You can question evolution and the existence of atoms too. Fortunately,
science doesn't depend on the acceptance by idiots to work.

Just as dumb Americans have everything to do with science.

Al gore? What Science degree does he hold? Why didn't that documentary
have a host who was a Climate expert?

That's how a communist revolution begins. People make the ones with
different views as outcast then make them scapegoats for all the
problems of society.

Then can we agree to cut federal funding so as not to let those 'less
worthy" to influence scientific research?

For the same reason people like YOU defend the comparison of Holocaust
Deniers to Global Warming Deniers. This comparison has been made by
SCIENTISTS in the climate areas. GEE, ever wonder why I might be a tad
upset with that kind of comparison.

We're not talking about science any longer when the "leaders" in the
climate sciences decide to compare people who dare question them to
holocaust deniers. It's political.

Let's see what the climate EXPERTS say after federal funding is cut
for 1 year? Think they might offer some caution to their own caution?

On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 18:26:41 -0600, kT <cosmic@lifeform.org> wrote:

Yes, how dare we question the laws of physics, all that chemistry and
quantum mechanics is just nonsense. Who are we to question God.

Funny you mention God. I noticed that anytime Man-Made global warming
is questioned the other side will "attack" with "holocaust denier"
labels and things about religion and politics.

Science, the climate part, has already become 100% political.

Al gore? What Science degree does he hold? Why didn't that documentary
have a host who was a Climate expert?

It is very sexy to be a global warming alarmist today.

On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 03:20:44 -0500, "VistaKing"
BushIsATraitor@hotmail.com> wrote:


"Bob Brown" <.> wrote
How dare anyone question Man-Made global warming. It's not PC.

You can question any reality you like Bobbie. Just don't expect anyone to
take your uneducated drivel seriously.

That's how a communist revolution begins. People make the ones with
different views as outcast then make them scapegoats for all the
problems of society.

The current political atmosphere reminds me of the history of how the
soviet's and nazi's came into power.

When all this happens it will be too late.

I do want science to be ONLY about science, therefore we should cut
all funds from scientists. I don't want to influence them. Do you?

On Wed, 24 Jan 07 09:54:39 GMT, lparker@emory.edu (Lloyd Parker)
wrote:

You can question evolution and the existence of atoms too. Fortunately,
science doesn't depend on the acceptance by idiots to work.

Then can we agree to cut federal funding so as not to let those 'less
worthy" to influence scientific research?

Or are you in favor of giving money with strings attached?

Or do you want it both ways?

On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 00:51:26 +0000 (UTC), William Asher
gcnp58@yahoo.com> wrote:

I'm just curious why you think this is so specious a
concept as to justify physical assault. If you want to criticize the
science, by all means talk about the science rather than slapping people
because their statements make you angry.

For the same reason people like YOU defend the comparison of Holocaust
Deniers to Global Warming Deniers. This comparison has been made by
SCIENTISTS in the climate areas. GEE, ever wonder why I might be a tad
upset with that kind of comparison.

We're not talking about science any longer when the "leaders" in the
climate sciences decide to compare people who dare question them to
holocaust deniers. It's political.

Let's see what the climate EXPERTS say after federal funding is cut
for 1 year? Think they might offer some caution to their own caution?

On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 03:20:44 -0500, "VistaKing"
BushIsATraitor@hotmail.com> wrote:


"Bob Brown" <.> wrote
How dare anyone question Man-Made global warming. It's not PC.

You can question any reality you like Bobbie. Just don't expect anyone to
take your uneducated drivel seriously.

That's how a communist revolution begins. People make the ones with
different views as outcast then make them scapegoats for all the
problems of society.

The current political atmosphere reminds me of the history of how the
soviet's and nazi's came into power.

When all this happens it will be too late.

I do want science to be ONLY about science, therefore we should cut
all funds from scientists. I don't want to influence them. Do you?

On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 20:25:48 -0500, Bob Brown <.> wrote:

On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 03:20:44 -0500, "VistaKing"
BushIsATraitor@hotmail.com> wrote:


"Bob Brown" <.> wrote
How dare anyone question Man-Made global warming. It's not PC.

You can question any reality you like Bobbie. Just don't expect anyone to
take your uneducated drivel seriously.

That's how a communist revolution begins. People make the ones with
different views as outcast then make them scapegoats for all the
problems of society.

The current political atmosphere reminds me of the history of how the
soviet's and nazi's came into power.

When all this happens it will be too late.

I do want science to be ONLY about science, therefore we should cut
all funds from scientists. I don't want to influence them. Do you?


kt and vitaking are the same guy.

this sock puppet master has got all kinds of alias' in the NG. some
are more abusive than others. some are way over the top abusive...

a couple puppets

anything with sucking cocks
h2pv
mobius pretzel
morphed poster names including some kind of abusive domain
kt
vistaking

talking to him is like talking to a lunatic.

wait. there is no talking. its his version of reality being rammed
down anyone/everyone's throat...

and a prolific lunatic. i figure he's got a handicap that keeps him
from doing anything other than posting.

On Thu, 25 Jan 2007 17:53:55 +0000 (UTC), William Asher
gcnp58@yahoo.com> wrote:

Bob Brown wrote:

On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 00:51:26 +0000 (UTC), William Asher
gcnp58@yahoo.com> wrote:

I'm just curious why you think this is so specious a
concept as to justify physical assault. If you want to criticize
the science, by all means talk about the science rather than
slapping people because their statements make you angry.

For the same reason people like YOU defend the comparison of
Holocaust Deniers to Global Warming Deniers. This comparison has
been made by SCIENTISTS in the climate areas. GEE, ever wonder why I
might be a tad upset with that kind of comparison.

We're not talking about science any longer when the "leaders" in the
climate sciences decide to compare people who dare question them to
holocaust deniers. It's political.

Let's see what the climate EXPERTS say after federal funding is cut
for 1 year? Think they might offer some caution to their own
caution?


Clearly you're angry, but that's not an excuse for conflating things
that have no relation to each other and trying to change the subject.
As far as I know Ralph Cicerone never equated the Holocaust with ACC
and his quote you were angry about makes no such claim. I've
certainly never heard research scientists actually studying climate
dynamics make that comparison. But back to the issue, what is so
wrong with the science of what Cicerone said that makes you want to
hit him for saying it?

Finally, I think if you cut off funding for climate science for a year
climate scientists would be *more* insistent on the importance of
their work, not more cautious. This goes back to my other question,
if all these people who are intricately familiar with the physics and
chemistry of climate think there is a problem, why do you not believe
them? Climate change skeptics remind me more of income tax protesters
in the United States, about whom one Circuit Court acidly observed:

"Some people believe with great fervor preposterous things that just
happen to coincide with their self-interest."

So, given that, leaving Cicerone out of it since he was speaking only
to the science, in what sense is what you are saying any less
political than what Heidi Cullen is saying?

The History channel had a one hour show about this subject. At least
two "scientists" said global warming deniers were the same as the
holocaust deniers. This angers me because it is saying that when you
deny man-made global warming that you also deny Jews were murdered by
Hitler. Wouldn't that make you angry?

Bob Brown wrote:

On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 00:51:26 +0000 (UTC), William Asher
gcnp58@yahoo.com> wrote:

I'm just curious why you think this is so specious a
concept as to justify physical assault. If you want to criticize the
science, by all means talk about the science rather than slapping people
because their statements make you angry.

For the same reason people like YOU defend the comparison of Holocaust
Deniers to Global Warming Deniers. This comparison has been made by
SCIENTISTS in the climate areas. GEE, ever wonder why I might be a tad
upset with that kind of comparison.

We're not talking about science any longer when the "leaders" in the
climate sciences decide to compare people who dare question them to
holocaust deniers. It's political.

Let's see what the climate EXPERTS say after federal funding is cut
for 1 year? Think they might offer some caution to their own caution?


Clearly you're angry, but that's not an excuse for conflating things that
have no relation to each other and trying to change the subject. As far as
I know Ralph Cicerone never equated the Holocaust with ACC and his quote
you were angry about makes no such claim. I've certainly never heard
research scientists actually studying climate dynamics make that
comparison. But back to the issue, what is so wrong with the science of
what Cicerone said that makes you want to hit him for saying it?

Finally, I think if you cut off funding for climate science for a year
climate scientists would be *more* insistent on the importance of their
work, not more cautious. This goes back to my other question, if all these
people who are intricately familiar with the physics and chemistry of
climate think there is a problem, why do you not believe them? Climate
change skeptics remind me more of income tax protesters in the United
States, about whom one Circuit Court acidly observed:

"Some people believe with great fervor preposterous things that just happen
to coincide with their self-interest."

So, given that, leaving Cicerone out of it since he was speaking only to
the science, in what sense is what you are saying any less political than
what Heidi Cullen is saying?

"Bob Brown" <.> wrote in message
news:8f1gr2dcnrjlmrvrt2snsq514mgpf6hr6e@bbb.org...
Al gore? What Science degree does he hold? Why didn't that documentary
have a host who was a Climate expert?

It did. Gore is a climate expert. He isn't a scientist, but he got all
the science right.

And that is why Gore is so well respected in the scientific community,
weather it be Climate Science, Networking, Space Science, or virtually
anything else.