Posts Made By: David Cotterell

Rod Kaufman said:

http://www.cnn.com/video/?hpt=hp_c2#/video/world/2012/01/25/pkg-newton-honor-killings-in-canada.cnn
Not guilty?

Very GUILTY. 4 counts first degree murder for the father, mother and brother. that's 25 years minimum with no parole.

Dave

David Cotterell said:

Do social conservatives ever get tired of being shot down like this?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/calif-same-sex-marriage-ban-ruled-unconstitutional/2012/02/07/gIQAMNwkwQ_story.html?hpid=z1

Dave

Where are 'the usual suspects' in the face of this devastating (for them) news?
Have you no rational argument to make?
Dave

Andreas Saldivar said:

Despite what Al Gore tells you about Greenland. The current climate there is not unusual at all. The current temps have happened many times before.

http://www.syntrillium.net/sigasaswelt/ressource/pdf/2011GL049444.pdf

Andreas

From the Abstract: "Notwithstanding this conclusion, climate models project that if anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions continue, the Greenland temperature would exceed the natural variability of the past 4000 years sometime before the year 2100."

The current climate there is not unusual at all. The current climate TREND is.

Dave

Herbert York said:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=alXxsKLVofM

Enjoy!

I did enjoy it, Herb. Thanks for posting it. The guy was right on the money.

Dave

Dave Snope said:

WTI crude just broke $100, trading at $99.99.

Where are the liberal calls for yet another congressional investigation of the "speculators"? Oil just can't drop so fast in three days on it's own. Surely this is an example of price manipulations by the evil profiteers. Go get 'em!

Here's one lib who wonders why the gasoline price at the pump doesn't go DOWN anywhere near as fast as the per barrel price goes down but jumps UP instantly whenever a speculator or Obama or GW Bush or OPEC or Hugo Chavez or Monica Lewinsky or God-knows-who-is-in-charge-of-oil-prices farts.

Now thare's a congressional investigation that needs doing.....

Dave

David Cotterell said:

http://www.businessinsider.com/karl-rove-electoral-map-obama-looking-pretty-2012-5

couldn't resist.

Well that is fantastic!!! Who would ever have forseen this development? what a remarkable post!!! the world has been immeasurably improved by this astonishing information.


Nah.

Bump

DC

Dave Snope said:

Or risk death.

Karachi (AsiaNews) - At least 11 nurses, including three Christians, were poisoned at Civil Hospital Karachi for eating during Ramadan. During their afternoon break yesterday, the 11 nurses went to the hostel cafeteria for some tea and food. Rita, a Catholic nurse, collapsed first after drinking her tea. Now all the nurses are in the hospital's intensive care unit, some in very serious conditions.

In Pakistan, eating in public during the Muslim month of fasting is illegal. For Muslims, fasting is compulsory. However, hospital workers and travellers are exempt.

Civil Hospital Karachi staff is made up mostly of Muslims who do not tolerate that their non-Muslim colleagues eat during Ramadan.

Obligatory questions: Why was the cafeteria open? During the day? In Public? During Ramadan? In Pakistan?

DC

Tony Aguire said:

I dare you to watch the whole video. Don't bother adding your $.02 unless you do.

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/01/31/the-most-powerful-gun-control-speech-father-of-sandy-hook-victim-speaks-out-video/

Eloquent, powerful and right on target. Almost 5 hours since you posted it, Tony, and the usual suspects are avoiding this like the bubonic plague.

Tell, us, O silent ones, how your freedom to not have to pass a sanity test trumps the freedom of a six year old kid to live.


Dave

I've posted thoughts on this before. Generally speaking, on a large population, statistical basis we see:

Liberals tend to favour: Some measure of gun control, abortion choice, less military, gov't health care, higher degrees of 'socialistic' thinking, progressive taxation etc.,

Conservatives tend to favour: Less gun control, less access to legal abortion, more military, anti gov't health care, higher degrees of 'libertarianism', less taxation etc.

My main point is that the above 'packages' of thought tend not to be broken up. If you're dealing with a liberal, or a conservative there is seldom any of the items in the list missing, or opposite.

There are many here who opine that liberalism is a mental illness. Well, so is conservatism. It seems that a significant majority of us are wired the way we are and we have a great deal of difficulty meeting in the middle as a result.

Dave

Some more thoughts on this:

1. what's the flip side that would justify a WORLD WIDE cover-up? Why are scientists world wide all colluding to oppress American energy companies? This is a contentious issue pretty much only in the US, whereas those that will feel the brunt of climate change first are developing-world countries, with seaward-concentrated populations, fragile food supplies, and poor infrastructure.

Who's doling out the bribes, how are they covering it up, and who could possibly afford to out-spend the energy industry?

2. Follow the money... the truth is usually in the opposite direction.

3. Most of the lead deniers know that they're lying about an issue that could realistically lead to the destruction of over 90% of the world's population (if not the entire human race) as well as most of the world's living species, within just a few generations. And they're doing it purely for momentary self-enrichment, at a time of record global inequality between rich and poor.

That makes them without exaggeration potentially the greatest villains in all of human history.

4. Imagine how terrible it would be if we took steps to clean up our world and then find out all these scientists were wrong?!!?
Oh the horror of a clean world when we could have left it dirty and polluted!!!

5. You cannot be a climate change denier and accept the validity of the scientific method. Climate change denial is just a small step above creationism.

6. Scientists are constantly trying to find mistakes made by other scientists. This is what they live for. Showing that someone else f'ed up an experiment or study gives them a huge hard on. With thousands and thousands of scientists all looking for each other's weaknesses, there is a pretty energetic system of checks that makes it hard for a really big mistake to get through.

7 If it was just about money then every single one of these scientists could all be bought out by a single week of Exxon profits. The reason that hasn't happened is because there are still scientists who value honesty above money.

Seriously, if you think that "AGW proponents" have more money behind them than "AGW skeptics" you're a really special type of retard.

8. if the "AGW proponents" were in it for the money, they wouldn't have to look to the future. They could just accept a big fat paycheck from Exxon or the Koch brothers today.

Surely you have to concede that if all of these scientists are just sellouts who do the bidding of the highest bidder for their services, it's pretty farking amazing that Exxon and the other big oil corporations can only garner 3% of the global scientific consensus, isn't it?

Those poor downtrodden multinational oil corporations just can't get a break, can they?

9. a) how utterly insane it is to think that the overwhelming majority of funding that goes into climate science actually goes into scientists' pet projects rather than observational platforms (such as satellites, radiosondes, etc.) that government agencies wanted before- and will continue to need irrespective of- anthropogenic climate change.

b) how utterly insane it is to think that scientists quickly and virtually unanimously identifying a problem that has a relatively straightforward solution (which is itself outside the bounds of their expertise) somehow will receive more funding than if they sustained the appearance of disagreement about (and thus the need for further research in solving) the question of attribution.

c) how utterly insane it is to think that someone studying ice sheet dynamics or ocean acidification during the Permian-Triassic boundary stands to personally benefit from a transition to a lower carbon intensity economy.

......and so on and so forth.

Dave