Posts Made By: Doug Matulis

Timothy McDougall said:

Okay, now that I have your attention, This summer the National Geographic Channel had a special on Hitler's Secret Weapon: A Stealth Fighter...

http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/episode/hitler-s-stealth-fighter-3942/Overview

In reviewing the pics of this thing it has an uncanny resemblence to Kenneth Arnolds sightings in 1947...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_Arnold

The Horton 229 (Hitler's Stealth) was brought to the U.S. after the war by Operation Paperclip. It is reported that it was operationally flown by 1947...Kenneth Arnold reported (as well as others) that he saw up to nine UFO's flying in an echelon (standard) military formation. I propose (and I'm sure others, I just haven't come across)that this event is what started the UFO craze and that what we were actually seeing in our skies was advanced military technology. The resemblance is just too great to be anything but!

Lee Spain said:

This danged thing was obviously written by lawyers and needs to be changed:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Here's my markup:

Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of a religion, or prohibiting the free peaceful exercise of religion by citizens unless leaders or sizeable factions of that religion espouse criminal conduct, treason, sedition, terrorism, or war against the United States, its people, or its allies; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the citizens to peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Mel Maki said:

A Muslim says threat assessment demands profiling of Muslims.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-11-29/airport-security-lets-profile-muslims/p/

I mean, come on!

Dave Snope said:

Japan got badly burned by the redistribution of wealth from the previous Kyoto Protocol and is having no more of it.

The delicately balanced global climate talks in Cancún suffered a serious setback last night when Japan categorically stated its opposition to extending the Kyoto protocol – the binding international treaty that commits most of the world's richest countries to making emission cuts.

The Kyoto protocol was adopted in Japan in 1997 by major emitting countries, who committed themselves to cut emissions by an average 5% on 1990 figures by 2012.

However the US congress refused to ratify it and remains outside the protocol.

The brief statement, made by Jun Arima, an official in the government's economics trade and industry department, in an open session, was the strongest yet made against the protocol by one of the largest emitters of greenhouse gases.

He said: "Japan will not inscribe its target under the Kyoto protocol on any conditions or under any circumstances."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/dec/01/cancun-climate-change-summit-japan-kyoto

Dave Snope said:

Actually, with the exception of 1998 - a 'blip' year when temperatures spiked because of a strong 'El Nino' effect (the cyclical warming of the southern Pacific that affects weather around the world) - the data on the Met Office's and CRU's own websites show that global temperatures have been flat, not for ten, but for the past 15 years.
Even Phil Jones, the CRU director at the centre of last year's 'Climategate' leaked email scandal, was forced to admit in a littlenoticed BBC online interview that there has been 'no statistically significant warming' since 1995.
...

One of those leaked emails, dated October 2009, was from Kevin Trenberth, head of climate analysis at the US government's National Centre for Atmospheric Research and the IPCC's lead author on climate change science in its monumental 2002 and 2007 reports.

He wrote: 'The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment, and it is a travesty that we can't'



Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1335798/Global-warming-halted-Thats-happened-warmest-year-record.html#ixzz17OLBm0Rp

Lee Spain said:

Let's all take a moment to offer prayers to Elizabeth Edwards and reflect upon what reprehensible scumbags too many of politicians are.

http://www.usatoday.com/yourlife/health/medical/breastcancer/2010-12-07-edwardscancer07_ST_N.htm?csp=34news

Rod Kaufman said:

So according to this latest Pew research poll, 7 out 10 Muslims reject Al Qaeda. And what about the other three out of ten that don't? And more favor the Hamas and Hezbollah.
That's not much of a repudiation of terrorism, now is it? :S
http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2010/12/03/muslims-offer-mixed-views-on-hamas-hezbollah-reject-al-qaeda/?hpt=Sbin

Rod Kaufman said:

It's going up in a hurry, pretty much in line with an anticipated take over by the GOP in congress.
Why and how?
First, the intrinsic rise in the cost of gas is due to the rise in the cost of a barrel of crude oil. Most people understand that fact. But why the sudden increase? Supply and demand? Nope, the world, overall, is awash in oil. Our refineries are operating normally without any unanticipated down time. Our strategic oil reserves are at or near capacity, although they'll probably always add more. There's no supply and demand problem and if you want to argue it, I've got more than enough to dump on you.
So why the price spikes?
Same exact reason as the last time: SPECULATION. So why the speculation now?
First, the boys are back in town. The Republican boys, to be exact. With a change in venue in the house, there's less likelihood of the CEOs of the major oil companies to be hauled out in front of a committee in congress.
Second, who gets the blame when gas prices go up? The president, by far. I can see some Republicans in congress hoping it goes up even faster than it already is.
Third, Obama, in a weakened political state, won't be able to initiate a watchdog to guard against speculation as he had originally planned to do. The Republicans will never support it.
Fourth, companies will seize upon the new "crisis" to drill more than ever before with the Republicans on the sidelines chanting, "drill baby drill!" again, claiming they were right all along!
When it happens, don't forget to book mark this post...

Mel Maki said:

The thirteen month extension isn't cheap. It's about three times what NASA spends. One person suggested the benefits given after a year should be considered a loan! He wasn't a politician. Who could deny benefits this close to Christmas?

Alan French said:

http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=47628