Re: More Gore


"Kevin G. Rhoads" wrote:

Have any of the "Al Gore is evil" crowd actually WATCHED the video?
Do any of you criticise based on real experience?


Do you have to watch a dogfight to know its wrong? Or domestic
violence? How about underage porn? Or are you smart enough to know,
without watching all the gory details?

"Underage porn" -- nice non-sequiter there. Totally different issues,
classic misdirection on your part -- two points.

This is exactly what I was asking about -- do you criticize based on
information or not. Clearly, Michael, you have indicated you do not
need to actually evaluate any information presented to know it is
wrong.


All I see is massive hand waving from the GW side. They rant and rave
like lunatics, which makes it impossible to accept anything they say at
face value. I am undecided, but watching a group of people running in
circles and screaming "We're all going to die!!!" does not have any
credibility.


I'm happly you are so secure in your prescience.


You have mistaken me for someone in the 'GW crowd'. Most likely Al
Gore.


However, science requires something more than prescience.


Then show some REAL science, rather than a bunch of yes men and
doomsday cultists on either side.


This form of dismissive, and/or ad-hominem, and/or put-down mixture
of purported debunking does not constitute scientifically sound
criticism -- however much it may "feel good" emotionally to the
person putting it out.

From where I am it appears more like flaming, not scientific debate.


It's the same from here. Anyone who questions anything about 'GW' or
'CC' gets flamed by them. Scientists were ranting about 'The coming ice
age' when I was in school. They went into great detail about the wars
and violence that would happen as people fought for space as amount of
habitable land shrank to a narrow band around the Equator.

Now, 40 years later they are saying exactly the opposite. It's hard
to believe any of them when they can't even decide which disaster is
going to destroy mankind. From an undecided viewpoint it's like watching
a bunch of kindergarten kids arguing, and arguing for so long that they
don't even remember what it was about. It would be entertaining, if so
much time and energy wasn't being wasted by all those involved.

I am sick of hearing that I HAVE to switch to CFL lighting. I
switched to fluorescent almost 40 years ago. To switch to CFL would
require all new fixtures to use more lamps, the each cost more to buy
and operate than what I am already using. There are only a couple low
wattage incandescent lamps left. A pair of 25 watt halogens in my
gateposts to keep people from hitting the, and a few 60 or 75 watt bulbs
in work lights where yo need to move them, and don't want to risk
mercury cleanup problems if they break.

I have driven under 200 miles this month. My electric bill was
under $65 last month and that included the well pump. I have always
despised waste, and started recycling things long before it was THE
thing to do. I was running a part time used TV business when I was in
Junior high school and kept a lot of TVs out of the local landfill.

If the GW cult or the other side produces real science, i will study
it. They claim to be scientists, and act like they are infallible. They
aren't. It would be easier to write prediction software to pick every
winning lottery number in ever game for the next 20 years than produce
an accurate climate change model, yet a couple thousand lines of code,
and they are condemning mankind to extinction. Where is the real
science? A scientist is supposed to show some skepticism. I wonder if
the 'GW scientists' are the same ones who were convinced that 'cold
fusion' fully solved, and ready to save mankind a few years earlier?
Thank God that these 'GW scientist don't design high rise buildings,
bridges and airplanes. They would pick up a crayon, scribble a childish
outline on a dirty napkin and send it to manufacturing.


A few years ago, a 'well known scientist' was quoted as saying the
new HV transmission line they were building across Florida from the
nuclear power plant at Crystal River would have twice the voltage, and
therefore it would emit four times the EM field for the same amount of
power. The newspaper refused to release the name ofd the 'scientist'
they quoted, but he was a 'professional expert' the greenies had hired
in an attempt to stop the construction. Things like this make it damn
hard to believe anything they wave and shout about.

Frankly, I am becoming disgusted with the whole damn mess of greedy
idiots who only want to line their pockets. If the GW crowd was serious,
they would sell everything they own, and become self sufficient on small
farms, then ignore the rest of the world as they live their less than 50
year average lives without medical care, or other things provided by
actual science.


--
http://improve-usenet.org/index.html

If you have broadband, your ISP may have a NNTP news server included in
your account: http://www.usenettools.net/ISP.htm

Sporadic E is the Earth's aluminum foil beanie for the 'global warming'
sheep.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Honest Creationists Argument wanted
    ... I would think that most scientists have no intention of being dishonest ... science. ... DNA strands. ... parts of the theory of evolution) that can be presented rather easily. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Ping Bil Slowman; The global warming hoax reveiled
    ... I'm basically "at home" with snow and ice. ... Proof is not to be had in science. ... The scientists active in these areas make it their ... climate forcing, in my view. ...
    (sci.electronics.design)
  • Re: Honest Creationists Argument wanted
    ... I would think that most scientists have no intention of being dishonest ... science. ... DNA strands. ... parts of the theory of evolution) that can be presented rather easily. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Why does creationism persist in the USA?
    ... fundementalist churches of the USA and why they support creationism. ... Education, specifially science education, would I expect to be a major ... level scientists and research due to continued funding at the elite ... Whatever "health and vigor" Evolutionism enjoys is also caused by God. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Honest Creationists Argument wanted
    ... I would think that most scientists have no intention of being dishonest ... science. ... Because the line between life and non-life is blurred, ... deduction from the evidence is deduction from the evidence - i.e. ...
    (talk.origins)