Is Bush the worst President in recent time?

[SLCPUNK]

A lot of those people would rather see Iraq fail so that Bush will be embarrassed.

This is sadly true.

This is bullshit.

Total bullshit.

Oh, come on.  You are telling me that noneone out there was hoping that Bush would fail in Iraq from the start.  There are plenty of people that simply hated Bush ever since he won Florida.  I think there is a faction out there, on the left and the right, that would rather see people embarrassed and their views vindicated, then to see that the person they hated made a right decision.

Again, I believe the decision to go to war in Iraq was a mistake.  But there are some that refuse to acknowledge anything positive ever, and that place the blame on Bush for everything.

Bush did not "win" Florida. That whole election was stolen. And no I wont "get over it." Gore was robbed and the election of 2000 was a joke and made a farce of our "great democracy."

 You conspiracy theory wackos are really crossing the line.  You want to talk about banning people in this forum, maybe you should start with the person who advocated the assasination of America's President.  That certainly made me feel 'uncomfortable' and god forbid we express a view that makes someone uneasy. Yet someone committs a felony and not a word is said. 

Fine, if we ban that person then we should also ban all the people that conclude that the murder of Iraqi citizens is "collateral damage". Right?

Condoning murder is no laughing matter and we should ban all the people who do so. Agree or not?

[Jamie]

P.S.? I wrote my senior thesis for my last Political Theory class on C02 and the atmosphere.( I got an A and my teacher was an admitted liberal)? Interesting reading if anyone is up for around 20 pages of libertarian/realist outlook.

What exactly did you have to say about CO2 that's so different to what is already blatantly obvious? I mean, it's a huge threat to the environment, I don't think there's much denying that.

I disagree that it's a huge threat.? The Earth has been much hotter and colder long before man walked the Earth.? There is a natural cycle that the Earth has in place to protect itself from a runaway green house effect.? Anyway, the majority of the paper is oriented around a free market sollution to aide in the reduction of pollution and a philosophical understanding of why we do what we do.? The reality is that scientist aren't sure what's going on.? Everyone remember the hole in the ozone layer cause by "global warming" - yea it's gone now.? in the 1970s Scientist were claiming we were heading to a new ice age.? Since very few of you actually are interested enough in the issue, I have a Penn & Teller Bullshit! episode on the issue I'd be more than glad to make available.? Since everyone loves to have an open mind, why not read/watch what some libertarian atheist have to say.

Well, I actually would be interested to see it, the Earth may survive the effects of global warming, but the people in it will not. Earth's temperature may have risen and dropped over the years, but that was a natural occurence, global warming is not a natural occurence. If the temperature, on an international level is changed, immaturely, it will surely have catastrophic effects. I mean in the last 3-4 years, I've seen more natural disasters collectively than I have seen in my (admittedly short) life, that is surely not coincedental.

[SLCPUNK]

The comment on CO2 is just a tip of the iceberg anyway. Obviously none of the pro-Bush crowd have even read about his Clear Skies program or what it really entails. If they did, they might be in for a shocker.

"The Clear Skies legislation sets new targets for emissions of sulfur dioxide, mercury, and nitrogen oxides from U.S. power plants. But these targets are weaker than those that would be put in place if the Bush administration simply implemented and enforced the existing law. Compared to current law, the Clear Skies plan would allow three times more toxic mercury emissions, 50 percent more sulfur emissions, and hundreds of thousands more tons of smog-forming nitrogen oxides. It would also delay cleaning up this pollution by up to a decade compared to current law and force residents of heavily-polluted areas to wait years longer for clean air compared to the existing Clean Air Act."

National Resources Council

[SLCPUNK]

P.S.  I wrote my senior thesis for my last Political Theory class on C02 and the atmosphere.( I got an A and my teacher was an admitted liberal)  Interesting reading if anyone is up for around 20 pages of libertarian/realist outlook.

What exactly did you have to say about CO2 that's so different to what is already blatantly obvious? I mean, it's a huge threat to the environment, I don't think there's much denying that.

  The reality is that scientist aren't sure what's going on.  Everyone remember the hole in the ozone layer cause by "global warming" - yea it's gone now.  in the 1970s Scientist were claiming we were heading to a new ice age.

Well, I actually would be interested to see it.....

I would like to see an scientific paper that claimed that scientists "are not sure what is going on". I would be very interested to see that. Please produce it.

I have asked for the "ice age prediction" made several times but they can not produce it. I have searched myself and can not find anything to support this. They refered to the "scientists predicted the next ice age in the 80's" in their last attempt to deny global warming (caused by man) but never backed it up. So, until then I will call this claim false.

[SLCPUNK]

New global warming evidence presented

Scientists say their observations prove industry is to blame

Washington -- Scientists reported Friday they have detected the clearest evidence yet that global warming is real -- and that human industrial activity is largely responsible for it.

Researchers at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science cited a range of evidence that the Earth's temperatures are rising:

-- The Arctic regions are losing ice cover.

-- The populations of whales and walrus that Alaskan Eskimo communities depend on for food are crashing.

-- Fresh water draining from ice and snow on land is decreasing the salinity of far northern oceans.

-- Many species of plankton -- the microscopic plants that form the crucial base of the entire marine food web -- are moving north to escape the warming water on the ocean surface off Greenland and Alaska.

Ice ages come and go over millennia, and for the past 8,000 years, the gradual end of the last ice age has seen a natural increase in worldwide temperatures, all scientists agree. Skeptics have expressed doubt that industrial activity is to blame for world's rapidly rising temperatures.

But records show that for the past 50 years or so, the warming trend has sped up -- due, researchers said, to the atmospheric burden of greenhouse gases produced by everything industrial, from power plants burning fossil fuels to gas-guzzling cars -- and the effects are clear.

"We were stunned by the similarities between the observations that have been recorded at sea worldwide and the models that climatologists made," said Tim Barnett of the University of California's Scripps Institution of Oceanography. "The debate is over, at least for rational people. And for those who insist that the uncertainties remain too great, their argument is no longer tenable. We've nailed it."

Barnett and other experts marshaled their evidence and presented it to their colleagues for the first time at a symposium here.

For the past 40 years, Barnett said, observations by seaborne instruments have shown that the increased warming has penetrated the oceans of the world - - observations, he said, that have proved identical to computer predictions whose accuracy has been challenged by global-warming skeptics.

The most recent temperature observations, he said, fit those models with extraordinary accuracy.

But a spokesman for the Bush administration -- which has been criticized for not taking global warming seriously -- was unfazed by the latest news.

"Our position has been the same for a long time," said Bill Holbrook, spokesman for the White House Council on Environmental Quality. "The science of global climate change is uncertain."

"Ice is in decline everywhere on the planet, and especially in the Arctic, " said Ruth Curry, a physical oceanographer at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, "and there is large-scale drying throughout the Northern Hemisphere."

Ice cores drilled deep into the Greenland ice cap show that salinity of the ice at the upper layers of the cores has decreased sharply due to the incursion of fresh water draining from melting snows on the surface, she reported, and land ice and permafrost are in decline all around the Arctic. In the meantime, she said, measurements show that salinity of the ocean waters nearer the equator has increased as the rate of evaporation of warmer tropical and subtropical oceans quickens.

It may take several centuries for all the ice that covers Greenland to melt, Curry said, "but its release of fresh water will make sea-level rise a very significant issue in this century." In fact, she said, changes in the freshwater balance of the oceans has already caused severe drought conditions in America's Western states and many parts of China and other Asian countries.

Already, the physics of increased warming and the changes in ocean circulation that result are strongly affecting the entire ecology of the Arctic regions, according to Sharon L. Smith, an oceanographer and marine biologist at the University of Miami.

Last summer, on an expedition ranging from Alaska's Aleutian islands to the Arctic Ocean above the state's oil-rich North Slope, Smith said she encountered the leading elder of an Eskimo community on Little Diomede island who told her that ice conditions offshore were changing rapidly year by year; that the ice was breaking up and retreating earlier and earlier; and that in the previous year the men of his community were able to kill only 10 walrus for their crucial food supplies, compared to past harvests of 200 or more.

Populations of bowhead whales, which the Eskimo people of Barrow on the North Slope are permitted to hunt, are declining too, Smith said. The organisms essential to the diet of Eider ducks living on St. Lawrence Island have been in rapid decline, while both the plants and ducks have moved 100 miles north to colder climates -- a migration, she said, that obviously was induced by the warming of the waters off the island.

Another piece of evidence Smith cited for the ecological impact of warming in the Arctic emerged in the Bering Sea, where there was a huge die- off in 1997 of a single species of seabirds called short-tailed shearwaters.

Hundreds of thousands of birds died, she said, and the common plankton plants on which they depend totally for food was replaced by inedible plants covered with calcite mineral plates. Those plants thrive in warmer waters and require higher-than-normal levels of carbon dioxide -- the major greenhouse gas -- to reproduce, Smith said.

"What more convincing evidence do we need that warming is real?" Smith asked.

AP

[Charity Case]

Reagan sucked

You opinions should be ignored after this moronic statement.? There may be 5 people in the world that think this, and you are one of them.? ?

Five people...ok

Please post link.....

PS, Hey I remember when I asked you to debate me one on one. But you said it was stupid and you had a life. You didn't have time to take on facts, figures and articles beating you down. But somehow, you have had time to come back as a new user, and post all day long. Posting stuff like you did above.

So you can't take me on, one on one in a controlled debate where you will be held for accountability and sources, because you "don't have time" and "have a life" but do have time to come back and post bullshit.

Hmmm...imagine that.

Boo hoo.   

Imagine that, you crying like a baby again...how novel.

You are getting your ass beat all over this forum from thread to thread.  Why should I debate you one on one when you get your ass handed to you daily here?  Not to mention, I stop by here for 5 minutes here, 10 minutes there.  I don't have any time in my life to debate someone properly.  Look at my posts.  I don't created long posts where I break down others posts point by point.  I have a job, a wife, two kids, a house and soccer to coach...I don't have the time to sit in front of my computer like you and break down everyone's posts line by line.

I am content to trash you along with others here on a daily basis in an open forum and expose your extremeist left wing agenda and your let's-help-everyone-in-the-world-cause-I-care-so-much-about-everyone-and-Bush-sucks hippy viewpoint for the rubbish everyone here sees it for.  That's fine by me.

[SLCPUNK]

Reagan sucked

You opinions should be ignored after this moronic statement.  There may be 5 people in the world that think this, and you are one of them.   

Five people...ok

Please post link.....

PS, Hey I remember when I asked you to debate me one on one. But you said it was stupid and you had a life. You didn't have time to take on facts, figures and articles beating you down. But somehow, you have had time to come back as a new user, and post all day long. Posting stuff like you did above.

So you can't take me on, one on one in a controlled debate where you will be held for accountability and sources, because you "don't have time" and "have a life" but do have time to come back and post bullshit.

Hmmm...imagine that.

Boo hoo.   

Imagine that, you crying like a baby again...how novel.

You are getting your ass beat all over this forum from thread to thread.  Why should I debate you one on one when you get your ass handed to you daily here?  Not to mention, I stop by here for 5 minutes here, 10 minutes there.  I don't have any time in my life to debate someone properly.  Look at my posts.  I don't created long posts where I break down others posts point by point.  I have a job, a wife, two kids, a house and soccer to coach...I don't have the time to sit in front of my computer like you and break down everyone's posts line by line.

I am content to trash you along with others here on a daily basis in an open forum and expose your extremeist left wing agenda and your let's-help-everyone-in-the-world-cause-I-care-so-much-about-everyone-and-Bush-sucks hippy viewpoint for the rubbish everyone here sees it for.  That's fine by me.

Crying about what? 

I'm pointing out you doublespeak that is all.

You are the minority in the country, the world, and here. I'm hardly extreme.

Think I have my ass handed to me here? LOL, you wish. I'm sure the only readers who think that are the other 3-5 of you guys...that is it.

As usual, you can't dispute the facts I posted above, so you go personal.

Have a nice day.

[Jamie]

Reagan sucked

You opinions should be ignored after this moronic statement.? There may be 5 people in the world that think this, and you are one of them.? ?

Five people...ok

Please post link.....

PS, Hey I remember when I asked you to debate me one on one. But you said it was stupid and you had a life. You didn't have time to take on facts, figures and articles beating you down. But somehow, you have had time to come back as a new user, and post all day long. Posting stuff like you did above.

So you can't take me on, one on one in a controlled debate where you will be held for accountability and sources, because you "don't have time" and "have a life" but do have time to come back and post bullshit.

Hmmm...imagine that.

Boo hoo.? ?

Imagine that, you crying like a baby again...how novel.

You are getting your ass beat all over this forum from thread to thread.? Why should I debate you one on one when you get your ass handed to you daily here?? Not to mention, I stop by here for 5 minutes here, 10 minutes there.? I don't have any time in my life to debate someone properly.? Look at my posts.? I don't created long posts where I break down others posts point by point.? I have a job, a wife, two kids, a house and soccer to coach...I don't have the time to sit in front of my computer like you and break down everyone's posts line by line.

I am content to trash you along with others here on a daily basis in an open forum and expose your extremeist left wing agenda and your let's-help-everyone-in-the-world-cause-I-care-so-much-about-everyone-and-Bush-sucks hippy viewpoint for the rubbish everyone here sees it for.? That's fine by me.

OK, give an example when you and your little possy has ever won a proper argument or debate on this board, without resorting to insults and calling sources "liberal rags" and people on the board "hippies". And as for "everyone here sees it for" that is just utter bullshit, there are seriously about 5 or 6 people here with conservative viewpoints. everyone else seems to disagree with racism and bigotry.

[Charity Case]

Who went personal first? ?Slow down when you read. ?I didn't take anything personal until you did first.

And you may not realize it, but you get beat around here like a red headed step child. ?Just because there are more liberals here than conservatives doesn't mean you win. ?

I personally think you've lost just about every arguement you've been in. ?I can even tell the moment you lose one too. ?It starts when you can't defend a statement and start getting person with insults. ?For example, in this thread it start when you called popmetal a poptard. ?You lose almost every arguement the same way. ?Funny as hell too.

[Charity Case]

Reagan sucked

You opinions should be ignored after this moronic statement.? There may be 5 people in the world that think this, and you are one of them.? ?

Five people...ok

Please post link.....

PS, Hey I remember when I asked you to debate me one on one. But you said it was stupid and you had a life. You didn't have time to take on facts, figures and articles beating you down. But somehow, you have had time to come back as a new user, and post all day long. Posting stuff like you did above.

So you can't take me on, one on one in a controlled debate where you will be held for accountability and sources, because you "don't have time" and "have a life" but do have time to come back and post bullshit.

Hmmm...imagine that.

Boo hoo.? ?

Imagine that, you crying like a baby again...how novel.

You are getting your ass beat all over this forum from thread to thread.? Why should I debate you one on one when you get your ass handed to you daily here?? Not to mention, I stop by here for 5 minutes here, 10 minutes there.? I don't have any time in my life to debate someone properly.? Look at my posts.? I don't created long posts where I break down others posts point by point.? I have a job, a wife, two kids, a house and soccer to coach...I don't have the time to sit in front of my computer like you and break down everyone's posts line by line.

I am content to trash you along with others here on a daily basis in an open forum and expose your extremeist left wing agenda and your let's-help-everyone-in-the-world-cause-I-care-so-much-about-everyone-and-Bush-sucks hippy viewpoint for the rubbish everyone here sees it for.? That's fine by me.

OK, give an example when you and your little possy has ever won a proper argument or debate on this board, without resorting to insults and calling sources "liberal rags" and people on the board "hippies". And as for "everyone here sees it for" that is just utter bullshit, there are seriously about 5 or 6 people here with conservative viewpoints. everyone else seems to disagree with racism and bigotry.

You equate conservatives to racism and bigotry?  Please.  Just because we don't want to save every life on this plant and grow government welfare programs to the extreme doesn't make us racist.  I believe in complete equality.  That means no affirmative action, no prolonged welfare benefits, no school grants based on color and I'd advocate for more white programing on the WB and less white programming on CNN. 

Equality means something different for liberals and conservatives.  But it doesn't make anyone racists.  Got to love someone who plays the race card.  Just like OJ.  You guys probably think he was innocent too.   

[SLCPUNK]

Reagan sucked

You opinions should be ignored after this moronic statement.  There may be 5 people in the world that think this, and you are one of them.   

Five people...ok

Please post link.....

PS, Hey I remember when I asked you to debate me one on one. But you said it was stupid and you had a life. You didn't have time to take on facts, figures and articles beating you down. But somehow, you have had time to come back as a new user, and post all day long. Posting stuff like you did above.

So you can't take me on, one on one in a controlled debate where you will be held for accountability and sources, because you "don't have time" and "have a life" but do have time to come back and post bullshit.

Hmmm...imagine that.

Boo hoo.   

Imagine that, you crying like a baby again...how novel.

You are getting your ass beat all over this forum from thread to thread.  Why should I debate you one on one when you get your ass handed to you daily here?  Not to mention, I stop by here for 5 minutes here, 10 minutes there.  I don't have any time in my life to debate someone properly.  Look at my posts.  I don't created long posts where I break down others posts point by point.  I have a job, a wife, two kids, a house and soccer to coach...I don't have the time to sit in front of my computer like you and break down everyone's posts line by line.

I am content to trash you along with others here on a daily basis in an open forum and expose your extremeist left wing agenda and your let's-help-everyone-in-the-world-cause-I-care-so-much-about-everyone-and-Bush-sucks hippy viewpoint for the rubbish everyone here sees it for.  That's fine by me.

OK, give an example when you and your little possy has ever won a proper argument or debate on this board, without resorting to insults and calling sources "liberal rags" and people on the board "hippies". And as for "everyone here sees it for" that is just utter bullshit, there are seriously about 5 or 6 people here with conservative viewpoints. everyone else seems to disagree with racism and bigotry.

There is none.

Repeat until you think it's true.

Rinse.

Repeat.

Ask same questions over and over.

Ignore facts.

Declare yourself the winner..

 

[Jamie]

Reagan sucked

You opinions should be ignored after this moronic statement.? There may be 5 people in the world that think this, and you are one of them.? ?

Five people...ok

Please post link.....

PS, Hey I remember when I asked you to debate me one on one. But you said it was stupid and you had a life. You didn't have time to take on facts, figures and articles beating you down. But somehow, you have had time to come back as a new user, and post all day long. Posting stuff like you did above.

So you can't take me on, one on one in a controlled debate where you will be held for accountability and sources, because you "don't have time" and "have a life" but do have time to come back and post bullshit.

Hmmm...imagine that.

Boo hoo.? ?

Imagine that, you crying like a baby again...how novel.

You are getting your ass beat all over this forum from thread to thread.? Why should I debate you one on one when you get your ass handed to you daily here?? Not to mention, I stop by here for 5 minutes here, 10 minutes there.? I don't have any time in my life to debate someone properly.? Look at my posts.? I don't created long posts where I break down others posts point by point.? I have a job, a wife, two kids, a house and soccer to coach...I don't have the time to sit in front of my computer like you and break down everyone's posts line by line.

I am content to trash you along with others here on a daily basis in an open forum and expose your extremeist left wing agenda and your let's-help-everyone-in-the-world-cause-I-care-so-much-about-everyone-and-Bush-sucks hippy viewpoint for the rubbish everyone here sees it for.? That's fine by me.

OK, give an example when you and your little possy has ever won a proper argument or debate on this board, without resorting to insults and calling sources "liberal rags" and people on the board "hippies". And as for "everyone here sees it for" that is just utter bullshit, there are seriously about 5 or 6 people here with conservative viewpoints. everyone else seems to disagree with racism and bigotry.

You equate conservatives to racism and bigotry?? Please.? Just because we don't want to save every life on this plant and grow government welfare programs to the extreme doesn't make us racist.? I believe in complete equality.? That means no affirmative action, no prolonged welfare benefits, no school grants based on color and I'd advocate for more white programing on the WB and less white programming on CNN.?

Equality means something different for liberals and conservatives.? But it doesn't make anyone racists.? Got to love someone who plays the race card.? Just like OJ.? You guys probably think he was innocent too.? ?

I equate many conservatives on this board to racism and bigotry, go back and read some of the threads about racism, inequality etc. and there are a hell of a lot of racist comments coming from conservatives on this board. And as for OJ, I most certainly do not think he was innocent, he was scum. That's as much grabbing at straws as you guys blaim the liberals on this board for, if not even more, by they way.

[Surfrider]

Reagan sucked

You opinions should be ignored after this moronic statement.? There may be 5 people in the world that think this, and you are one of them.? ?

Five people...ok

Please post link.....

PS, Hey I remember when I asked you to debate me one on one. But you said it was stupid and you had a life. You didn't have time to take on facts, figures and articles beating you down. But somehow, you have had time to come back as a new user, and post all day long. Posting stuff like you did above.

So you can't take me on, one on one in a controlled debate where you will be held for accountability and sources, because you "don't have time" and "have a life" but do have time to come back and post bullshit.

Hmmm...imagine that.

Boo hoo.? ?

Imagine that, you crying like a baby again...how novel.

You are getting your ass beat all over this forum from thread to thread.? Why should I debate you one on one when you get your ass handed to you daily here?? Not to mention, I stop by here for 5 minutes here, 10 minutes there.? I don't have any time in my life to debate someone properly.? Look at my posts.? I don't created long posts where I break down others posts point by point.? I have a job, a wife, two kids, a house and soccer to coach...I don't have the time to sit in front of my computer like you and break down everyone's posts line by line.

I am content to trash you along with others here on a daily basis in an open forum and expose your extremeist left wing agenda and your let's-help-everyone-in-the-world-cause-I-care-so-much-about-everyone-and-Bush-sucks hippy viewpoint for the rubbish everyone here sees it for.? That's fine by me.

OK, give an example when you and your little possy has ever won a proper argument or debate on this board, without resorting to insults and calling sources "liberal rags" and people on the board "hippies". And as for "everyone here sees it for" that is just utter bullshit, there are seriously about 5 or 6 people here with conservative viewpoints. everyone else seems to disagree with racism and bigotry.

There is none.

Repeat until you think it's true.

Rinse.

Repeat.

Ask same questions over and over.

Ignore facts.

Declare yourself the winner..

 

You guys are delusional if you think you are always right and win every argument on this board.  I agree with much of what is written from the left on this board, but come on now . .

[-Jack-]

Come on slcpunk.. have some humor. lets be friends 

OK, lets be friends.

Lol. Classic. Peace bro.

[Dr. Blutarsky]

I think the award for worst president in recent time would have to be Jimmy Carter.

Great humanitarian, terrible president.

[Charity Case]

I think the award for worst president in recent time would have to be Jimmy Carter.

Great humanitarian, terrible president.

This is probably true.

[Guns N RockMusic]

Reagan sucked

You opinions should be ignored after this moronic statement.? There may be 5 people in the world that think this, and you are one of them.? ?

Five people...ok

Please post link.....

PS, Hey I remember when I asked you to debate me one on one. But you said it was stupid and you had a life. You didn't have time to take on facts, figures and articles beating you down. But somehow, you have had time to come back as a new user, and post all day long. Posting stuff like you did above.

So you can't take me on, one on one in a controlled debate where you will be held for accountability and sources, because you "don't have time" and "have a life" but do have time to come back and post bullshit.

Hmmm...imagine that.

Boo hoo.? ?

Imagine that, you crying like a baby again...how novel.

You are getting your ass beat all over this forum from thread to thread.? Why should I debate you one on one when you get your ass handed to you daily here?? Not to mention, I stop by here for 5 minutes here, 10 minutes there.? I don't have any time in my life to debate someone properly.? Look at my posts.? I don't created long posts where I break down others posts point by point.? I have a job, a wife, two kids, a house and soccer to coach...I don't have the time to sit in front of my computer like you and break down everyone's posts line by line.

I am content to trash you along with others here on a daily basis in an open forum and expose your extremeist left wing agenda and your let's-help-everyone-in-the-world-cause-I-care-so-much-about-everyone-and-Bush-sucks hippy viewpoint for the rubbish everyone here sees it for.? That's fine by me.

OK, give an example when you and your little possy has ever won a proper argument or debate on this board, without resorting to insults and calling sources "liberal rags" and people on the board "hippies". And as for "everyone here sees it for" that is just utter bullshit, there are seriously about 5 or 6 people here with conservative viewpoints. everyone else seems to disagree with racism and bigotry.

You equate conservatives to racism and bigotry?? Please.? Just because we don't want to save every life on this plant and grow government welfare programs to the extreme doesn't make us racist.? I believe in complete equality.? That means no affirmative action, no prolonged welfare benefits, no school grants based on color and I'd advocate for more white programing on the WB and less white programming on CNN.?

Equality means something different for liberals and conservatives.? But it doesn't make anyone racists.? Got to love someone who plays the race card.? Just like OJ.? You guys probably think he was innocent too.? ?

Amen.  Glad to know I'm not the only one out there who feels this way.

[Guns N RockMusic]

P.S.? I wrote my senior thesis for my last Political Theory class on C02 and the atmosphere.( I got an A and my teacher was an admitted liberal)? Interesting reading if anyone is up for around 20 pages of libertarian/realist outlook.

What exactly did you have to say about CO2 that's so different to what is already blatantly obvious? I mean, it's a huge threat to the environment, I don't think there's much denying that.

? The reality is that scientist aren't sure what's going on.? Everyone remember the hole in the ozone layer cause by "global warming" - yea it's gone now.? in the 1970s Scientist were claiming we were heading to a new ice age.

Well, I actually would be interested to see it.....

I would like to see an scientific paper that claimed that scientists "are not sure what is going on". I would be very interested to see that. Please produce it.

I have asked for the "ice age prediction" made several times but they can not produce it. I have searched myself and can not find anything to support this. They refered to the "scientists predicted the next ice age in the 80's" in their last attempt to deny global warming (caused by man) but never backed it up. So, until then I will call this claim false.

Here it is SLC.  One of many articles claiming the Earth was cooling down rather than warming up as scientist now say: http://www.globalclimate.org/Newsweek.htm     Try and distort this, but I have provided you with an article from 1975.  Scientist turned away from this line of bullshit, why shouldn't we question their motives and exxagerations now?

[Guns N RockMusic]

Here is another one from just 2 years ago.  http://mitosyfraudes.8k.com/Calen/Landscheidt-1.html  Amazing how you claimed you couldn't find any but after 20 seconds on google I came up with hundreds of articles on thousands of pages.  I'm waiting for your doublespeak on this now. 

[SLCPUNK]

P.S.  I wrote my senior thesis for my last Political Theory class on C02 and the atmosphere.( I got an A and my teacher was an admitted liberal)  Interesting reading if anyone is up for around 20 pages of libertarian/realist outlook.

What exactly did you have to say about CO2 that's so different to what is already blatantly obvious? I mean, it's a huge threat to the environment, I don't think there's much denying that.

  The reality is that scientist aren't sure what's going on.  Everyone remember the hole in the ozone layer cause by "global warming" - yea it's gone now.  in the 1970s Scientist were claiming we were heading to a new ice age.

Well, I actually would be interested to see it.....

I would like to see an scientific paper that claimed that scientists "are not sure what is going on". I would be very interested to see that. Please produce it.

I have asked for the "ice age prediction" made several times but they can not produce it. I have searched myself and can not find anything to support this. They refered to the "scientists predicted the next ice age in the 80's" in their last attempt to deny global warming (caused by man) but never backed it up. So, until then I will call this claim false.

Here it is SLC.  One of many articles claiming the Earth was cooling down rather than warming up as scientist now say: http://www.globalclimate.org/Newsweek.htm     Try and distort this, but I have provided you with an article from 1975.  Scientist turned away from this line of bullshit, why shouldn't we question their motives and exxagerations now?

This article is about scientists who are concerned about food production based on the recent (at the time) dip in global temperature.

Nowhere in that article did I see "loony scientists" predicting the next ice age by the 80's. I read references to the 1600-1900 as "mini ice age", but no predictions (other than food production or lack of) for the future.

I will read the next article in a moment, it looks longer.

Either way, no matter what they say, what is the point? That a small group of scientists claimed that we may have another ice age one day (30 yrs ago)? And therefore any theory about the earth should be discarded immediately because of it? Is that your line of logic?

There are scientists that believe and do not belive in global warming. I happen to believe that humans and industry do cause global warming. I think the facts are too much to ignore. I also can't imgine any amount of pollution can be good for this planet. It is a fact that Bush's policies have a lower standard then those in place before. I disagree with that. I disagree because we should not destroy our planet, and I also believe it causes global warming.

What is it you really want to debate? Either you are for Bush's policies for the environment, or you are not. Which one is it? Care to read the facts on them and tell me what you think? Instead of going off topic (like you guys all do)? What is your stance?

Gonna give me a link from Fox showing how all people who believe in global warming also hate their country next?