, and my father dosen't judge me, he just loves me.
He is so out of touch he actually is responding to my response to Blown and attributing it to you.
I don't think he can read.:rolleyes:

[ULTRA26 # 1]

Wrong, yet again.
There IS historical CO2/temperature history, that the LEFT IS USING to push this agenda. It is the way thay LIE ABOUT IT that is a problem.
They CLAIM it shows CO2 emmissions PRECEEDING temperature increase w3hile the reality of it is that they have shifted the charting TO REMOVE THE FACT THAT THE INCREASE FOLLOWS TEMPERATURE INCREASE BY ROUGHLY 200 YEARS.
The earth warms, water requires a HUGE ammount of energy input to increase it's temperature (high-school physics), and THEN the warmed ocean water outgasses some of it's CO2. It is HISTORY.
Here's 542 MILLION YEARS of history, with CO2 levels in excess of 10 TIMES current levels. Current time is ON THE LEFT.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/7/76/Phanerozoic_Carbon_Dioxide.png/300px-
Short on refuting "evidence" eh?
Oh spare me your arrogant condecention from upon high. Prove me wrong and drop me down a peg or 30.
No, My opinion IS BASED IN FACT, unlike yours, which is based on feel-good.
According to you, the conclusion was final a few years ago, wasn't it.
More arrogance, wonderful at display, like a strutting peacock or one of my cockerels. Steel's right, you have a lot in comon with Al and Breck Girl Edwards. I have just stayed with smacking you with facts and not playing personal like YOU and SCHIADA.
Your words in response to my comment:
"it's a matter of opinion"
"For the moment, yes, and in less than 2 decades, it will be a matter of scientific fact I believe"
Your current position is quite a radical change in what you believed 5 days ago. Flip flop flip flop doesn't become you, Smokin.
There is nothing feel good about mankind fu*king up the atmosphere, which is fact, pure and simple. A while back I realized that I was burning way to much fuel and decided to begin changing this. I have made some changes and intend to to make more. My truck is next, as it burns way too much fuel towing my 15k pound, ugly POS boat. :rolleyes:
Argue until your blue in the face which is all you seem to know how to do, when you view an issue as being related to the left. Again argue until your blue in the face, please.
Sorry for the misquote between Steel and 76. You both are just so pleasent I lost track of which a**hole I was talking to. What I stated applies equally to both of you. Steel posted his opinion about Katrina a while back. Very similar BS.
It's obvious that right and wrong are not a consideration when discussing matters in this forum. All that matters, to most of you here, is left and right and inflating egos. Standing on positions, purely based on political left or right is what's wrong with country. US dependence on foriegn oil is negatively affecting our freedom and independence. The US is wasting $125 million dollars a day on a war that that we have no business, (other than oil) being in. The Govt has mnadated outragous profits for drug companies, the natioanl debt is increasing at an historic rate, SSI is going broke, it is estimated that gas prices will reach $4.00 a gallon by mid summer, with the benifit of these reciord prices going directly into the pockects of already profit bloated oil companies, and most of you fools want to address these issues based on a Rush right wing agenda. Sorry and aint gonna work. To fix what is so very wrong woith this country is going to take the best minds from all political sides working together. IMO, the type of bullsh** that goes on in this forum, is what wrong with this country. Proving eachother isn't that answer. Accepting whats right, from both sides of the table, and placing the focus there is our only hope. Talking shit, based on party lines seems to be what's important to you. I would like to see some changes made and I don't many here
feel that way, unless it related to Christian morallity and more military action. Abortion is wrong but killing under the umbrella of war, is OK. Bullsh*t.
As Tex would say he recognizes my frustration. Don't you all think it's time that
we start working together as a nation instead of siding with one of two political parties that are both totally full of shit Sorry for the rant

[Old Texan]

Your words in response to my comment:
"it's a matter of opinion"
"For the moment, yes, and in less than 2 decades, it will be a matter of scientific fact I believe"
Your current position is quite a radical change in what you believed 5 days ago. Flip flop flip flop doesn't become you, Smokin.
There is nothing feel good about mankind fu*king up the atmosphere, which is fact, pure and simple. A while back I realized that I was burning way to much fuel and decided to begin changing this. I have made some changes and intend to to make more. My truck is next, as it burns way too much fuel towing my 15k pound, ugly POS boat. :rolleyes:
Argue until your blue in the face which is all you seem to know how to do, when you view an issue as being related to the left. Again argue until your blue in the face, please.
Sorry for the misquote between Steel and 76. You both are just so pleasent I lost track of which a**hole I was talking to.
I modify...therefore, I am what????
John, you need to slow down before you swell up and burst. Your BP has got to be soaring.
What is trying to be told is the fact of pollution being a problem which requires plans for it to be be properly dealt with over time. This is being done.
GW is a theory being thrown about as "pure fact". GW is just a possilbe consequence of pollution. It is viewed as a political issue based on those pushing it as an absolute.
You arguing GW as a politcal issue just futhers your frustration and makes for your opposition's argument. Whether you will ever admit it or not, you really don't read and comphrehed what others actually say in response to your comments.
GW may or may not exist. It may or may not be caused by pollution. However there are those that view GW as real and are quite specific to it's origin. These people are wrong without solid proof. They need to better expalin their points and realize there are real things being done to restrict pollution, whatever it's effects, and quit pointing the finger of blame and making this GW thing political.
There are 2 issues here and actually 3 when you throw in the politics.

[Schiada76]

"Sorry for the misquote between Steel and 76. You both are just so pleasent I lost track of which a**hole I was talking to."
HEY!!!! You forgot the other a**hole whose post I was responding to! You need to quote him first.:D

[Schiada76]

"Sorry for the misquote between Steel and 76. You both are just so pleasent I lost track of which a**hole I was talking to."
HEY!!!! You forgot the other a**hole whose post I was responding to! You need to quote him first.:D

[ULTRA26 # 1]

Previous post was editied.
Tex, you were right about my BP.
I have really had enough dealing with those who act as if they dont give a damn about anything exept following party lines. I don't even like the term GW. However I do believe that mankind is have a negative affect on the atmosphere and the enviorment. For this I have to listen to rash of BS.
I care, and for that I'm an idiot. To me there is something wromg with this picture.

[Schiada76]

Previous post was editied.
Tex, you were right about my BP.
I have really had enough dealing with those who act as if they dont give a damn about anything exept following party lines. I don't even like the term GW. However I do believe that mankind is have a negative affect on the atmosphere and the enviorment. For this I have to listen to rash of BS.
I care, and for that I'm an idiot. To me there is something wromg with this picture.
Stop lying! You're the one following the party line.
You've had a chitload of stats and history showing that the current gw hysteria is just that yet you continue to worship at the temple of the Algore.
You even call facts BS. You're a left wing ideologe and can't see past the end of your nose.
I've asked you before to start a pollution thread if that's what you want to talk about but you can't even seem to be able to tell the difference between GW and pollution. Can you?:rolleyes:

[Old Texan]

Previous post was editied.
Tex, you were right about my BP.
I have really had enough dealing with those who act as if they dont give a damn about anything exept following party lines. I don't even like the term GW. However I do believe that mankind is have a negative affect on the atmosphere and the enviorment. For this I have to listen to rash of BS.
I care, and for that I'm an idiot. To me there is something wromg with this picture.
Once again no one is questiong the matter of pollution. And there is a lot being done if we study the differences between now and 30 years ago as far as measurable pollution in our environment. From what I can see everyone contributing to this thread agrees there is pollution and it needs to be addressed. What you seem to be frustrating many with is the point nothing is being done to better pollution control when that's not the case.
As far as the political issues and the divide down party lines, it is quite apparent that one side is taking the stance that nothing is being done and man is deliberately polluting. I think these 2 points are fallacy. I work in the industrial sector and I see everyday the strides in technology to eliminate pollution.
Why isn't the positive being reported by the media? Why does the media make big stories out of "old" closed down pollution sites being monitored and cleaned up rather than telling the story of modern sites using controls to operate cleanly thus dwelling on the bad things of the past that are not being practiced today? Why when the media talks about power plants do they show condenser units emitting giant clouds of wate vapor on a cool day letting an ignorant general public believe these are huge clouds of pollutants? Why does the media picture a mother and cub polar bear louging on a broken up iceflow insinuating it's a melting glacier? These are things and misrepresentations that bring political divide and give a false representation of the positive.
John don't take this the wrong way but your 2 questions and their purpose support what pisses off a lot of intelligent people, the resortation to trickery by means of insinuating a problem exists to motivate people to care and fix the problem rather than being honest and educating the public to live cleaner to fix the problem. Trusting people to be sincere and understanding that we need to better police our environment is the answer not the BS Al Gore and "Twinky" Moore spew in their 3rd rate movies. Division and resentment spawn from arrogance and falsehoods.
I'm far more impressed with an individual that rids his yard and garden of chemical fertilizers, herbicides, and insecticides than I am with someone driving a Prius or trading carbon offsets. This person does far more to improve the environment than the showy media hog in a high dollar alternative vehicle or farfetched scam that has minimal effect overthe long haul.
Read what people say and understand their intent without focusing on the namecalling and posturing. Until you can do that you just aren't understanding the real message that 99% of the contibution to this very thread favors a clean environment and personal care for the future. It's there if you will look.

[ULTRA26 # 1]

Once again no one is questiong the matter of pollution. And there is a lot being done if we study the differences between now and 30 years ago as far as measurable pollution in our environment. From what I can see everyone contributing to this thread agrees there is pollution and it needs to be addressed. What you seem to be frustrating many with is the point nothing is being done to better pollution control when that's not the case.
As far as the political issues and the divide down party lines, it is quite apparent that one side is taking the stance that nothing is being done and man is deliberately polluting. I think these 2 points are fallacy. I work in the industrial sector and I see everyday the strides in technology to eliminate pollution.
Why isn't the positive being reported by the media? Why does the media make big stories out of "old" closed down pollution sites being monitored and cleaned up rather than telling the story of modern sites using controls to operate cleanly thus dwelling on the bad things of the past that are not being practiced today? Why when the media talks about power plants do they show condenser units emitting giant clouds of wate vapor on a cool day letting an ignorant general public believe these are huge clouds of pollutants? Why does the media picture a mother and cub polar bear louging on a broken up iceflow insinuating it's a melting glacier? These are things and misrepresentations that bring political divide and give a false representation of the positive.
John don't take this the wrong way but your 2 questions and their purpose support what pisses off a lot of intelligent people, the resortation to trickery by means of insinuating a problem exists to motivate people to care and fix the problem rather than being honest and educating the public to live cleaner to fix the problem. Trusting people to be sincere and understanding that we need to better police our environment is the answer not the BS Al Gore and "Twinky" Moore spew in their 3rd rate movies. Division and resentment spawn from arrogance and falsehoods.
I'm far more impressed with an individual that rids his yard and garden of chemical fertilizers, herbicides, and insecticides than I am with someone driving a Prius or trading carbon offsets. This person does far more to improve the environment than the showy media hog in a high dollar alternative vehicle or farfetched scam that has minimal effect overthe long haul.
Read what people say and understand their intent without focusing on the namecalling and posturing. Until you can do that you just aren't understanding the real message that 99% of the contibution to this very thread favors a clean environment and personal care for the future. It's there if you will look.
Tex,
I have read what people in this thread have said. Some do discuss the pollution issue as if the give a damn about the enviorement and there are others who act is if this is all a big f'n joke. It seems that because I don't come from the far right, many of the people here have fun screwin' with me. This is fine. I happen to believe that there is a problem with what man pumps into the atmosphere. Not becuase al gore says so, but because simple common sense. Without science, I can state without doubt that air is cleaner than it was 30 and 40 years ago. We have come a long way in this regard, I can see it with my own eyes. There is no middle ground in this place. If you are anyplace slightly left of right, Smoking will spend 12 hours a day to prove you wrong. When someone doesn't have the time or desire to spend 13 hours to rebut some of his so called proof, he/she becomes a POS to the rest of his followers. I guess I just don't have the dedication and/or time needed to talk in here. As I have said in the past, whether or not you and I agree about things doesn't matter, as we seem to communicate like adults which is a good thing.
Take care Tex
Stop lying! You're the one following the party line.
You've had a chitload of stats and history showing that the current gw hysteria is just that yet you continue to worship at the temple of the Algore.
You even call facts BS. You're a left wing ideologe and can't see past the end of your nose.
I've asked you before to start a pollution thread if that's what you want to talk about but you can't even seem to be able to tell the difference between GW and pollution. Can you?:rolleyes:
That's it, I'm lying and I'm a left wing ideologe who can't see past the end of my nose due to following leftist party lines. You're right
Does you ego feel bigger now. I hope so

[Schiada76]

Your real problem is you can't stay on topic or accept facts.
You twist the truth like all libs and march along following the party line.
Man made Global Warming is a joke, a sack of pure bullshit that you bought into and now worship as a new religion with the Algore as it's high priest. When we rufute your and his BS you lie and say we conservatives claim that air pollution is a joke.
Please refer to the Air Pollution thread for the Air Pollution debate. Thank You!:D :D

[ULTRA26 # 1]

Your real problem is you can't stay on topic or accept facts.
You twist the truth like all libs and march along following the party line.
Man made Global Warming is a joke, a sack of pure bullshit that you bought into and now worship as a new religion with the Algore as it's high priest. When we rufute your and his BS you lie and say we conservatives claim that air pollution is a joke.
Please refer to the Air Pollution thread for the Air Pollution debate. Thank You!:D :D
Again you're right. You will always be right as you will never admit to anything else. I am a lying leftist lib with nothing esle to do except into this forum and lie about conservatives. There is no debate here, if your not far right then you are a lying leftist lib. Amazing that there's no in between.
Again, I hope your little ego has been inflated by putting a lying leftist in his place.
The funny thing is that come 2008, you and your party are f'n toast. Get your licks in while you can

[SmokinLowriderSS]

The funny thing is that come 2008, you and your party are f'n toast. Get your licks in while you can
Better save up your money for the Democraty's 400 Billion dollar tax increase to trench the economy and Hillary to confiscate all the money from oil companies above their operating expenses.
Oh yea, and Canada or England health care too. 3 month wait to see a specialist, 6 month wait from a cancer diagnosis to find out WHAT CANCER and if it can be treated, etc., etc.
Wait, that might be a good thing. Shorten life expectancy and bring Social Security into line with fewer recipients. :idea:

[Blown 472]

Better save up your money for the Democraty's 400 Billion dollar tax increase to trench the economy and Hillary to confiscate all the money from oil companies above their operating expenses.
Oh yea, and Canada or England health care too. 3 month wait to see a specialist, 6 month wait from a cancer diagnosis to find out WHAT CANCER and if it can be treated, etc., etc.
Wait, that might be a good thing. Shorten life expectancy and bring Social Security into line with fewer recipients. :idea:
And dont forget to dig your fallout shelter, get some duct tape and stock up on ammo cuz the pinko commies are going to invade. Do you ever leave the house?

[SmokinLowriderSS]

The fallout shelter isn't as stupid as you want it to sound blown because if the apeasers win the '08 election, so did Al-Queda, and Hammass, and Islamic Jihad, and all your other favorites, and you WILL see them here, in the US, again, with more explosives.

[Blown 472]

The fallout shelter isn't as stupid as you want it to sound blown because if the apeasers win the '08 election, so did Al-Queda, and Hammass, and Islamic Jihad, and all your other favorites, and you WILL see them here, in the US, again, with more explosives.
ho my gawd, the sky is falling, falling is the sky.
And what is your boy doing about the wave of ecomomic distruction coming from south of the boarder?? NOT A F UCKING THING. You blather about health care, shit they are getting all the free health care they can stand, on your dime. How long your boy been in office? and what has he done about it? let it get worse. Your carping is falling on deaf ears when we can see first hand what gdumbya is doing to this country, not what might happen.

[steelcomp]

John, (ULTRA) I'm going to say this from the bottom of the heart, with no sarcasm, and no personal insults.
You, from the first tiime you responded to one of my posts long ago, are the consumate passive-aggressive. You use inuendo, you use sarcasm, and you insult with the best of them, yet, you claim foul. You are as narrow-minded (not meant as an insult), and "stuck" on your own opinion being the ONLY right answer, and that anyone who challanges you, or disagrees with you, is wrong, and then you have plenty of your own "name calling" to follow. Unfortunately, you never seem to have any facts to back up your position, and your MO is to attack the messenger, instead of addressing the message. OVER and OVER again.
My opinion of party lines being a dividing factor in this country is shared by MILLIONS. The PRINCIPLES of the left have abandoned what this country was founded on, and what it stands for. That's a FACT. Yet, you disagree with that, so I'm whatever it is you called me. MILLIONS say I'm right. Millions also disagree, but I see what's happened for the last thirty years, and the cause, and effect. My "opinion" is based on FACTS as I see them, nothing more. Not anyone else's opinion, not anyone else's facts. You don't state facts with your opinions, you just express them, and then you battle with whoever disagrees with you. How are you any better than whoever you criticize here?
You are two faced, and you are a hypocrate. That's not name calling, it's an observation. You talk down to every single person here that calls you out on your facts (what few you present) and then you play "grownup" with Tex. In the arena of ideas, you have none. But you argue and name call, just like everyone else here.
You seem as phony and transparent as they come, and in that, you represent everything that has come to define the left, to the many of us who see it for what it is. You are aligning yourself with the same emotion based, lacking in fact, BS that is identifying the left today.
You're never wrong, even when proven beyond a doubt. Everyone is wrong, sometimes.
I'll take a step here, and after saying all that, I'll extend my hand, and apologise for the personal insults. That is childish, and uncalled for, BUT,
I won't change the way I view you and/or your attitude. You are not better than the rest of us, but I sincerely believe you think you are.

[steelcomp]

ho my gawd, the sky is falling, falling is the sky.
And what is your boy doing about the wave of ecomomic distruction coming from south of the boarder?? NOT A F UCKING THING. You blather about health care, shit they are getting all the free health care they can stand, on your dime. How long your boy been in office? and what has he done about it? let it get worse. Your carping is falling on deaf ears when we can see first hand what gdumbya is doing to this country, not what might happen.You, on the other hand, Blown, are just a stupid mother focker.
Do you remember 9-11? Do you think that was just an accident? Do you think it's just luck that we haven't been hit again?
I'm with ya about Bush and his border policy, but you just might want to find a place to hide come '08 if the dems get the presidency. The fockin Islamo's are just wringing their hands in anticipation, and if you don't get that, you truely are a dumbass. Healthcare will be the last thing you'll have to worry about if they get their way.

[Moneypitt]

I have a question, an honest question about algore's movie. Is it FREE to get in to see it? Or is there a charge?.........And if there is a fee, where does every penny of the money go?..........Hmmmmmm, maybe Mr Gore aint as shallow as we all thought..........MP

[Blown 472]

You, on the other hand, Blown, are just a stupid mother focker.
Do you remember 9-11? Do you think that was just an accident? Do you think it's just luck that we haven't been hit again?
I'm with ya about Bush and his border policy, but you just might want to find a place to hide come '08 if the dems get the presidency. The fockin Islamo's are just wringing their hands in anticipation, and if you don't get that, you truely are a dumbass. Healthcare will be the last thing you'll have to worry about if they get their way.
bbbbbbbbbbbbbbwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwaaaaaaaaaaaaa hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.
You are funny.
Dont you think that if gdumbya was concerned at all about keeping us safe he would do something about our boarders? hell on of them a rabs could just walk right across, but I guess they are just smokin us out until 08 right???
I must say thou, I admire your passion, not your smarts so much but your passion
I hope you enjoy your kool aid with your snack pac.

[SmokinLowriderSS]

Do you remember 9-11? Do you think that was just an accident? Do you think it's just luck that we haven't been hit again?.
Now come on Steel, everybody knows 9/11 was a setup, from the inside, done BY the govt, by Bush himself, so he could start a war to support the Millitary Industrial Complex, at the orders of the money-controlling Jews, to move closer to the New World Order. The rest is just govt coverup.
I could post up pages and pages of proof, but haven't got time this morning.
It's concensus, aqmong thousands, and among hundreds of college professors, so it is a certainty, just like man-made Global Warming. :D :D :rolleyes:
I'm with ya about Bush and his border policy, but you just might want to find a place to hide come '08 if the dems get the presidency. The fockin Islamo's are just wringing their hands in anticipation, and if you don't get that, you truely are a dumbass. Healthcare will be the last thing you'll have to worry about if they get their way.
He doesn't get it, and never will, till some suiucide bomber blows up next to him at a stoplight. Then MAYBE it'll blow off his rose-colored glasses.
I'm pissed about the border situation too.

[SmokinLowriderSS]

bbbbbbbbbbbbbbwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwaaaaaaaaaaaaa hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.
You are funny.
Dont you think that if gdumbya was concerned at all about keeping us safe he would do something about our boarders? hell on of them a rabs could just walk right across, but I guess they are just smokin us out until 08 right???
I hope you enjoy your kool aid with your snack pac.
So blown, what's going to happen when the democrats pull us out of Iraq before the Iraq govt can sustain itself? Hmmmmmmm? Exactly WHAT?

[Blown 472]

Now come on Steel, everybody knows 9/11 was a setup, from the inside, done BY the govt, by Bush himself, so he could start a war to support the Millitary Industrial Complex, at the orders of the money-controlling Jews, to move closer to the New World Order. The rest is just govt coverup.
I could post up pages and pages of proof, but haven't got time this morning.
It's concensus, aqmong thousands, and among hundreds of college professors, so it is a certainty, just like man-made Global Warming. :D :D :rolleyes:
He doesn't get it, and never will, till some suiucide bomber blows up next to him at a stoplight. Then MAYBE it'll blow off his rose-colored glasses.
I'm pissed about the border situation too.
Yup, that is going to happen.
Not pissed enough to do something about it I see, just sit on here and run your mouth and put that clown back in office for four more years, cuz he said he can protect you scared lil sheep.

[Blown 472]

So blown, what's going to happen when the democrats pull us out of Iraq before the Iraq govt can sustain itself? Hmmmmmmm? Exactly WHAT?
Maybe they will attack us again, you know like they did on 9-11??

[steelcomp]

Yup, that is going to happen.
Not pissed enough to do something about it I see, just sit on here and run your mouth and put that clown back in office for four more years, cuz he said he can protect you scared lil sheep.That right there, folks, is a perfect example of the blind hatred the left has for Bush, and the level of intelligence that goes along with it.
That "clown" isn't running for re-election, you dumbass. He can't be re-elected. His term is over, but you guys keep on after him like he could be.
Talk about running your mouth!
SO typical. :notam:

[ULTRA26 # 1]

John, (ULTRA) I'm going to say this from the bottom of the heart, with no sarcasm, and no personal insults.
You, from the first tiime you responded to one of my posts long ago, are the consumate passive-aggressive. You use inuendo, you use sarcasm, and you insult with the best of them, yet, you claim foul. You are as narrow-minded (not meant as an insult), and "stuck" on your own opinion being the ONLY right answer, and that anyone who challanges you, or disagrees with you, is wrong, and then you have plenty of your own "name calling" to follow. Unfortunately, you never seem to have any facts to back up your position, and your MO is to attack the messenger, instead of addressing the message. OVER and OVER again.
My opinion of party lines being a dividing factor in this country is shared by MILLIONS. The PRINCIPLES of the left have abandoned what this country was founded on, and what it stands for. That's a FACT. Yet, you disagree with that, so I'm whatever it is you called me. MILLIONS say I'm right. Millions also disagree, but I see what's happened for the last thirty years, and the cause, and effect. My "opinion" is based on FACTS as I see them, nothing more. Not anyone else's opinion, not anyone else's facts. You don't state facts with your opinions, you just express them, and then you battle with whoever disagrees with you. How are you any better than whoever you criticize here?
You are two faced, and you are a hypocrate. That's not name calling, it's an observation. You talk down to every single person here that calls you out on your facts (what few you present) and then you play "grownup" with Tex. In the arena of ideas, you have none. But you argue and name call, just like everyone else here.
You seem as phony and transparent as they come, and in that, you represent everything that has come to define the left, to the many of us who see it for what it is. You are aligning yourself with the same emotion based, lacking in fact, BS that is identifying the left today.
You're never wrong, even when proven beyond a doubt. Everyone is wrong, sometimes.
I'll take a step here, and after saying all that, I'll extend my hand, and apologise for the personal insults. That is childish, and uncalled for,BUT,
I won't change the way I view you and/or your attitude. You are not better than the rest of us, but I sincerely believe you think you are.
You are two faced, and you are a hypocrate That's not name calling????? Not a personal insult????
I'll take a step here, and after saying all that, I'll extend my hand, and apologise for the personal insults. That is childish, and uncalled for,
MW
hypocrite
One entry found for hypocrite.
Main Entry: hyp·o·crite
Pronunciation: 'hi-p&-"krit
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English ypocrite, from Anglo-French, from Late Latin hypocrita, from Greek hypokritEs actor, hypocrite, from hypokrinesthai
1 : a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion
2 : a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings
3 : Steelcomp:)
That right there, folks, is a perfect example of the blind hatred the left has for Bush, and the level of intelligence that goes along with it.
That "clown" isn't running for re-election, you dumbass. He can't be re-elected. His term is over, but you guys keep on after him like he could be.
Talk about running your mouth!
SO typical. :notam:
Seems that blown was referring to re-electing Bush to his 2nd term. There are a great many on the right who now dislike Bush. Blind hatred ??? Lack of intelligence??? Probabally not.
__________________________________________________ _______
Smokin,
Here is some interesting reading from the IPCC. PDF file that is to large to post
http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM2feb07.pdf

[Blown 472]

That right there, folks, is a perfect example of the blind hatred the left has for Bush, and the level of intelligence that goes along with it.
That "clown" isn't running for re-election, you dumbass. He can't be re-elected. His term is over, but you guys keep on after him like he could be.
Talk about running your mouth!
SO typical. :notam:
So, he is not on his second term???

[SmokinLowriderSS]

You are two faced, and you are a hypocrate That's not name calling????? Not a personal insult????
Main Entry: hyp·o·crite
Pronunciation: 'hi-p&-"krit
Function: noun
2 : a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings
Man who firmly believes man is causing the earth to warm up, headed toward disaster, yet owns and drives both a V-8 pickup truck AND a (just short of) 500 Cubic Inch Displacement (big motor) boat.
Also, man with several (4) mansions who lectures us about excess carbon dioxide emmissions while he has an electric bill of THOUSANDS of dollars a month, and frequently flies in CO2-spewing aircraft.
Hypocrite, pretty accurate.
Accuracy. Question:
Is it an insult, or just accuracy, to call a clansman (KKK member) a bigot?
Is it an insult, or just accuracy, to call a christian evangelist preacher who keeps getting nailed with hookers a hipocrite?
__________________________________________________ _______
Smokin,
Here is some interesting reading from the IPCC. PDF file that is to large to post
http://www.ipcc.ch/SPM2feb07.pdf
I've seen the IPCC's report and again, you are overlooking a glaring problem with it that I have brought up at least twice before, and you have IGNORED EVERY TIME..
Is it not "interesting" that quite a few of the "2500 noted scientists" who are listed as "contributors" to the report,
1- Resigned from the IPCC when or before the report was published,
2- Do not support the report,
3- Have nothing in the report that is their work
4- Have been unable to get the IPCC to remove their names from the "list of contributing scientists" without threat of legal action?
THOSE FACTS I believe are much more "interesting" than the report saying man is causing global warming.
WHY refuse to delete the names of scientists who DO NOT WANT TO BE CONNECTED TO THE REPORT????
If the report is so good, is so accurate, then those very scientists would pretty well be cutting their own throats as far as credibility goes.
WHY would they want to basically end their career lives in such a manner?
Find the correct answer to those 2 questions, and you will be VERY CLOSE to the heart of the mater.
Ultra, what does your opinion say is the answers to those 2 questions?

[jimslade]

Better save up your money for the Democraty's 400 Billion dollar tax increase to trench the economy and Hillary to confiscate all the money from oil companies above their operating expenses.
Oh yea, and Canada or England health care too. 3 month wait to see a specialist, 6 month wait from a cancer diagnosis to find out WHAT CANCER and if it can be treated, etc., etc.
Wait, that might be a good thing. Shorten life expectancy and bring Social Security into line with fewer recipients. :idea:
Today my wife fainted (sick with the flu) took her to the emerg.ward. Saw a doctor in 10 min. did blood tests, out in 3 hours everything completed. She has a bad flu. Great service.cost to me Nothing. Try that in the USA. sorry folks my sister lives in Fl. and she loves Canadian health care. We have a few complaints. But please SHUT UP YOU DON"T KNOW WHAT YOUR TALKING ABOUT. PS my dad has a heart condition. Had problems in Fl. a couple years ago. They almost killed him! If you don't take care of your sick what type of a nation are you building? maybe thats why your poverty rate is sickning, crime also. Bring on the Canadian bashers!

[SmokinLowriderSS]

So, he is not on his second term???
blown, do you EVER have anything of substance and on topic to add to a thread, or just polution?
Yes, only polution. I expected as much.

[ULTRA26 # 1]

Man who firmly believes man is causing the earth to warm up, headed toward disaster, yet owns and drives both a V-8 pickup truck AND a (just short of) 500 Cubic Inch Displacement (big motor) boat.
Also, man with several (4) mansions who lectures us about excess carbon dioxide emmissions while he has an electric bill of THOUSANDS of dollars a month, and frequently flies in CO2-spewing aircraft.
Hypocrite, pretty accurate.
Accuracy. Question:
Is it an insult, or just accuracy, to call a clansman (KKK member) a bigot?
Is it an insult, or just accuracy, to call a christian evangelist preacher who keeps getting nailed with hookers a hipocrite?
__________________________________________________ _______
I've seen the IPCC's report and again, you are overlooking a glaring problem with it that I have brought up at least twice before, and you have IGNORED EVERY TIME..
Is it not "interesting" that quite a few of the "2500 noted scientists" who are listed as "contributors" to the report,
1- Resigned from the IPCC when or before the report was published,
2- Do not support the report,
3- Have nothing in the report that is their work
4- Have been unable to get the IPCC to remove their names from the "list of contributing scientists" without threat of legal action?
THOSE FACTS I believe are much more "interesting" than the report saying man is causing global warming.
WHY refuse to delete the names of scientists who DO NOT WANT TO BE CONNECTED TO THE REPORT????
If the report is so good, is so accurate, then those very scientists would pretty well be cutting their own throats as far as credibility goes.
WHY would they want to basically end their career lives in such a manner?
Find the correct answer to those 2 questions, and you will be VERY CLOSE to the heart of the mater.
Ultra, what does your opinion say is the answers to those 2 questions?
I will answer your 2 questions after I verify that are valid.
As I've stated previously, I can do better and plan to. I have made changes in the right direction and will continue changing with regard to lowering my fuel consumption. Your comparison is far from acurate.
Someone posted Gore's electric bill somewhere in another thread. As I recall, a substancial amount of the electricity he uses comes from solar and wind power

[SmokinLowriderSS]

Today my wife fainted (sick with the flu) took her to the emerg.ward. Saw a doctor in 10 min. did blood tests, out in 3 hours everything completed. She has a bad flu. Great service.cost to me Nothing. Try that in the USA. sorry folks my sister lives in Fl. and she loves Canadian health care. We have a few complaints. But please SHUT UP YOU DON"T KNOW WHAT YOUR TALKING ABOUT. PS my dad has a heart condition. Had problems in Fl. a couple years ago. They almost killed him! If you don't take care of your sick what type of a nation are you building? maybe thats why your poverty rate is sickning, crime also. Bring on the Canadian bashers!
So, I don't know what I am talking about.
Whose info do you want me to use, North or South of the Canadian Border?
Waiting list for health bennefits:
Permanent residents are eligible immediately, except in British Columbia, Ontario and New Brunswick where there is a three-month waiting period. Persons in Canada temporarily and holding Immigration Canada documentation (e.g., temporary workers, holders of a Minister's permit and foreign students) have different waiting periods, depending on the province.
According to another Fraser Institute survey, Waiting Your Turn: Hospital Waiting Lists in Canada (13th edition, October 2003), a Canadian health care patient, on average, must wait 17.7 weeks for hospital treatment. Those who live in Saskatchewan waited an average of 30 weeks, those in Ontario a relatively expeditious 14 weeks.
Hip Replacement:
Fifty percent of the Canadian hospital administrators said the average waiting time for a 65-year-old man requiring a routine hip replacement was more than six months.
Not one American hospital administrator reported waiting periods that long. Eighty-six percent of American hospital administrators said the average waiting time was shorter than three weeks; only 3 percent of Canadian hospital administrators said their patients had this brief a wait
Coronary Bypass:
In a single year, 1999, for this one operation, the doctor said, "71 Ontario patients died before surgery, 121 were removed from the list permanently because they had become medically unfit for surgery," and 44 left the province to have the surgery, many having gone to the United States for the operation.
In other words, 192 people either died or became too sick to have surgery before they could work their way to the front of the line.
Boy have I got more. How much do you want to see?

[Blown 472]

Today my wife fainted (sick with the flu) took her to the emerg.ward. Saw a doctor in 10 min. did blood tests, out in 3 hours everything completed. She has a bad flu. Great service.cost to me Nothing. Try that in the USA. sorry folks my sister lives in Fl. and she loves Canadian health care. We have a few complaints. But please SHUT UP YOU DON"T KNOW WHAT YOUR TALKING ABOUT. PS my dad has a heart condition. Had problems in Fl. a couple years ago. They almost killed him! If you don't take care of your sick what type of a nation are you building? maybe thats why your poverty rate is sickning, crime also. Bring on the Canadian bashers!
Dude you are messing with Mr. know it all, dont even bother.:rolleyes:

[SmokinLowriderSS]

Dude you are messing with Mr. know it all, dont even bother.:rolleyes:
More polution.:rolleyes:
Now, more of the wonders of Canadian Health Care I know nothing about.
During 2001 and 2002, the median wait between family practitioner and specialist for orthopedic surgery was 12.7 weeks, according to The Fraser Institute’s annual survey Waiting Your Turn: Hospital Waiting Lists in Canada.
That's 3 months Jim, well, 3 months, 4 days.
As of 2000 info I am looking at, from the BC ministry for Health:
Gynecology - 9.8 weeks
Opthalmology - 24.5 weeks
Otolaryngology - 16.8 weeks
General Surgury - 11.8 weeks
Neurosurgury - 14.0 weeks
Orthopedic Surgery - 23 weeks
Urology - 11.6 weeks.
Here ya go, I'm tired of proving I have NO IDEA WHAT I AM TALKING ABOUT.
Waiting list (http://oldfraser.lexi.net/publications/critical_issues/2001/wyt/section_04.html)
Incedentally, I am pleased you managed to get your wife seen so instantly and she is going to be fine (my taking the liberty of an assumption).

[ULTRA26 # 1]

Smokin,
I don't think I have ever encountered anyone who gets so much pleasure from trying to make others look like fools. You spend as many hours as is necessary to find info to dispute the beliefs of others. Do you really believe that you know everything there is to know?

[SmokinLowriderSS]

Don't need an MRI anytime soon.
From the website on von Hippel-Lindau disease, based in Ottowa Canada:
7 to 9 MONTHS to get an MRI.:eek:
I could look up CATs and PETs, but I have the picture.
Mine took under 10 days, and could have been sooner had my schedule permitted .....
Now, back to Global Warming:
Gore's Solar power and wind power usage, lessee, how shal I put this, would not be on his electric bill.
By all means, verify. That is all I EVER insist on. Don't believe me, prove it to yourself.
The other major problem "factiod":
The fact is that until about 1975, most of the world s scientists, along with the major media, supported the hypothesis of global COOLING. Page one stories on the pending ice age were published in the New York Times, the Christian Science Monitor, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, the Los Angeles Times and most of the major global media.
April 28, 1975 article in Newsweek magazine. Titled “The Cooling World,” it pointed to “ominous signs that the Earth’s weather patterns have begun to change” and pointed to “a drop of half a degree in average ground temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere between 1945 and 1968.”
30 years after the "Global Cooling" hysteria, we now have "Global Warming" hysteria. Which hysteria will be next?
One last thing.
Since, according to the report itself from the IPCC, the scientists on the list of contributors “were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendation nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release.”, 2 things:
1- Why are the crowd pushing Global Warming claiming scientific "concensus", when the report itself says the scientists listed do not necisarally support the conclusion?
2- Again, Why the refusal to remove scientists names upon their asking if the names have no importance?
The more I dig through the subject, the more things I find that are I believe deservedly QUESTIONABLE.
THAT is why I am not a Global Warming supporter, for me it has absolutely nothing to do with political ideology Ultra.

[Blown 472]

If you follow smokins posts you will see a pattern of him giving advice on subjects that he has read an article on and now is an expert..... he has no actual knowledge or experience but he read the book so he knows all
Like building engines? bbbbbbbbbbwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhh hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

[SmokinLowriderSS]

You can refute your own government's published statistics all you want to canuck1, but they are still YOUR OWN GOVERNMENT'S PUBLISHED STATISTICS.
I have never set foot over this country's Northern border, or Southern border, and just don't have any interest in changing that. I have no interest in anything Canada offers as vacation/recreation, or employment. Not saying there isn't anything, just nothing of interest to me.
And I don't run and hide.
I do however determine when it is time to guit arguing with people who don't pay any attention, or read, and have math trouble.
Ultra, I don't make others look like fools, I let fools make themselves look like fools, and yes, I do enjoy that. :D

[SmokinLowriderSS]

Like building engines?
Go ahead blown, post-a-link to the last thread YOU posted any helpful advice to a guy asking about an engine build. Rex'll cut ya slack this time since I asked for the link.
I sure haven't seen it myself.
Go ahead, prove me wrong JUST ONCE. (and the post must pre-date this one).

[Blown 472]

Go ahead blown, post-a-link to the last thread YOU posted any helpful advice to a guy asking about an engine build. Rex'll cut ya slack this time since I asked for the link.
I sure haven't seen it myself.
Go ahead, prove me wrong JUST ONCE. (and the post must pre-date this one).
No, that is ok, I will post up stuff like, " I had a discussion about this" my desktop dyno says this, blah blah blah, take a look big boy lots of info out there, rather then just hot air like you seem to spew about, perhaps it is time you take a sip of the stfu cup.

[Blown 472]

OK butthole, I'll give you an example. When My father needed an MRI ....he got it....the next day. If the fukking quacks in the US were not so incompetent(sp) he would not have ever gotten to the point of needing an MRI.
Dude, you dont know anything, I mean what you live there and all, hell smokin aint never been out of kansass, what with all them sheep wif der heads caught in the fence why would he leave?

[Blown 472]

Stresses of that darned crankshaft trying to leave the engine cause it, and I don't think there is any real way to STOP it absolutely. Prevent it to a point, or minimize it, sure.
Main stud girdles. I'm sure they exist for big Chevys, but:
Summit only shows one for Ford mains.
Jeggs doesn't show any.
I KNOW they exist for Olds'.
If they do exist somewheres, some of the racers and engine builders on here'll have a line on them.
Getting right to the meat of the topic now aren't we?

[steelcomp]

You are two faced, and you are a hypocrate That's not name calling????? Not a personal insult????Not in this case...it's a description. If it insults you, so be it. Facts are facts, and you are what and who you are. Funny...I don't see you denying a word of it, either.
Maybe we should take a poll here? :idea:

[Blown 472]

You'll use 2x as much alky as you ever did gasoline.
__________________
Hummmmm, very informative, shall we look for more of your vauge posts?

[steelcomp]

No, that is ok, I will post up stuff like, " I had a discussion about this" my desktop dyno says this, blah blah blah, take a look big boy lots of info out there, rather then just hot air like you seem to spew about, perhaps it is time you take a sip of the stfu cup.Jeez...talk about hot air and STFU!!! You're about the most useless waste of pixels on this site! You have zero technical knowledge, you have zero political knowledge, you offer nothing to any discussion except for your hatred and sarcasm. I've never heard you once, enter into an intelligent, normal conversation with anyone. You typically bring everything down to your level of ignorance with your intentional misspelled words, poor grammer, sexual inuendo, etc., and it's purely intentional. You only serve to degrade most threads you participate in, and what's more, you work at it! I often wonder what it is about you that you think that's a favorable way to present yourself, but for what ever reason, you do. Admittedly, there are times you add a certain "color" to some discussions, but you're the LAST person to criticize anyone for spewing hot air, and being someone that should STFU!

[Moneypitt]

SS, I would be careful about bashing Canada. Remember, when GW drives the temps in the lower 48 out of our comfort zone the great white north will probably be just about right, temp wise. About the Canadian healthcare, all the citizens I spoke to at Valleyfield love it.. Of course their liquor and tobacco purchases are taxed into outerspace to help provide it, but they feel its a worthwhile trade off. I also learned if you are a boat racer at Valleyfield, and not a Canadian citizen, don't get hurt!!! They will rush you to a hospital, the first one they come to AFTER they cross you back into the USA!!!.....MP

[jimslade]

S.S. you are using 1992 data, things have improved greatly since then in Ontario. The main problem with free healthcare is that too many people abuse it . People go to the emerg. ward for a runny nose. If they don't have to pay they tend to use it more frequently. A friend had fainting spells a month ago. He had an MRI immediatly. The waiting periods are for elective surgery. If its important the wait is very short .I speak from experiance. I don't judge your warmongering facist racist country, don't judge mine.
PS I really dont feel that way, so please speak from personal experiance, not corrupt data.

[Blown 472]

Jeez...talk about hot air and STFU!!! You're about the most useless waste of pixels on this site! You have zero technical knowledge, you have zero political knowledge, you offer nothing to any discussion except for your hatred and sarcasm. I've never heard you once, enter into an intelligent, normal conversation with anyone. You typically bring everything down to your level of ignorance with your intentional misspelled words, poor grammer, sexual inuendo, etc., and it's purely intentional. You only serve to degrade most threads you participate in, and what's more, you work at it! I often wonder what it is about you that you think that's a favorable way to present yourself, but for what ever reason, you do. Admittedly, there are times you add a certain "color" to some discussions, but you're the LAST person to criticize anyone for spewing hot air, and being someone that should STFU!
This coming from the tech expert who has had his ass handed to him more then one once. Thanks buddy.
Seems as thou you spend alot of time reading what I write, stalker??

[steelcomp]

OK butthole, I'll give you an example. When My father needed an MRI ....he got it....the next day. If the fukking quacks in the US were not so incompetent(sp) he would not have ever gotten to the point of needing an MRI.Incompetant quacks? American doctors?
You just lost all my respect. If it wasn't for American doctors, you jokers wouldn't have any medecine.

[Blown 472]

Your respect??? that and $35. will get me a box of beer;)
What is medecine?
Oh snap, Mr. perfect spelling.

[steelcomp]

This coming from the tech expert who has had his ass handed to him more then one once. Thanks buddy.
Seems as thou you spend alot of time reading what I write, stalker??
Well, when you've got over 13 THOUSAND posts, it's kinda hard not to read something of yours, at any given time. Thing is, it's always the same crap.
Stalker...yeah... Don't look now...:sqeyes:
OK...I've had my entertainment for the week. You all can go back to hating eachother, 'cause NO one here is interested in any kind of discussion. (Including me)
Carry on. :D

[Blown 472]

bite me spice boy:mad:
Dude, not you, Sir Steelcomp

[Blown 472]

Well, when you've got over 13 THOUSAND posts, it's kinda hard not to read something of yours, at any given time. Thing is, it's always the same crap.
Stalker...yeah... Don't look now...:sqeyes:
OK...I've had my entertainment for the week. You all can go back to hating eachother, 'cause NO one here is interested in any kind of discussion. (Including me)
Carry on. :D
Sounds like someone got handed, nite nite.

[steelcomp]

Your respect??? that and $35. will get me a box of beer;)
What is medecine?I type with ten thumbs...sorry. At least you didn't deny what I said was right. :)
$35.00 for a box of beer?:confused:

[ULTRA26 # 1]

Not in this case...it's a description. If it insults you, so be it. Facts are facts, and you are what and who you are. Funny...I don't see you denying a word of it, either.
Maybe we should take a poll here? :idea:
Insulted by someone like you. Not a chance. You are right, I am who I am and there is no denying that. What I'm not is a right wing radical who preaches bullsh*t like the dems are the enemy, they're cowards, liars, unpatriotic and hypocrites. I'm not perfect, I don't know it all and don't claim to. I have allot to learn. for sure.

[bigq]

S.S. you are using 1992 data, things have improved greatly since then in Ontario. The main problem with free healthcare is that too many people abuse it . People go to the emerg. ward for a runny nose. If they don't have to pay they tend to use it more frequently. A friend had fainting spells a month ago. He had an MRI immediatly. The waiting periods are for elective surgery. If its important the wait is very short .I speak from experiance. I don't judge your warmongering facist racist country, don't judge mine.
PS I really dont feel that way, so please speak from personal experiance, not corrupt data.
Same problem here. People without insurance use the emergency room for health care because they know they will not be turned away. We need to help people without insurance, but it would be nice if they did not abuse it and were also legal. The burden will eventually become to great and collapse.

[bigq]

Today my wife fainted (sick with the flu) took her to the emerg.ward. Saw a doctor in 10 min. did blood tests, out in 3 hours everything completed. She has a bad flu. Great service.cost to me Nothing. Try that in the USA. sorry folks my sister lives in Fl. and she loves Canadian health care. We have a few complaints. But please SHUT UP YOU DON"T KNOW WHAT YOUR TALKING ABOUT. PS my dad has a heart condition. Had problems in Fl. a couple years ago. They almost killed him! If you don't take care of your sick what type of a nation are you building? maybe thats why your poverty rate is sickning, crime also. Bring on the Canadian bashers!
Glad your wife is ok, but "cost you nothing"? So where does the government get money for health care?
BTW, we do take care of sick people even illegals that have broken Federal laws. No one is refused life saving health care. now to them the cost is free, but guess who pays for it?

[SmokinLowriderSS]

S.S. you are using 1992 data, things have improved greatly since then in Ontario. The main problem with free healthcare is that too many people abuse it . People go to the emerg. ward for a runny nose. If they don't have to pay they tend to use it more frequently.
I'm glad things are improving jim, as they need to.
The same abuse does occur here, on a much smaller scale, since by law, the emergency room CANNOT turn away ANYONE, period. I know people who go when they should not, and take their kids, when they should not.
It is about to become worse in some places since Massachusetts has decided to show us all how good Universal Health Care is, passed it last fall. They're gonna tax and fine the snot out of businesses (and people next) to pay for it as it becomes an abused morass.
You're right MP, when Global Warming pushes the midwest into becoming a 150* desert all the way to South Dakota, I might reconsider. :D That or just enjoy it like I did avery day spent in the Great Sandbox of the Middle East when it was 150*, in the shade.
Canuck, I never said I have never left this country. I said I have never been to Canada or Mexico. :idea:

[SmokinLowriderSS]

I type with ten thumbs...sorry. At least you didn't deny what I said was right. :)
$35.00 for a box of beer?:confused:
$14 to $18 here, for a 30-pack, depending on brand.
A bit more for the microbrews, but those aren't in 30's. :D

[jimslade]

Glad your wife is ok, but "cost you nothing"? So where does the government get money for health care?
BTW, we do take care of sick people even illegals that have broken Federal laws. No one is refused life saving health care. now to them the cost is free, but guess who pays for it? It's not really free. We pay for it through general taxes. No upfront fees. The good thing is no one is going to lose their house if they get sick. I don't drink or smoke so the prices don't affect me. The drinkers and smokers need the health care system more so I guess thats why they pay high prices.

[jimslade]

Your respect??? that and $35. will get me a box of beer;)
What is medecine? Thats what they give the illegal immigrants!

[bigq]

It's not really free. We pay for it through general taxes. No upfront fees. The good thing is no one is going to lose their house if they get sick. I don't drink or smoke so the prices don't affect me. The drinkers and smokers need the health care system more so I guess thats why they pay high prices.
Yes I know. My point is nothing is free it is just a metter of where it comes from. We pay for insurance, which I did for 4 years while being a self contracted person, but all premiums were a write off on my taxes which helps. Right now my insurance is part of my job benefits. Some people look at this as free, which it is not, it just comes out a different way.
and yes smokers usually pay higher premiums because of known risk. Can't say I know anyone that lost there house because of health care.

[bigq]

Thats what they give the illegal immigrants!
illegal immigrants should get fixed up and sent back from where they came from. They broke federal laws and should be deported. It might be too late for the US though, time will tell.

[CARLSON-JET]

So far I have noted the possible user fee on boats (proposed $1500) and read something else about another tax on non hybrid not so fuel friendly trucks ect. in Cali. Has anyone else read anything about any more costs that are going to be invloved if GW becomes "Law"?
I read about the EPA trying to dodge the CO2 deal after the lawsuit. How long before they are pressured into actually making us pay for it? Meaning higher vehicle costs or energy ect. to reduce CO2. I have a strong feeling we are going to eat this wether we believe or can prove GW is not something that is man made.
I read something the other day that stated the sun delivers more energy in one second to the earth, then all the energy man produces/consumes in a year. That statement really made me think we are more insignificant to GW then I had previously thought.

[SmokinLowriderSS]

I read something the other day that stated the sun delivers more energy in one second to the earth, then all the energy man produces/consumes in a year. That statement really made me think we are more insignificant to GW then I had previously thought.
That little fact is another one of the reasons that I am unconvinced we are cooking this planet in it's entirety.

[Old Texan]

So far I have noted the possible user fee on boats (proposed $1500) and read something else about another tax on non hybrid not so fuel friendly trucks ect. in Cali. Has anyone else read anything about any more costs that are going to be invloved if GW becomes "Law"?
I read about the EPA trying to dodge the CO2 deal after the lawsuit. How long before they are pressured into actually making us pay for it? Meaning higher vehicle costs or energy ect. to reduce CO2. I have a strong feeling we are going to eat this wether we believe or can prove GW is not something that is man made.
I read something the other day that stated the sun delivers more energy in one second to the earth, then all the energy man produces/consumes in a year. That statement really made me think we are more insignificant to GW then I had previously thought.
Bingo, the political agenda of user fees and excise taxes is the prime goal of people like Al Gore "getting the job done". They will play the fact they have punished the non believers and are helping society by making the pollutors pay for their sins. All based on theory and innuendo.
Ultra John was asking why gas prices had risen so dramatically, wait until the GW taxes hit the pump. GW has the potential to set this country into a terrible recession. Yeah I know, greedy conservative Republican concern for the economy over the environment attitude, sorry John.

[steelcomp]

Bingo, the political agenda of user fees and excise taxes is the prime goal of people like Al Gore "getting the job done". They will play the fact they have punished the non believers and are helping society by making the pollutors pay for their sins. All based on theory and innuendo.
Ultra John was asking why gas prices had risen so dramatically, wait until the GW taxes hit the pump. GW has the potential to set this country into a terrible recession. Yeah I know, greedy conservative Republican concern for the economy over the environment attitude, sorry John.It's going to go further than that...look at what's happened to the price of corn. Cattle farmers are going to feel that squeeze, and then what happens to the price of beef (and anything else corn-based, or corn fed)? Wait 'till they start really pushing alcohol-based fuels. That's a brand new opportunity for a completely different price structure. No one's saying it's going to be cheaper, just cleaner, which is a complete crock.

[ULTRA26 # 1]

Bingo, the political agenda of user fees and excise taxes is the prime goal of people like Al Gore "getting the job done". They will play the fact they have punished the non believers and are helping society by making the pollutors pay for their sins. All based on theory and innuendo.
Ultra John was asking why gas prices had risen so dramatically, wait until the GW taxes hit the pump. GW has the potential to set this country into a terrible recession. Yeah I know, greedy conservative Republican concern for the economy over the environment attitude, sorry John.
Tex, nothing to be sorry for. As I recall i commented that gas prices had risen so dramatically as a result of greed. If the shoe fits. If conservative Republicans were truely concerned about the economy, would the current conservative Republican administration be doing something to cut Govt spending, and in turn the debt?
No one's saying it's going to be cheaper, just cleaner, which is a complete crock.
Steel, what is the crock? I think this is about the fact that corn is renewable. You can't grow oil.

[eliminatedsprinter]

I read something the other day that stated the sun delivers more energy in one second to the earth, then all the energy man produces/consumes in a year. That statement really made me think we are more insignificant to GW then I had previously thought.
It's probably more like more energy than man has ever produced, let alone one year. But this factoid is a bit of a non sequitur in the GW debate. The GW debate is more about how much of the sun's energy (ie heat) that human produced gasses trap and keep here on earth, rather than how much man or the sun produces. Although solar activity is most likely the largest single factor in climate change. The question is are human produced "greenhouse gasses" a large enough secondary factor to be having a significant influence.

[asch]

I think this is about the fact that corn is renewable. You can't grow oil.
Oh that's right....not only are we changing the climate, we're running out of oil too. :rolleyes:
Tell me ultra, is there ANY proof that using bio fuel will for certain eliminate your global warming? At what point do we claim victory? Are you willing to give up that boat of yours? How bout all the creature comforts you enjoy. As someone pointed out earlier, back in the 70's, there were those smog alerts. Now, in 2007, we SEEMINGLY have improved air quality, but it's STILL not good enough. Where and when will it stop? It won't. Until we hand over every last vestige of our freedom, the globalists that are in charge will not quit. I say this because the next step in this ridiculous craze is grabbing land. MARK MY WORDS. The midwest areas will become the new oil fields and as such, will need to be "protected". The result will be government seizing private land in order to control the land. Control the land and....well....that's only the beginning. Sad thing is land owners will likely willingly hand it over for the sake of the environment, through sale purchase or otherwise. This is a most insidious conspiracy.
Yes there are people sitting around plotting America's demise. Just like the communist conspiracy, only packaged differently. Stalin, Marx and Lennon varied in their views of communism, but they all agreed that their enemy was capitalism. This is an ongoing extension of that agenda. To not recognize GW as such is to ignore or not know the nature and intents of the enemy. There are many unseen people at work here. The scientific "consenus" is just a propaganda tool as is Gore and the rest of em.
So ultra, consider yourself recruited.
I hate to sound cliche, but our freedoms our constantly under attack through plotting or conspiracy or through overt war.
Hope this helps you to see the larger game at play.

[ULTRA26 # 1]

Oh that's right....not only are we changing the climate, we're running out of oil too. :rolleyes:
Tell me ultra, is there ANY proof that using bio fuel will for certain eliminate your global warming? At what point do we claim victory? Are you willing to give up that boat of yours? How bout all the creature comforts you enjoy. As someone pointed out earlier, back in the 70's, there were those smog alerts. Now, in 2007, we SEEMINGLY have improved air quality, but it's STILL not good enough. Where and when will it stop? It won't. Until we hand over every last vestige of our freedom, the globalists that are in charge will not quit. I say this because the next step in this ridiculous craze is grabbing land. MARK MY WORDS. The midwest areas will become the new oil fields and as such, will need to be "protected". The result will be government seizing private land in order to control the land. Control the land and....well....that's only the beginning. Sad thing is land owners will likely willingly hand it over for the sake of the environment, through sale purchase or otherwise. This is a most insidious conspiracy.
Yes there are people sitting around plotting America's demise. Just like the communist conspiracy, only packaged differently. Stalin, Marx and Lennon varied in their views of communism, but they all agreed that their enemy was capitalism. This is an ongoing extension of that agenda. To not recognize GW as such is to ignore or not know the nature and intents of the enemy. There are many unseen people at work here. The scientific "consenus" is just a propaganda tool as is Gore and the rest of em.
So ultra, consider yourself recruited.
I hate to sound cliche, but our freedoms our constantly under attack through plotting or conspiracy or through overt war.
Hope this helps you to see the larger game at play.
My comment was "I think this is about the fact that corn is renewable. You can't grow oil."
No I don't feel or see a commy type conspiricy all around us. What are you so afraid of? Surely not me. The oil supplies will not last forever. I guess if you believe that the end is near, nothing else matters. I don't see the Armageddon thing as something that is upon us.

[eliminatedsprinter]

Oh that's right....not only are we changing the climate, we're running out of oil too. :rolleyes:
Tell me ultra, is there ANY proof that using bio fuel will for certain eliminate your global warming? At what point do we claim victory? Are you willing to give up that boat of yours? How bout all the creature comforts you enjoy. As someone pointed out earlier, back in the 70's, there were those smog alerts. Now, in 2007, we SEEMINGLY have improved air quality, but it's STILL not good enough. Where and when will it stop? It won't. Until we hand over every last vestige of our freedom, the globalists that are in charge will not quit. I say this because the next step in this ridiculous craze is grabbing land. MARK MY WORDS. The midwest areas will become the new oil fields and as such, will need to be "protected". The result will be government seizing private land in order to control the land. Control the land and....well....that's only the beginning. Sad thing is land owners will likely willingly hand it over for the sake of the environment, through sale purchase or otherwise. This is a most insidious conspiracy.
Yes there are people sitting around plotting America's demise. Just like the communist conspiracy, only packaged differently. Stalin, Marx and Lennon varied in their views of communism, but they all agreed that their enemy was capitalism. This is an ongoing extension of that agenda. To not recognize GW as such is to ignore or not know the nature and intents of the enemy. There are many unseen people at work here. The scientific "consenus" is just a propaganda tool as is Gore and the rest of em.
So ultra, consider yourself recruited.
I hate to sound cliche, but our freedoms our constantly under attack through plotting or conspiracy or through overt war.
Hope this helps you to see the larger game at play.
The land grab has already begun (under Clinton in the 90s) just ask any former rancher in southern Utah.
Here is what happened to a relative of mine.
He was a 90 year old who owned a horse ranch, that raised a small number of a specific and expensive type of horses. President Clinton declared the area his land was on "protected" and he recieved a letter telling him that while he still owned the land and could live on it and was responsible for all debts aginst it, or mortgage etc, he could no longer raise horses on it, because they might damage it's natural ecosystem. Of course the horses were his means of supporting his life there, so he had no choice but to try to sell it. The problem was, that since nobody could use his ranch for ranching, it was now worthless. But never fear, the federal government stepped in and offered to buy it,,,for a couple of pennies to the dollar of what is was worth before it was "protected". That ranch was purchased by his father over 100 years before it was lost and it's loss was a huge blow to that side of the family. This happened to all the ranchers in his area and countless others in other places as well.

[SmokinLowriderSS]

Steel, what is the crock? I think this is about the fact that corn is renewable. You can't grow oil.
The crock currently is this Ultra.
Corn produces the largest ammount of alcohol per measuring unit (pound/bushell/ton/whatever) of any growable source.
Energy is required to turn the corn into alcohol, which means electricity, which means burning coal/oil/natural gas, or running a nuke power plant.
The alcohol produced is capable of producing LESS ENERGY than the energy sources used to make it. Hence, you could not use corn alcohol to make corn alcohol.
A truly "renewable" or "alternative" energy source would provide an energy surplus, not a debt.
Ther is the great problem with grain alcohol as a fuel source that you WILL NOT hear from those pushing ethanol as an alternative fuel.

[bigq]

Nuke energy is the way to go. From what i understang they can even burn the waste from older nuke plants in the new technology nuke plants.
As far as ethenol they are looking into ways of using different sources besides corn. They are also working on clearing up the plants that refine the ethenol.
I actually think they will have a big push for Hydrogen in about 8-10 years. I read the other day that UPS is testing 10 Hydrogen trucks as we speak with great reliability.

[ULTRA26 # 1]

The crock currently is this Ultra.
Corn produces the largest ammount of alcohol per measuring unit (pound/bushell/ton/whatever) of any growable source.
Energy is required to turn the corn into alcohol, which means electricity, which means burning coal/oil/natural gas, or running a nuke power plant.
The alcohol produced is capable of producing LESS ENERGY than the energy sources used to make it. Hence, you could not use corn alcohol to make corn alcohol.
A truly "renewable" or "alternative" energy source would provide an energy surplus, not a debt.
Ther is the great problem with grain alcohol as a fuel source that you WILL NOT hear from those pushing ethanol as an alternative fuel.
A New Biofuel: Propane
Propane chemically derived from corn could be used in heating and transportation.
Biofuel alternative: MIT researchers are developing an efficient process for making propane from corn or sugarcane.
Credit: Dawn M. Turner
MIT researchers say they have developed an efficient chemical process for making propane from corn or sugarcane. They are incorporating a startup this week to commercialize the biopropane process, which they hope will find a place in the existing $21 billion U.S. market for the fuel.
While much of the attention on biofuels has focused on ethanol, the process developed by the MIT researchers produces propane, says Andrew Peterson, one of the graduate students who demonstrated the reactions. Propane is used in the United States for residential heating and some industrial processes, and to a limited extent as a liquid transportation fuel. "We're making a demonstrated fuel" for which a market and an infrastructure already exist, says Peterson, who works in the lab of chemical-engineering professor Jefferson Tester and has founded the startup C3 BioEnergy, based in Cambridge, MA, to commercialize the technology.
Propane, which is currently made from petroleum, has a higher energy density than ethanol, and although it is often used in its gaseous form, it's the cleanest-burning liquid fuel.
The C3 BioEnergy process depends on supercritical water--water at a very high temperature and pressure--which facilitates the reactions that turn a biological compound into propane. Peterson wouldn't reveal the starting compound, but he says that it is a product of the fermentation of the sugars found in corn or sugarcane. The reaction is driven by heat, requiring no catalysts. At supercritical temperature and pressure, Peterson says, "water does bizarre things. It becomes like a nonpolar solvent" and mixes with the organic compounds. Once the reaction has taken place, the solution is kept under high pressure and cooled to room temperature so that the propane comes out of the solution and floats to the top. "We've demonstrated that we can make propane," says Peterson. "Now we're trying to optimize the reaction rate and get it to a scalable stage."
Peterson says the biopropane conversion has a good energy balance: not much fossil fuel needs to be burned during production. The reaction does not require the input of a large amount of energy because the heat that's key to the biopropane conversion is recoverable using a heat exchanger, a device that transfers heat in and out of a fluid.
"All biofuel reactions involve removing oxygen from the starting compound," says George Huber, assistant professor of chemical engineering at the University of Massachusetts, in Amherst. There are a number of strategies for doing this, including reactions that rely on biological catalysts. But, says Huber, "supercritical fluids are a very promising way to make biofuels. You can do it in a very small reactor in a very short time, so you can do it very economically."
Other academic labs are developing processes that use high-temperature, high-pressure fluids to make biofuels. Douglas Elliott, at the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, in Richland, WA, is using near-supercritical conditions in combination with a catalyst to treat wastewater and unprocessed biomass. Under these conditions, organic compounds can be made into a mixture of methane (the main component in natural gas) and carbon dioxide. "We've gone all the way from small-batch reactors to treating a few gallons of wastewater per hour," says Elliott, who is working with a company on commercializing the technology for water treatment. "We're still in the lab with biomass."
Huber and Elliott say the MIT biopropane process is novel. "I've never seen anyone make propane with supercritical fluids," says Huber.
In some countries, including Australia, propane is more widely used as a transportation fuel. In the United States, "you would have to modify engines to use it," says Huber. "Biopropane could be used where we already use propane."

[SmokinLowriderSS]

Biopropane. Hmmmm Will have to see if they can get it produced anywhere as efficiently as they say. Looks very interesting. This is the first I had heard of this one.
See Ultra, I'm not against EVERYTHING you come up with. :D :D

[Blown 472]

The crock currently is this Ultra.
Corn produces the largest ammount of alcohol per measuring unit (pound/bushell/ton/whatever) of any growable source.
Energy is required to turn the corn into alcohol, which means electricity, which means burning coal/oil/natural gas, or running a nuke power plant.
The alcohol produced is capable of producing LESS ENERGY than the energy sources used to make it. Hence, you could not use corn alcohol to make corn alcohol.
A truly "renewable" or "alternative" energy source would provide an energy surplus, not a debt.
Ther is the great problem with grain alcohol as a fuel source that you WILL NOT hear from those pushing ethanol as an alternative fuel.
And they dont use any power what so ever to get oil and convert it? then ship it, load and unload it, goes on and on and on.
You are a great mouthpiece, you should have been a lobbyist.

[SmokinLowriderSS]

And they dont use any power what so ever to get oil and convert it? then ship it, load and unload it, goes on and on and on.
You are a great mouthpiece, you should have been a lobbyist.
Speaking of idiot cockbite mouthpieces.

[Blown 472]

Speaking of idiot cockbite mouthpieces.
Now that is no way to talk about yourself. So I gots to ask, you think that some ay rab is going to wait until 08 to pull off his shit, knowing full well it will make him a marter and get the virgins and all that just cuz a democrate might get the whitehouse?

[ULTRA26 # 1]

Biopropane. Hmmmm Will have to see if they can get it produced anywhere as efficiently as they say. Looks very interesting. This is the first I had heard of this one.
See Ultra, I'm not against EVERYTHING you come up with. :D :D
:) :)

[asch]

The land grab has already begun (under Clinton in the 90s) just ask any former rancher in southern Utah.
Here is what happened to a relative of mine.
Is this it?
Did quick search and found this:
Clinton pulls another western land grab
Human Events, Jan 28, 2000 by Park, Scott
There he goes again: On January 11, President Clinton unilaterally designated vast areas of Arizona and California as new national monuments without consulting Congress or local officials.
Clinton made a similar move on Sept. 18, 1996 when he signed an executive order designating 1.7 million acre of land in southern Utah as the Canyons of the Escalante National Monument. That land contained the nation's largest coal reserves.
Clinton's new land grab is only the latest assault in a federal campaign against real estate in the western United States that has been going on for decades-with a brief hiatus during the Reagan and Bush presidencies. Since 1960, the federal government has taken control of new acreage within the states equal in area to the entire state of Florida. Meanwhile, federal land-holding agencies are charging taxpayers 330% more in constant dollars to "manage" federal lands than they did in 1960.
Because the new lands that Clinton designated as monuments were already under federal control and already subject to federal land-use policies, there was no imminent environmental threat that required them to be permanently set aside in a status that prevents virtually all constructive economic use.
Two other rationales, however, suggest themselves: Clinton wanted to use raw executive power to influence the perception of his legacy among liberal environmentalists, and at the same time he wanted to boost enthusiasm among this group for Vice President Al Gore's struggling presidential campaign.
"The President is establishing a legacy of abuse," Sen. Larry Craig (R.-Idaho) told HUMAN EVENTS. "He started with the Office of the President and is moving on to the law and public process. He is abusing power, because the public has a right to be involved through the hearing process. This is driven by raw politics."
The Antiquities Act, under which Clinton created the new monuments, has been used only three times in the last 30 years. President Carter invoked it once, and now Clinton has employed it twice.
President 'Continues to Usurp'
It might seem odd that Gore, who authored a radical environmentalist call to arms titled Earth in the Balance, and who has championed the Kyoto Global Warming Treaty, should be worried about his support from the environmentalist left. But Friends of the Earth recently endorsed Bill Bradley for the Democratic presidential nomination contest.
Sierra Club political director Dan Weiss told HUMAN EVENTS that his group credits Gore with playing an important role in identifying and designating the land for the new monuments. The Sierra Club has not yet endorsed a presidential candidate, said Weiss, but will look at a candidate's record as well as his positions, in making a selection.
Clinton's January 11 decree created three new national monuments and expanded a fourth:
* Agua Fria National Monument, Ariz.; 71, 100 acres.
* Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument, Ariz.; 1,014,000 acres.
* California Coastal National Monument, Calif.; covers all the rocks along the entire 814-mile California coast out to a distance of 12 miles.
* Pinnacles National Monument, Calif.; expands existing monument by 7,960 acres.
"The President continues to usurp the power of state legislatures and local officials," said Rep. George Radanovich (R.-Calif), who chairs the Western Caucus. "This circumvention of power by the President must be stopped by the Congress. Local voices deserve to be heard and we have to act in order to prevent the President's continued abuse of power on public lands issues."
Texas Gov. George W. Bush, the frontrunner for the Republican presidential nomination joined in the criticism of Clinton's move. "Governor Bush doesn't believe in the Clinton Administration's top-down dictatorial approach," said campaign aide Scott McClelland. "He believes in creating conservation partnerships between the federal government, states and communities." Sen. John McCain (R.-Ariz.), also running for President, complained during the January 10 Republican presidential debate in Michigan that the administration had taken the action "by fiat, without consulting anyone-not a single person who lives in Arizona."

[CARLSON-JET]

It's probably more like more energy than man has ever produced, let alone one year. But this factoid is a bit of a non sequitur in the GW debate. The GW debate is more about how much of the sun's energy (ie heat) that human produced gasses trap and keep here on earth, rather than how much man or the sun produces. Although solar activity is most likely the largest single factor in climate change. The question is are human produced "greenhouse gasses" a large enough secondary factor to be having a significant influence.
True and valid... Although it does have alot more to do with this thread then say... Canada's health care sytem. :D
I have to look it up again, but I watched something a year or two ago about some guy who was checking out how the pollution particles were creating more cloud mass and were reflecting the light back out. It was interesting as others were starting to use the same particle/cloud idea to look into instances of warming/cooling in the past. His control area was a string of small islands islands that I can't remember where. Still a very interesting offset theory. Although his model did show somewhat that there still was a small percentage of warming on some islands other islands were actually getting cooler daily temps. As expected, it is hard to reproduce a model of the earths climate accurately.

[SmokinLowriderSS]

True and valid... Although it does have alot more to do with this thread then say... Canada's health care sytem. :D
I have to look it up again, but I watched something a year or two ago about some guy who was checking out how the pollution particles were creating more cloud mass and were reflecting the light back out. It was interesting as others were starting to use the same particle/cloud idea to look into instances of warming/cooling in the past. His control area was a string of small islands islands that I can't remember where. Still a very interesting offset theory. Although his model did show somewhat that there still was a small percentage of warming on some islands other islands were actually getting cooler daily temps. As expected, it is hard to reproduce a model of the earths climate accurately.
This is/was the basis for the 70's hype of Global Cooling/The Coming Ice Age, "aerosols" (the particles, not the spray cans) causing increased cloud formation
Just stumbled on something I was unaware of, in the "scientific concensus" department. Shortly after the IPCC report, with the non-support of 2500 or so named scientists who had nothing in the report, a petition came out of Oregon, questioning the findings in the report, SIGNED by meterological and climatological scientists. 15,000 to 17,000 of them.
It's things like this that keep me sceptical.
UN-sponsored Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) actually number less than 2000, and only a small fraction -- who were never polled -- can claim to be climate scientists. Many of those are known to be critical of the IPCC report and have now become signers of the Petition.
From the beginning (http://www.capmag.com/article.asp?id=50)

[asch]

What are you so afraid of?
Interesting response considering your position. Question is, what are YOU afraid of?
Me, personally, I'm not afraid really so much as concerned that you and people like you are creating this hype based on junk science and presenting it as truth.
Actually, who I am afraid for are my kids and their kids having to suffer the consequences of the lie. I would like them to enjoy the freedoms I have enjoyed. It amazes how people, especially in the last 40+ years are so willing to hand over their heritage of freedom in return for a mess of pottage. Yes, we have a lot less freedom than we did in years past.
Believe me, the underlying truth to this lie is the giving up of the things we enjoy--our freedom and ultimately our property.
I'm seriously concerned about the government making absolute law(s) based upon this garbage. The government's responsibility is STRICTLY to protect the life, liberty and property of it's citizens. There is nothing in the constitution that's requires or obligates the government to the protection of the environment (The EPA is an UNELECTED agency as is OSHA). Combine this with the tripe philosophies that are being taught in the universities. Do you know Constitutional law is barely taught anymore? It's all case law. That's a tragedy IMO. We're churning out lawyers that don't have a clue as to constitutional law. I digress.
No, I'm not afraid of you or your belief per se. I don't care what you or any of the rest of them believe in. I just don't want laws to be continued to be created based on your belief. As long as it continues, I AM against you.
Do you believe there should be some kind of "Global Warming Act" to force people into complying?
Another thing, by buying into this GW deal, your opening the door, carte blanche, for the government to further legislate your freedom away in ways that are far more devastating than any real or imagined climate change.
So, what are YOU so afraid of that your willing to give up your cars and other things?

[eliminatedsprinter]

Is this it?
Did quick search and found this:
Clinton pulls another western land grab
Human Events, Jan 28, 2000 by Park, Scott
Clinton made a similar move on Sept. 18, 1996 when he signed an executive order designating 1.7 million acre of land in southern Utah as the Canyons of the Escalante National Monument. That land contained the nation's largest coal reserves.
"
I believe his land was stolen under this previous grab. It was near the town of Tropic Utah which is near Bryce Canyon.:idea:

[Old Texan]

We're churning out lawyers that don't have a clue as to constitutional law.
So, what are YOU so afraid of that your willing to give up your cars and other things?
2 things I'd like to add based on the above points.
First to John: If everyone on planet earth gave up driving vehicles that are considered "Fuel Hogs" and everyone gave up boats of say, over 100Hp, would Global Warming end?
My point being what limits must be established to end GW? What will be enough?
Under present trends the GW folks will one day be rationing air and water consumption. We will be forced to regulate how many breaths per hour we are allowed. We will only get say a liter a day to drink and regualr bathing and washing clothes, cars, etc will cease. (actually I beleive the French have allready done away with the bathing part).
To further what asch has stated, why is it wrong to not blindly change and conform to theories that are unconfirmed and much of their presentation, concocted lies. The problem with too much of society is they feel guilt. Guilty they have money, guilty they have nice things, guilty they are more fortunate. This is a lot of what proposed reparations for slavery are based upon. Guilt for the actions of their ancestors. If they don't support GW they feel guilty. Everybody is guilty of f--ing up society and the environment if they don't go along with the rammblings of junk science.
Sorry but I'm not buying into the Hollywood Guilt trip that is so apparent in many of the celebrities rants against the "System". The majority of Liberals today come from this segment of society, the actors, professors, rights activists, and so on. Down deep I question if they really give a shit at all, but are just following their underlying guilt and other self serving ego purposes. Their so called "giving back to the people" BS.
My other point is the way lawyers and doctors are educated. What asch said is true, case law is where the bucks are at. Litigation is how the overabundance of America's lawyers fatten their pockets. Medical schools turn out Drs. more interested in pushing medication than curing the causes of all the "illness flavors of the day". It's ridiculous the ampunt of money thrown at today's Drs by drug companies to promote and prescribe their products. I was in my family Dr's office this past week and there were at least 4 drug peddlers coming and going pushing their new pharmaceutical miracles. I'm curious what the percentage of advertising is devoted to legal and medicinal / drug topics these days. Hell a good portion of the legal ads are about suing the drug companies for side effects. Parasite feeding on parasite.
Law, medicine, and GW have a lot in common, ways to take money out of your pocket. Never take any of them at face value.

[eliminatedsprinter]

2 things I'd like to add based on the above points.
First to John: If everyone on planet earth gave up driving vehicles that are considered "Fuel Hogs" and everyone gave up boats of say, over 100Hp, would Global Warming end?
My point being what limits must be established to end GW? What will be enough?
Under present trends the GW folks will one day be rationing air and water consumption. We will be forced to regulate how many breaths per hour we are allowed. We will only get say a liter a day to drink and regualr bathing and washing clothes, cars, etc will cease. (actually I beleive the French have allready done away with the bathing part).
To further what asch has stated, why is it wrong to not blindly change and conform to theories that are unconfirmed and much of their presentation, concocted lies. The problem with too much of society is they feel guilt. Guilty they have money, guilty they have nice things, guilty they are more fortunate. This is a lot of what proposed reparations for slavery are based upon. Guilt for the actions of their ancestors. If they don't support GW they feel guilty. Everybody is guilty of f--ing up society and the environment if they don't go along with the rammblings of junk science.
Sorry but I'm not buying into the Hollywood Guilt trip that is so apparent in many of the celebrities rants against the "System". The majority of Liberals today come from this segment of society, the actors, professors, rights activists, and so on. Down deep I question if they really give a shit at all, but are just following their underlying guilt and other self serving ego purposes. Their so called "giving back to the people" BS.
My other point is the way lawyers and doctors are educated. What asch said is true, case law is where the bucks are at. Litigation is how the overabundance of America's lawyers fatten their pockets. Medical schools turn out Drs. more interested in pushing medication than curing the causes of all the "illness flavors of the day". It's ridiculous the ampunt of money thrown at today's Drs by drug companies to promote and prescribe their products. I was in my family Dr's office this past week and there were at least 4 drug peddlers coming and going pushing their new pharmaceutical miracles. I'm curious what the percentage of advertising is devoted to legal and medicinal / drug topics these days. Hell a good portion of the legal ads are about suing the drug companies for side effects. Parasite feeding on parasite.
Law, medicine, and GW have a lot in common, ways to take money out of your pocket. Never take any of them at face value.
Our hospital is affilliated with UCLA's medical school and the interns, residents, and fellows, etc, that I have worked with over the last 23 years, are nothing like what you discribe above and everything like what you seem to wish they were like.
Drug Co's parasites?? Oh Lord,:eek: Ultra, Poster, and Blown have converted you over to the dark side....:2purples: :wink: ;)

[Old Texan]

Our hospital is affilliated with UCLA's medical school and the interns, residents, and fellows, etc, that I have worked with over the last 23 years, are nothing like what you discribe above and everything like what you seem to wish they were like.
Drug Co's parasites?? Oh Lord,:eek: Ultra, Poster, and Blown have converted you over to the dark side....:2purples: :wink: ;)
Sorry, I'm being far to harsh and general in my statement. I speak of a minority of Drs. that seem to have no qualms in prescribing meds for folks with addictions and do belive more meds are better. They are out there. You've been fortunate to be affiliated with a stalwart institution and wouldn't likely see the "quacks". My statement was quick and really based on some personal situations I've witnessed lately.
I can think of at least 4 people I know that are presently hooked on extreme amounts of pain meds, mainly Oxyconden(sp). These people are all suffering depression, physical problems, and family issues due to the excess use of these meds which are prescribed by physicians. All have ceased to be uselful contributors to society and 3 are on government disability. They all seek new physicians that readily prescribe keep them going. How do you descibe Dr.s that allow and contribute to this growing problem in our country? Actually it would be interesting to hear how the "real" Drs. you work with view this growing problem. I'd love to hear their candid opinions, off the record of course.:)
Oh and I damn sure don't wish Drs to be this way, it's very concerning to me that we have these "quacks" practicing.

[eliminatedsprinter]

Sorry, I'm being far to harsh and general in my statement. I speak of a minority of Drs. that seem to have no qualms in prescribing meds for folks with addictions and do belive more meds are better. They are out there. You've been fortunate to be affiliated with a stalwart institution and wouldn't likely see the "quacks". My statement was quick and really based on some personal situations I've witnessed lately.
I can think of at least 4 people I know that are presently hooked on extreme amounts of pain meds, mainly Oxyconden(sp). These people are all suffering depression, physical problems, and family issues due to the excess use of these meds which are prescribed by physicians. All have ceased to be uselful contributors to society and 3 are on government disability. They all seek new physicians that readily prescribe keep them going. How do you descibe Dr.s that allow and contribute to this growing problem in our country? Actually it would be interesting to hear how the "real" Drs. you work with view this growing problem. I'd love to hear their candid opinions, off the record of course.:)
Oh and I damn sure don't wish Drs to be this way, it's very concerning to me that we have these "quacks" practicing.
My step father was a world class indocrine phsiologist (PHD not MD) and he used to say..."They don't all get straight A's in med school."
Bottom line is they are human and they can get a bit sloppy. There are flakes in every field, even one that requires as much education as medicine. Plus some of the patients, that are addicts can be very clever about "MD shopping" etc and will flat out lie to (and often threaten) their docs to get what they want...It really takes a sharp (and tough) Doc to handle some of the more clever and or agressive ones...
P.S. It's not really a growng problem. It has been very widespred for a long time. If anything, it is less (in terms of the % of pt's) than it was in the 1950s, 60s, and 70s. It's just that it is much more talked about today than it was. I like the phrase "acute awareness of a chronic problem".
All of the med schools and major medical organizations are emphisizing looking out for this (addiction and or polypharmacy) and ever since the late 1970s the emphisis in medical care has been on more comprehensive interdisiplinary care and minimum medication.

[Moneypitt]

From the local Ventura County newspaper.........
COLORADO:
DENVER-----Hurricane forcaster William Gray said Friday that GLOBAL OCEAN currents, not human produced carbon dioxide, are responsible for global warming, and the earth may begin to cool on it's own in five to ten years.
Gray, a Colorado State University researcher best known for his annual forcasts of hurricanes along to US Atlantic coast, also said increasing levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere won't produce more or stronger hurricanes.
He said over the past 40 years the number of major hurricanes making landfall on the US Atlantic coast has declinded compared to the previous 40 years..
I typed it all, it is not a cut and paste.........MP

[SmokinLowriderSS]

But MP, After Katrina (which was caused by Bush's refusal to ratify the Kyoto protocol) everyone (except Grey) said 2006 would be an even worse Hurricane season due to Global Warming. I heard it on the news all fall & winter '05/06. :jawdrop:
Oh, wait, everyone got it WRONG, well, everyone but Grey. :idea:
Grey MUST be a maverick nutcase who doesn't realize just how serious the situation is. :D
The only other answer is just beyond consideration. :D

[Old Texan]

From the local Ventura County newspaper.........
COLORADO:
DENVER-----Hurricane forcaster William Gray said Friday that GLOBAL OCEAN currents, not human produced carbon dioxide, are responsible for global warming, and the earth may begin to cool on it's own in five to ten years.
Gray, a Colorado State University researcher best known for his annual forcasts of hurricanes along to US Atlantic coast, also said increasing levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere won't produce more or stronger hurricanes.
He said over the past 40 years the number of major hurricanes making landfall on the US Atlantic coast has declinded compared to the previous 40 years..
I typed it all, it is not a cut and paste.........MP
This is really gonna pissoff Al Gee. Another of his myths questioned and by a knowlegable expert with a proven track record no less.......:eek:
What say Ye John Ultra????????? I believe we've had a volley into your court.....:D

[Cas]

this one also