gt;>>> either dead or are kneeling toward Mecca. Once it is too late, >they >>>>>>can >>>>>>>> then >>>>>>>>>> whine about how pissed off they are that there's no separation >between >>>>>>>>>> mosque and state...right before they are separated from their heads. >>>>>>I >>>>>>>>>> recognized it years ago. So did lots of other people.....funny, >>I >>>>didn't >>>>>>>>>> hear a peep out of OBama though. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> OK......now I'm of to rape the land. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> bye. >>>>>>>>>> >>&gt
> rick <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote: >> again, i know the story is about language, confusion and other bright >> ideas men come up with. >> sorry, but i have a problem with "men" had one language thing. just >> as i have a problem with god being suprised that adam and eve would >> partake of the forbidden fruit when told no no no you don't. he's >> god...for his sakes... guess he also didn't think of incest when >> populating the earth from just one pair of peeps. i mean cain went to >> the land of nod and eventually married...who...i don't >> know...mom...sis...cousin rita??? >> i believe god was smart enough to create the laws of physics that >> allow certain things to happen under certain conditions and lets the >> chips fall where they may. to me god doesn't kill 250 people on a >> plane and spare one as a lesson of his devine intervention >> capabilities. he doesn't kill half a town yet spares a church so they >> have somewhere to mourn the dead. >> the truely (again to me) sad thing about the differing concepts of god >> is how their used to validate the harm we do each other. >> >> >> On 22 Mar 2008 00:13:36 +1000, "Steve Cox" <stevec1@charter.net> >> wrote: >> >>> http://ldolphin.org/babel.html >Hey Hey.. I logged on. I'm offended that you would think that I posted that "YA" stuff. I always put my name on my post with my real email address. I have nothing to hide.. "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote: > >Do you really want to ruin Good Friday LaMont? > >"James McCloskey" <exc
elsm@hotmail.com> wrote: >> >>Why don't you start a new thread and we can throw down there? >> >>"yah" <Blah@ya-ya.com> wrote: >>> >>>Why do yoy think that your opinion is the right one? Are you saying that >>this >>>country >>>was'nt built on the backs of slavery? How am I a hypocrite? Ask questions? >>>My >>>first post was nothing but questions. Having the guts to stand up for >>>what you believe in with integrity, honor and respect, but without any >pansy, >>>pacifist whining and hiding behind labels and stereotypes". are serious? >>>Why did it take so long for every man to have the right same rights? Is'nt >>>that something we were suppose to believe in? Honor? respect? Look,do'nt >>>get >>>made at me or anyone that confronts you with the truth. I love this country >>>just as much as you. If I can say that with your permission. But we >>>have alot of work to do. We want to blame everyone else for are problems.(not >>>to say we are the cause of all the problems) Think what you want about >my >>>credibility,my words can stand on there own! This makes them no less true >>> >>>"Dedric Terry" <dt@noreply.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>Before you pass judgement, make ill-informed assumptions and become a >hypocrit >>>>yourself, read the context, ask questions, and attempt to actually understand >>>>other people. You just read a single word and extrapolated that into >left >>>>field. >>>> >>>>This had nothing to do with race. You might has well launched off a diatribe >>>>on the problems with meteor storms on Pluto. >>>> >>>>And in case you were wondering, by "fabric" I meant guts to stand up for >>>>what you believe in with integrity, honor and respect, but without any >>pansy, >>>>pacifist whining and hiding behind labels and stereotypes. >>>> >>>>Btw - posting like this without your real name is cowardly and destroys >>>any >>>>credibility to your opinion, but at least it supports my argument in spades. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>"Yah" <Blah@ya-ya.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>Listen, >>>>&g
t;My comments are not about the article,I'm not defending the left. I just >>>>>find the statement "the fabric of are country" to be bullshit. We forget >>>>>about >>>>>are past and pass judgement on others. This is the self-righteousness >>I >>>>speak >>>>>of. As to why I do not post my name? Because of the self-righteousness >>>I >>>>>speak >>>>>of. Wake up! Clean up your backyard. Playing the race card? It could'nt >>>>be >>>>>played if racism was'nt true and alive today! You may look at my comments >>>>>as detour >>>>>into left field,but my comments are directed at your comment about the >>>"fabric" >>>>>of are country. The truth is almost all the founding fathers were slave >>>>owners,and >>>>>some only freed their slaves after they died. Now there is one thing >I >>>agree >>>>>on >>>>>with you is that this place has gone way down! >>>>> >>>>>"Dedric Terry" <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote: >>>>>>And, btw - I can't believe anyone would even dare to post such racist >>> >>>>>>propaganda as this >>>>>>(and that's exactly what it is) when the original post was on radical >>>islam, >>>>> >>>>>>not slavery. Simply amazing. >>>>>> >>>>>>This forum really has lost it. I'm out. I've really had enough of >these >>>>>>far fetched bizarre reactions and detours into left field. >>>>&g
t;> >>>>>>"YAH" <bla-bla@yah.com> wrote in message news:47e3dde1$1@linux... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The fabric of are nation? What is that? Salvery? segragation? racisim? >>>>> >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> KKK? >>>>>>> self-righteousness! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote: >>>>>>>>I've heard two separate commentaries (one a major news agency, the >>other >>>>>>> a >>>>>>>>Brit's personal rant) about how the UK is catering to the whims of >>Islam >>>>>>> - >>>>>>>>they've restricted the use of the Three Little Pigs story in some >schools. >>>>>>>>England is funding Islamic schools for their Muslim citizens. They >>>are >>>>>>>>considering passing Islamic laws in some areas to appease that community >>>>>>>>(these were echoed in both, separate and independent commentaries >- >>>two >>>>>>>>completely different viewpoints seeing the same thing happen). In >>effect, >>>>>>>>the UK is making concessions right and left and getting nothing in >>return >>>>>>> - >>>>>>>>just more demands. Forget their own history, people and culture, >just >>>>> >>>>>>>>give >>>>>>>>up in the face of fear of suicide bombers, sarin gas, and extremist >>>>>>>>protests. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>The news agency report basically said exactly what you are DJ - the >>>US >>>>>is >>>>>>>>doing the same thing - bowing down and letting our "pacifist" leftwing >>>>> >>>>>>>>veil >>>>>>>>of "peace" and "equality" and "justice" dupe us into giving up those >>>>very >>>>>>>>ideals, playing right into the hands of extremism and even terrorism. >>>>>>>>That's the paradox that's become our country. And this is just one >>>case >>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>how the left is ironically proposing and touting exactly the opposite >>>>>of >>>>>>>>what is the fabric of our country. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>DT >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On 3/21/08 7:49 AM, in article 47e3bffd@linux, "Mr. Simplicity" >>>>>>>><noway@jose.net> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Isn't this cute? >>>>>>>>> http://markhumphrys.com/left.islamic.html >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> This one is the kicker though, and elucidates my periodic rants >better >>>>>>> than >>>>>>>>> I do: >>>>>>>>> http://dineshdsouza.com/books/enemy-intro.html >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Our economy is gonna bounce along the bottom for a while. This wasn't >>>>>>>>> necessar
y. Now I hear the Democrats starting to harp on the economy >>>>>and >>>>>>> tie >>>>>>>>> it ti Iraq. there is, most definitely, a connection. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> http://drsanity.blogspot.com/2007/04/selfless-narcissism.htm l >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> and the following excerpt is something I've been ranting about here >>>>>and >>>>>>>>> elsewhere for years: >>>>>>>>> The Democrats and their glorious leaders, who have become so >>>>>>>>> narcissistically invested in this country's defeat as a political >>> >>>>>>>>> strategy >>>>>>>>> to accumulate power and "restore American honor", that they >>>>>>>>> have--wittingly >>>>>>>>> or unwittingly--decided to sell their countrymen out to the very >>enemy >>>>>>> they >>>>>>>>> are currently fighting. They mean well, of course. They do it for >>>those >>>>>>>>> wonderful 'selfless' reasons--like "peace" and "social justice" >and >>>>>all. >>>>>>>>> They really support the troops . >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Let's just ignore the fact that they bear considerable responsibility >>>>>>> for >>>>>>>>> the ongoing violence and death of our troops as they enable and > >>>>>>>>> encourage >>>>>>>>> the priorities of the enemy. Why should the terrorists alter their >>>> >>>>>>>>> homicidal >>>>>>>>> behavior? It is working! People like Nancy Pelosi are living proof >>>>of >>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> effectiveness of their strategy. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> There really is a problem. It's a problem that has been aggravated >>>>and >>>>>>>>> encouraged by the left in this country..........you know, the ones >>>>>who >>>>>>>>> don't quite understand that they will be the first to be slaughtered >>>>> >>>>>>>>> once >>>>>>>>> they have thrown a wrench in the gears of those who are willing >to >>>> >>>>>>>>> protect >>>>>>>>> them. They just do not get it. The Islamists parrot the leftist >American >>>>>>>>> Imperialist tripe that the leftists love to hear and ascribe to >this >>>>> >>>>>>>>> country >>>>>>>>> but the Islamists do it by design, to dupe the left into helping >>them >>>>>>>>> destroy the protectors of the culture that the left hopes to protect >>>>>by >>>>>>>>> trying to appease those who will not be appeased until the leftists >>>>>are >>>>>>>>> either dead or are kneeling toward Mecca. Once it is too late, they >>>>>can >>>>>>> then >>>>>>>>> whine about how pissed off they are that there's no separation between >>>>>>>>> mosque and state...right before they are separated from their heads. >>>>>I >>>>>>>>> recognized it years ago. So did lots of other people.....funny, >I >>>didn't >>>>>>>>> hear a peep out of OBama though. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> OK......now I'm of to rape the land. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> bye. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >James, what is the race thing?Really? What is the race thing. ?? I think you come in here daily, I might add, with your right-winged off the wall, bull-shit ,rhetoric...Please stop posting such BS!@# and doe yourself a favor a nd study up on REAL AMERICAN HISTORY, not that Bull-shit you think you now and was taught in school... "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote: > >"yah"
rter.net" target="_blank">stevec1@charter.net> >>wrote: >> >>>http://ldolphin.org/babel.html >> >Steve, I don't think Rick gives a hoot about the story. He is talking about his ideas on god man, trees and swingin' cats. You're prolly not going to get any traction on that Babylonian story. Steve Cox wrote: > Rick, I HIGHLY reccomend you crack the book open and read the text for yourself. > You keep coming up with all these goofy things about a tree being a tree > and swinging a cat around... Man... that's all just foolishness. Please, > read it first-THEN bring on the comments. Right now all you are doing is > "babelling" about something you don't know anything about. Read the text.... > It WAS all about all the Babylonians speaking Babalonian. Not a hard concept > to understand. God wanted to break their power of agreement so he confused > the language and no-one understood each other and the progress of the tower > seeced. Why are you fighting such a simple, well known, taught to millions, > established story? You are fortunate that there are (just assuming guys)a > handful of Believers on this Forum who (you may as well face it) won't back > down from the Truth? >
The truth is almost all the founding fathers were slave >>>>>>owners,and >>>>>>>some only freed their slaves after they died. Now there is one thing >>>I >>>>>agree >>>>>>>on >>>>>>>with you is that this place has gone way down! >>>>>>> >>>>>>>"Dedric Terry" <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote: >>>>>>>>And, btw - I can't believe anyone would even dare to post such racist >>>>> >>>>>>>>propaganda as this >>>>>>>>(and that's exactly what it is) when the original post was on radical >>>>>islam, >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>not slavery. Simply amazing. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>This forum really has lost it. I'm out. I've really had enough of >>>these >>>>>>>>far fetched bizarre reactions and detours into left field. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>"YAH" <bla-bla@yah.com> wrote in message news:47e3dde1$1@linux... >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The fabric of are nation? What is that? Salvery? segragation? racisim? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> KKK? >>>>>>>>> self-righteousness! >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>I've heard two separate commentaries (one a major news agency, the >>>>other >>>>>>>>> a >>>>>>>>>>Brit's personal rant) about how the UK is catering to the whims >of >>>>Islam >>>>>>>>> - >>>>>>>>>>they've restricted the use of the Three Little Pigs story in some >>>schools. >>>>>>>>>>England is funding Islamic schools for their Muslim citizens. They >>>>>are >>>>>>>>>>considering passing Islamic laws in some areas to appease that community >>>>>>>>>>(these were echoed in both, separate and independent commentaries >>>- >>>>>two >>>>>>>>>>completely different viewpoints seeing the same thing happen). >In >>>>effect, >>>>>>>>>>the UK is making concessions right and left and getting nothing >in >>>>return >>>>>>>>> - >>>>>>>>>>just more demands. Forget their own history, people and culture, >>>just >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>give >>>>>>>>>>up in the face of fear of suicide bombers, sarin gas, and extremist >>>>>>>>>>protests. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>The news agency report basically said exactly what you are DJ - >the >>>>>US >>>>>>>is >>>>>>>>>>doing the same thing - bowing down and letting our "pacifist" leftwing >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>veil >>>>>>>>>>of "peace" and "equality" and "justice" dupe us into giving up those >>>>>>very >>>>>>>>>>ideals, playing right into the hands of extremism and even terrorism. >>>>>>>>>>That's the paradox that's become our country. And this is just >one >>>>>case >>>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>>>>how the left is ironically proposing and touting exactly the opposite >>>>>>>of >>>>>>>>>>what is the fabric of our country. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>DT >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>On 3/21/08 7:49 AM, in article 47e3bffd@linux, "Mr. Simplicity" >>>>>>>>>><noway@jose.net> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Isn't this cute? >>>>>>>>>>> http://markhumphrys.com/left.islamic.html >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> This one is the kicker though, and elucidates my periodic rants >>>better >>>>>>>>> than >>>>>>>>>>> I do: >>>>>>>>>>> http://dineshdsouza.com/books/enemy-intro.html >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Our economy is gonna bounce along the bottom for a while. This >>wasn't >>>>>>>>>>> necessary. Now I hear the Democrats starting to harp on the economy >>>>>>>and >>>>>>>>> tie >>>>>>>>>>> it ti Iraq. there is, most definitely, a connection. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> http://drsanity.blogspot.com/2007/04/selfless-narcissism.htm l >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> and the following excerpt is something I've been ranting about >>here >>>&
gt;>> of >>>>>>>>> how the left is ironically proposing and touting exactly the opposite >>>>>> of >>>>>>>>> what is the fabric of our country. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> DT >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 3/21/08 7:49 AM, in article 47e3bffd@linux, "Mr. Simplicity" >>>>>>>>> <noway@jose.net> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Isn't this cute? >>>>>>>>>> http://markhumphrys.com/left.islamic.html >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> This one is the kicker though, and elucidates my periodic rants >> better >>>>>>>> than >>>>>>>>>> I do: >>>>>>>>>> http://dineshdsouza.com/books/enemy-intro.html >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Our economy is gonna bounce along the bottom for a while. This > wasn't >>>>>>>>>> necessary. Now I hear the Democrats starting to harp on the economy >>>>>> and >>>>>>>> tie >>>>>>>>>> it ti Iraq. there is, most definitely, a connection. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> http://drsanity.blogspot.com/2007/04/selfless-narcissism.htm l >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> and the following excerpt is something I've been ranting about > here >>>>>> and >>>>>>>>>> elsewhere for years: >>>>>>>>>> The Democrats and their glorious leaders, who have become so >>>>>>>>>> narcissistically invested in this country's defeat as a political >>>>>>>>>> strategy >>>>>>>>>> to accumulate power and "restore American honor", that they >>>>>>>>>> have--wittingly >>>>>>>>>> or unwittingly--decided to sell their countrymen out to the very >>> enemy >>>>>>>> they >>>>>>>>>> are currently fighting. They mean well, of course. They do it for >>>> those >>>>>>>>>> wonderful 'selfless' reasons--like "peace" and "social justice" >> and >>>>>> all. >>>>>>>>>> They really support the troops . >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Let's just ignore the fact that they bear considerable responsibility >>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>>>> the ongoing violence and death of our troops as they enable and >>>>>>>>>> encourage >>>>>>>>>> the priorities of the enemy. Why should the terrorists alter their >>>>>>>>>> homicidal >>>>>>>>>> behavior? It is working! People like Nancy Pelosi are living proof >>>>> of >>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>> effectiveness of their strategy. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> There really is a problem. It's a problem that has been aggravated >>>>> and >>>>>>>>>> encouraged by the left in this country..........you know, the > ones >>>>>> who >>>>>>>>>> don't quite understand that they will be the first to be slaughtered >>>>>>>>>> once >>>>>>>>>> they have thrown a wrench in the gears of those who are willi
ng >> to >>>>>>>>>> protect >>>>>>>>>> them. They just do not get it. The Islamists parrot the leftist >> American >>>>>>>>>> Imperialist tripe that the leftists love to hear and ascribe to >> this >>>>>>>>>> country >>>>>>>>>> but the Islamists do it by design, to dupe the left into helping >>> them >>>>>>>>>> destroy the protectors of the culture that the left hopes to protect >>>>>> by >>>>>>>>>> trying to appease those who will not be appeased until the leftists >>>>>> are >>>>>>>>>> either dead or are kneeling toward Mecca. Once it is too late, > they >>>>>> can >>>>>>>> then >>>>>>>>>> whine about how pissed off they are that there's no separation > between >>>>>>>>>> mosque and state...right before they are separated from their heads. >>>>>> I >>>>>>>>>> recognized it years ago. So did lots of other people.....funny, >> I >>>> didn't >>>>>>>>>> hear a peep out of OBama though. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> OK......now I'm of to rape the land. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> bye. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >Ok, if you say so. So Mr. Yah, why don't you come out in to the open? "LaMOnt" <jjdpro@gmail.com> wrote: > >James, what is the race thing?Really? What is the race thing. ?? I think you >come in here daily, I might add, with your right-winged off the wall, bull-shit >,rhetoric...Please stop posting such BS!@# and doe yourself a favor a nd >study up on REAL AMERICAN HISTORY, not that Bull-shit you think you now and >was taught in school... > >"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote: >> >>"yah" <blah@ya-ya.com> wrote: >>> >>>I'm not Lamont.....Christ dying today could'nt get worse. I never understood >>>how >>>Christ dying was good,maybe it should have been Sad friday. >> >>Ok, LaMont usually goes off on the race thing, and he often has type-Os, >>my mistake. As far as Christ dyeing on the cross, it is sad, it is also >>something to be glad about and celebrate. If you under stood Christianity >>you would understand that. >>> >>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>Do you really want to ruin Good Friday LaMont? >>>> >>>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>Why don't you start a new thread and we can throw down there? >>>>> >>>>>"yah" <Blah@ya-ya.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>Why do yoy think that your opinion is the right one? Are you saying >that >>>>>this >>>>>>country >>>>>>was'nt built on the backs of slavery? How am I a hypocrite? Ask questions? >>>>>>My >>>>>>first post was nothing but questions. Having the guts to stand up for >>>>>>what you believe in with integrity, honor and respect, but without any >>>>pansy, >>>>>>pacifist whining and hiding behind labels and stereotypes". are serious? >>>>>>Why did it take so long for every man to have the right same rights? >>Is'nt >>>>>>that something we were suppose to believe in? Honor? respect? Look,do'nt >>>>>>get >>>>>>made at me or anyone that confronts you with the truth. I love this >country >>>>>>just as much as you. If I can say that with your permission. But we >>>>>>have alot of work to do. We want to blame everyone else for are problems.(not >>>>>>to say we are the cause of all the problems) Think what you want about >>>>my >>>>>>credibility,my words can stand on there own! This makes them no less >>true >>>>>> >>>>>>"Dedric Terry" <dt@noreply.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Before you pass judgement, make ill-informed assumptions and become >>a >>>>hypocrit >>>>>>>yourself, read the context, ask questions, and attempt to actually >understand >>>>>>>other people. You just read a single word and extrapolated that into >>>>left >>>>>>>field. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>This had nothing to do with race. You might has well launched off >a >>>diatribe >>>>>>>on the problems with meteor storms on Pluto. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>And in case you were wondering, by "fabric" I meant guts to stand up >>>for >>>>>>>what you believe in with integrity, honor and respect, but without >any >>>>>pansy, >>>>>>>pacifist whining and hiding behind labels and stereotypes. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Btw - posting like this without your real name is cowardly and destroys >>>>>>any >>>>>>>credibility to your opinion, but at least it supports my argument in >>>spades. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>"Yah" <Blah@ya-ya.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Listen, >>>>>>>>My comments are not about the article,I'm not defending the left. >I >>>just >>>>>>>>find the statement "the fabric of are country" t
ery? How am I a hypocrite? Ask questions? >>>>>My >>>>>first post was nothing but questions. Having the guts to stand up for >>>>>what you believe in with integrity, honor and respect, but without any >>>pansy, >>>>>pacifist whining and hiding behind labels and stereotypes". are serious? >>>>>Why did it take so long for every man to have the right same rights? >Is'nt >>>>>that something we were suppose to believe in? Honor? respect? Look,do'nt >>>>>get >>>>>made at me or anyone that confronts you with the truth. I love this country >>>>>just as much as you. If I can say that with your permission. But we >>>>>have alot of work to do. We want to blame everyone else for are problems.(not >>>>>to say we are the cause of all the problems) Think what you want about >>>my >>>>>credibility,my words can stand on there own! This makes them no less >true >>>>> >>>>>"Dedric Terry" <dt@noreply.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>Before you pass judgement, make ill-informed assumptions and become >a >>>hypocrit >>>>>>yourself, read the context, ask questions, and attempt to actually understand >>>>>>other people. You just read a single word and extrapolated that into >>>left >>>>>>field. >>>>>> >>>>>>This had nothing to do with race. You might has well launched off a >>diatribe >>>>>>on the problems with meteor storms on Pluto. >>>>>> >>>>>>And in case you were wondering, by "fabric" I meant guts to stand up >>for >>>>>>what you believe in with integrity, honor and respect, but without any >>>>pansy, >>>>>>pacifist whining and hiding behind labels and stereotypes. >>>>>> >>>>>>Btw - posting like this without your real name is cowardly and destroys >>>>>any >>>>>>credibility to your opinion, but at least it supports my argument in >>spades. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>"Yah" <<a href="mailto:Blah@ya-ya.com" target="_bla
gt;>>>and >>>>>>>>>>> elsewhere for years: >>>>>>>>>>> The Democrats and their glorious leaders, who have become so >>>>>>>>>>> narcissistically invested in this country's defeat as a political >>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> strategy >>>>>>>>>>> to accumulate power and "restore American honor", that they >>>>>>>>>>> have--wittingly >>>>>>>>>>> or unwittingly--decided to sell their countrymen out to the very >>>>enemy >>>>>>>>> they >>>>>>>>>>> are currently fighting. They mean well, of course. They do it >for >>>>>those >>>>>>>>>>> wonderful 'selfless' reasons--like "peace" and "social justice" >>>and >>>>>>>all. >>>>>>>>>>> They really support the troops . >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Let's just ignore the fact that they bear considerable responsibility >>>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>>>>> the ongoing violence and death of our troops as they enable and >>> >>>>>>>>>>> encourage >>>>>>>>>>> the priorities of the enemy. Why should the terrorists alter their >>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> homicidal >>>>>>>>>>> behavior? It is working! People like Nancy Pelosi are living proof >>>>>>of >>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>> effectiveness of their strategy. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> There really is a problem. It's a problem that has been aggravated >>>>>>and >>>>>>>>>>> encouraged by the left in this country..........you know, the >>ones >>>>>>>who >>>>>>>>>>> don't quite understand that they will be the first to be slaughtered >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> once >>>>>>>>>>> they have thrown a wrench in the gears of those who are willing >>>to >>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> protect >>>>>>>>>>> them. They just do not get it. The Islamists parrot the leftist >>>American >>>>>>>>>>> Imperialist tripe that the leftists love to hear and ascribe to >>>this >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> country >>>>>>>>>>> but the Islamists do it by design, to dupe the left into helping >>>>them >>>>>>>>>>> dest
roy the protectors of the culture that the left hopes to protect >>>>>>>by >>>>>>>>>>> trying to appease those who will not be appeased until the leftists >>>>>>>are >>>>>>>>>>> either dead or are kneeling toward Mecca. Once it is too late, >>they >>>>>>>can >>>>>>>>> then >>>>>>>>>>> whine about how pissed off they are that there's no separation >>between >>>>>>>>>>> mosque and state...right before they are separated from their >heads. >>>>>>>I >>>>>>>>>>> recognized it years ago. So did lots of other people.....funny, >>>I >>>>>didn't >>>>>>>>>>> hear a peep out of OBama though. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> OK......now I'm of to rape the land. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> bye. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >Sorry about they typos. I'm on my treo. "LaMOnt" <jjdpro@gmail.com> wrote: > >James, what is the race thing?Really? What is the race thing. ?? I think you >come in here daily, I might add, with your right-winged off the wall, bull-shit >,rhetoric...Please stop posting such BS!@# and doe yourself a favor a nd >study up on REAL AMERICAN HISTORY, not that Bull-shit you think you now and >was taught in school... > >"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote: >> >>"yah" <blah@ya-ya.com> wrote: >>> >>>I'm not Lamont.....Christ dying today could'nt get worse. I never understood >>>how >>>Christ dying was good,maybe it should have been Sad friday. >> >>Ok, LaMont usually goes off on the race thing, and he often has type-Os, >>my mistake. As far as Christ dyeing on the cross, it is sad, it is also >>something to be glad about and celebrate. If you under stood Christianity >>you would understand that. >>> >>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>Do you really want to ruin Good Friday LaMont? >>>> >>>>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>Why don't you start a new thread and we can throw down there? >>>>> >>>>>"yah" <Blah@ya-ya.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>Why do yoy think that your opinion is the right one? Are you saying >that >>>>>this >>>>>>country >>>>>>was'nt built on the backs of slavery
o be bullshit. We >forget >>>>>>>>about >>>>>>>>are past and pass judgement on others. This is the self-righteousness >>>>>I >>>>>>>speak >>>>>>>>of. As to why I do not post my name? Because of the self-righteousness >>>>>>I >>>>>>>>speak >>>>>>>>of. Wake up! Clean up your backyard. Playing the race card? It could'nt >>>>>>>be >>>>>>>>played if racism was'nt true and alive today! You may look at my >comments >>>>>>>>as detour >>>>>>>>into left field,but my comments are directed at your comment about >>the >>>>>>"fabric" >>>>>>>>of are country. The truth is almost all the founding fathers were >slave >>>>>>>owners,and >>>>>>>>some only freed their slaves after they died. Now there is one thing >>>>I >>>>>>agree >>>>>>>>on >>>>>>>>with you is that this place has gone way down! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>"Dedric Terry" <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote: >>>>>>>>>And, btw - I can't believe anyone would even dare to post such racist >>>>>> >>>>>>>>>propaganda as this >>>>>>>>>(and that's exactly what it is) when the original post was on radical >>>>>>islam, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>not slavery. Simply amazing. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>This forum really has lost it. I'm out. I've really had enough >of >>>>these >>>>>>>>>far fetched bizarre reactions and detours into left field. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>"YAH" <bla-bla@yah.com> wrote in message news:47e3dde1$1@linux... >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The fabric of are nation? What is that? Salvery? segragation? >racisim? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>> KKK? >>>>>>>>>> self-righteousness! >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>I've heard two separate commentaries (one a major news agency, >the >>>>>other >>>>>>>>>> a >>>>>>>>>>>Brit's personal rant) about how the UK is catering to the whims >>of >>>>>Islam >>>>>>>>>> - >>>>>>>>>>>they've restricted the use of the Three Little Pigs story in some >>>>schools. >>>>>>>>>>>England is funding Islamic schools for their Muslim citizens. >They >>>>>>are >>>>>>>>>>>considering passing Islamic laws in some areas to appease that >community >>>>>>>>>>>(these were echoed in both, separate and independent commentaries >>>>- >>>>>>two >>>>>>>>>>>completely different viewpoints seeing the same thing happen). > >>In >>>>>effect, >>>>>>>>>>>the UK is making concessions right and left and getting nothing >>in >>>>>return >>>>>>>>>> - >>>>>>>>>>>just more demands. Forget their own history, people and culture, >>>>just >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>give >>>>>>>>>>>up in the face of fear of suicide bombers, sarin gas, and extremist >>>>>>>>>>>protests. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>
enact all levels of retribution on others >because we think that's what god would do. >> >>What concerns me is the reality of Jesus. From that issue flow all >>others, and whether there is an objective truth here or we are >>free to make it up as we go along. >and whose to say where the "making up" began. it is in my nature to >question what i see and hear and if i go to hell for it...then oh well >it's who i am, the way i was made. >> >>DC >> >> >> >>rick <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>again, i know the story is about language, confusion and other bright >>>ideas men come up with. >>>sorry, but i have a problem with "men" had one language thing. just >>>as i have a problem with god being suprised that adam and eve would >>>partake of the forbidden fruit when told no no no you don't. he's >>>god...for his sakes... guess he also didn't think of incest when >>>populating the earth from just one pair of peeps. i mean cain went to >>>the land of nod and eventually married...who...i don't >>>know...mom...sis...cousin rita??? >>>i believe god was smart enough to create the laws of physics that >>>allow certain things to happen under certain conditions and lets the >>>chips fall where they may. to me god doesn't kill 250 people on a >>>plane and spare one as a lesson of his devine intervention >>>capabilities. he doesn't kill half a town yet spares a church so they >>>have somewhere to mourn the dead. >>>the truely (again to me) sad thing about the differing concepts of god >>>is how their used to validate the harm we do each other. >>> >>> >>>On 22 Mar 2008 00:13:36 +1000, "Steve Cox" <stevec1@charter.net> >>>wrote: >>> >>>>http://ldolphin.org/babel.html >>> >If the global temperature raises with more than 2 degrees celcius, we'll have a global disaster. It's no chance that we are going to avoid that. So beware, the africans, the south asians and the south americans are coming to knock on our door, and they are hungry, they are thirsty, and they are many. And that's just the beginning. This thing is out of control. Bjorn R "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:47e41af0@linux... > James McCloskey wrote: > > The science is about money. > > To an extent everything is about money. But that doesn't stop people > from doing good, conscientious work. > > You yourself require money to live. Should we therefore disbelieve > everything you say? > > No, I don't think so. That argument is really reaching. > > > > The science of man made global warming being > > a major factor is bullshit, and it is not provable. > > LOL. The science is hardly bullshit. > > What scientists are saying is that there is a strong chance that human > contributions to greenhouse gases are affecting the climate. > > This is because we are dumping large and increasing amounts of > greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, above and beyond current natural > cycles. Gases that then stay in the atmosphere for extended periods, > decades or more. > > Keep in mind that greenhouse gases help regulate temperature on earth by > reflecting back infrared radiation. This is a good thing for our > survival but it can be overdone. > > Since only a tiny fraction of the gases in the atmosphere reflect > infrared radiation (nitrogen and oxygen don't), it doesn't take much of > an increase in greenhouse gases to noticeably change the amount of heat > directed back toward the earth. > > There is strong evidence that this is what is happening now, and that > our contributions are part of the problem. Based on what we know so far > there is a strong chance this problem will increase over time. > > Given that information, it's smart to consider the implications now. > > > > Has the earth heated > > up a bit, yes, the earth goes threw changes. > > True, and true. > > And evidence indicates there's a good chance we're involved in the > current climate change event. > > > > Should we as people stop polluting, > > yes. > > We certainly need to be aware of the chemistry around us and how we > interact with it. > > The ozone situation is a good example. Scientists noticed a change in > the ozone layer. A human chemical cause was discovered. Policies were > changed to stop human contributions to the problem. > > > > Should we conserve, yes, I'm a conservative, not a liberal. &g
otmail.com" target="_blank">parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote: >>> again, i know the story is about language, confusion and other bright >>> ideas men come up with. >>> sorry, but i have a problem with "men" had one language thing. just >>> as i have a problem with god being suprised that adam and eve would >>> partake of the forbidden fruit when told no no no you don't. he's >>> god...for his sakes... guess he also didn't think of incest when >>> populating the earth from just one pair of peeps. i mean cain went to >>> the land of nod and eventually married...who...i don't >>> know...mom...sis...cousin rita??? >>> i believe god was smart enough to create the laws of physics that >>> allow certain things to happen under certain conditions and lets the >>> chips fall where they may. to me god doesn't kill 250 people on a >>> plane and spare one as a lesson of his devine intervention >>> capabilities. he doesn't kill half a town yet spares a church so they >>> have somewhere to mourn the dead. >>> the truely (again to me) sad thing about the differing concepts of god >>> is how their used to validate the harm we do each other. >>> >>> >>> On 22 Mar 2008 00:13:36 +1000, "Steve Cox" <stevec1@charter.net> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> http://ldolphin.org/babel.html >>First, I don't think it is only one party that will be on this taxation band wagon, the bush's are trilateralist also, and others. "a thousand points of light" " A new world order" That's trilateral talk. Isn't it funny that China, the biggest polluter on the planet is exempt from the law and rules the world gov. is trying to put in place. Why? This is all part of the trilateralist plan to shift the money around. The world banks have now set up inside of China. They are trying to scare people in to a sin tax. It's about money, they want a sin tax to build up the rest of the world. It's about controlling the world economically. They want to restrict what america can build and do in the future. Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote: >James McCloskey wrote: >> The science is about money. > >To an extent everything is about money. But that doesn't stop people >from doing good, conscientious work. > >You yourself require money to live. Should we therefore disbelieve >everything you say? > >No, I don't think so. That argument is really reaching. > > > > The science of man made global warming being >> a major factor is bullshit, and it is not provable. > >LOL. The science is hardly bullshit. > >What scientists are saying is that there is a strong chance that human >contributions to greenhouse gases are affecting the climate. > >This is because we are dumping large and increasing amounts of >greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, above and beyond current natural >cycles. Gases that then stay in the atmosphere for extended periods, >decades or more. > >Keep in mind that greenhouse gases help regulate temperature on earth by >reflecting back infrared radiation. This is a good thing for our >survival but it can be overdone. > >Since only a tiny fraction of the gases in the atmosphere reflect >infrared radiation (nitrogen and oxygen don't), it doesn't take much of >an increase in greenhouse gases to noticeably change the amount of heat >directed back toward the earth. > >There is strong evidence that this is what is happening now, and that >our contributions are part of the problem. Based on what we know so far >there is a strong chance this problem will increase over time. > >Given that information, it's smart to consider the implications now. > > >> Has the earth heated >> up a bit, yes, the earth goes threw changes. > >True, and true. > >And evidence indicates there's a good chance we're involved in the >current climate change event. > > >> Should we as people stop polluting, >> yes. > >We certainly need to be aware of the chemistry around us and how we >interact with it. > >The ozone situation is a good example. Scientists noticed a change in >the ozone layer. A human chemical cause was discovered. Policies were >changed to stop human contributions to the problem. > > >> Should we conserve, yes, I'm a conservative, not a liberal. > >Great. > >To conserve what we have we need to take into account any evidence that >shows we may have a problem. > >BTW climate change and conservation are not a partisan issues, in my
lorious leaders, who have become so >>>>>>> narcissistically invested in this country's defeat as a political > >>>>>>> strategy >>>>>>> to accumulate power and "restore American honor", that they >>>>>>> have--wittingly >>>>>>> or unwittingly--decided to sell their countrymen out to the very enemy >>>>> they >>>>>>> are currently fighting. They mean well, of course. They do it for >those >>>>>>> wonderful 'selfless' reasons--like "peace" and "social justice" and >>>all. >>>>>>> They really support the troops . >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Let's just ignore the fact that they bear considerable responsibility >>>>> for >>>>>>> the ongoing violence and death of our troops as they enable and >>>>>>> encourage >>>>>>> the priorities of the enemy. Why should the terrorists alter their >> >>>>>>> homicidal >>>>>>> behavior? It is working! People like Nancy Pelosi are living proof >>of >>>>> the >>>>>>> effectiveness of their strategy. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There really is a problem. It's a problem that has been aggravated >>and >>>>>>> encouraged by the left in this country..........you know, the ones >>>who >>>>>>> don't quite understand that they will be the first to be slaughtered >>> >>>>>>> once >>>>>>> they have thrown a wrench in the gears of those who are willing to >> >>>>>>> protect >>>>>>> them. They just do not get it. The Islamists parrot the leftist American >>>>>>> Imperialist tripe that the leftists love to hear and ascribe to this >>> >>>>>>> country >>>>>>> but the Islamists do it by design, to dupe the left into helping them >>>>>>> destroy the protectors of the culture that the left hopes to protect >>>by >>>>>>> trying to appease those who will not be appeased until the leftists >>>are >>>>>>> either dead or are kneeling toward Mecca. Once it is too late, they >>>can >>>>> then >>>>>>> whine about how pissed off they are that there's no separation between >>>>>>> mosque and state...right before they are separated from their heads. >>>I >>>>>>> recognized it years ago. So did lots of other people.....funny, I >didn't >>>>>>> hear a peep out of OBama though. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> OK......now I'm of to rape the land. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> bye. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >China is one of the countries that's going to suffer most from global heating. In fact, they already do. Bjorn R "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:47e42074$1@linux... > > First, I don't think it is only one party that will be on this taxation band > wagon, the bush's are trilateralist also, and others. "a thousand points > of light" " A new world order" That's trilateral talk. > > Isn't it funny that China, the biggest polluter on the planet is exempt from > the law and rules the world gov. is trying to put in place. Why? This is > all part of the trilateralist plan to shift the money around. The world > banks have now set up inside of China. > > They are trying to scare people in to a sin tax. It's about money, they > want a sin tax to build up the rest of the world. It's about controlling > the world economically. They want to restrict what america can build and > do in the future. > > Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote: > >James McCloskey wrote: > >> The science is about money. > > > >To an extent everything is about money. But that doesn't stop people > >from doing good, conscientious work. > > > >You yourself require money to live. Should we therefore disbelieve > >everything you say? > > > >No, I don't think so. That argument is really reaching. > > > > > > > The science of man made global warming being > >> a major factor is bullshit, and it is not provable. > > > >LOL. The science is hardly bullshit. > > > >What scientists are saying is that there is a strong chance that human > >contributions to greenhouse gases are affecting the climate. > > > >This is because we are dumping large and increasing amounts of > >greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, above and beyond current natural > >cycles. Gases that then stay in the atmosphere for extended periods, > >decades or more. > > > >Keep in mind that greenhouse gases help regulate temperature on earth by > > >reflecting back infrared radiation. This is a good thing for our > >survival but it can be overdone. > > > >Since only a tiny fraction of the gases in the atmosphere reflect > >infrared radiation (nitrogen and oxygen don't), it doesn't take much of > > >an increase in greenhouse gases to noticeably change the amount of heat > > >directed back toward the earth. > > > >There is strong evidence that this is what is happening now, and that > >our contributions are part of the problem. Based on what we know so far > > >there is a strong chance this problem will increase over time. > > > >Given that information, it's smart to consider the implications now. > > > > > >> Has the earth heated > >> up a bit, yes, the earth goes threw changes. > > > >True, and true. > > > >And evidence indicates there's a good chance we're involved in the > >current climate change event. > > > > > >> Should we as people stop polluting, > >> yes. > > > >We certainly need to be aware of the chemistry around us and how we > >interact
lusions. > > > > I'm I buying in the this trilateralist >> plan to shift more money out of the USA, no way! > >That's fine. But again you can promote your political views without >attacking climate scientists or dismissing scientific conclusions. > > >> Back in the 70's, the scientist >> that started this global warming stuff, was predicting that we would be in >> an ice age right now. > >Who are you talking about? > > >> You can post all of the contrived research you, it won't change the truth. >> Choose to believe what you want, man made global warming has not been proven. > >If someone is exploiting scientific data in a partisan way to push a >certain point of view you happen to disagree with, then fine, argue with >them. > >But don't pretend the data itself doesn't exist. There is a lot of >peer-reviewed research out there, and it isn't "contrived." > >If the only way to "prove" your point is to continue a risky worldwide >experiment until we possibly screw up the planet for future generations, >then your proof is too late to be in any way useful. > >It's much smarter to look at the decades of evidence we already have and >make prudent risk management decisions. > >Cheers, > -Jamie > www.JamieKrutz.com > > > >> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote: >>> Wish it were that easy, James. We would be poor stewards of the land >>> indeed if we carelessly dismissed the evidence to date. It's not >>> particularly prudent to ignore increasing evidence that shows possible >>> problems. >>> >>> The atmosphere and our use of it to store increasing amounts of unwanted >> >>> greenhouse gases is a big enough subject scientifically without being >>> sidetracked by political and economic conspiracy theories. >>> >>> Even if you enjoy discussing perceived conspiracies, be sure you don't >>> confuse them with the ongoing science. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> -Jamie >>> www.JamieKrutz.com >>> >>> >>> James McCloskey wrote: >>>> What we need is waders and a big shovel to get rid of this load of crap. >> >>>> >>>> "BR" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote: >>>>> The humanity is facing it's biggest disaster in 100 000 years. Tax raises >>>>> won't solve anything, it demand a lot more action than that.. >>>>> BR >>>>> >>>>> "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message >>>>> news:47e2cfc2$1@linux... >>>>>> This is what i've been saying. When Al Gore buys global offsets for >> ten >>>>> cents >>>>>> and sells them for a dollar, it's a big bunch of money making bullshit! >>>>>> Now this trilateralist bureaucrat bunch of SOBs are going to try to >> make >>>>>> it a sin tax that we will all have to pay. You know once the government >>>>>> gets a tax passed through they will never repeal it. We will be paying >>>> it >>>>>> for then on! It's a scare tactic to cow the people in to believing >> this >>>>>> bunch of bullshit. There is no significant man made global warming, >> it's >>>>>> a lie to shift the wealth out of the United States while these rats >> and >>>>> their >>>>>> friends get wealthy doing it. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> "Mr. Simplicity" <noway@jose.net> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> http://blog.mlive.com/annarbornews/2007/09/dingell_global_wa rming_may_req.h >>>>> tml >>>>>>> This is the biggest load of disingenuous hubris I've seen in a while. >>>>> More >>>>>>> hypocracy. Whether you get it or not, your intelligence has just been >>>>>>> insulted and be assured that what this is really all about it preparing >>>>>> you >>>>>>> to be bent over as consumption falls. Expect more of this BS as gas >> usage >>>>>>> goes down and therefore the tax revenue that a gallon of gas generates >>>> is >>>>>>> proportionately reduced. To make up for the revenue shortfall, we're >>>>> going >>>>>>> to get taxed into oblivion........and I was even sorta' thinking about >>>>>>> voting for a Democrat for president. The new forumla for the American >>>>>>> economy is to tax businesses more so that they will continue to go >>>>> elsewhere >>>>>>> while screwing the workers who will be losing their jobs. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Gimme some of that. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>There has always been global disasters. "BR" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote: >If the global temperature raises with more than 2 degrees celcius, we'll >have a global disaster. It's no chance that we are going to avoid th
at. So >beware, the africans, the south asians and the south americans are coming to >knock on our door, and they are hungry, they are thirsty, and they are many. >And that's just the beginning. This thing is out of control. > >Bjorn R > >"Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:47e41af0@linux... >> James McCloskey wrote: >> > The science is about money. >> >> To an extent everything is about money. But that doesn't stop people >> from doing good, conscientious work. >> >> You yourself require money to live. Should we therefore disbelieve >> everything you say? >> >> No, I don't think so. That argument is really reaching. >> >> >> > The science of man made global warming being >> > a major factor is bullshit, and it is not provable. >> >> LOL. The science is hardly bullshit. >> >> What scientists are saying is that there is a strong chance that human >> contributions to greenhouse gases are affecting the climate. >> >> This is because we are dumping large and increasing amounts of >> greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, above and beyond current natural >> cycles. Gases that then stay in the atmosphere for extended periods, >> decades or more. >> >> Keep in mind that greenhouse gases help regulate temperature on earth by >> reflecting back infrared radiation. This is a good thing for our >> survival but it can be overdone. >> >> Since only a tiny fraction of the gases in the atmosphere reflect >> infrared radiation (nitrogen and oxygen don't), it doesn't take much of >> an increase in greenhouse gases to noticeably change the amount of heat >> directed back toward the earth. >> >> There is strong evidence that this is what is happening now, and that >> our contributions are part of the problem. Based on what we know so far >> there is a strong chance this problem will increase over time. >> >> Given that information, it's smart to consider the implications now. >> >> >> > Has the earth heated >> > up a bit, yes, the earth goes threw changes. >> >> True, and true. >> >> And evidence indicates there's a good chance we're involved in the >> current climate change event. >> >> >> > Should we as people stop polluting, >> > yes. >> >> We certainly need to be aware of the chemistry around us and how we >> interact with it. >> >> The ozone situation is a good example. Scientists noticed a change in >> the ozone layer. A human chemical cause was discovered. Policies were >> changed to stop human contributions to the problem. >> >> >> > Should we conserve, yes, I'm a conservative, not a liberal. >> >> Great. >> >> To conserve what we have we need to take into account any evidence that >> shows we may have a problem. >> >> BTW climate change and conservation are not a partisan issues, in my >> view. At the very least, most people don't want to screw up the area >> where they live, no matter their politics. >> >> >> > Am I buying >> > in to the liberal's sin tax plan their trying to convince the dummies to >> > start paying to save the world, NO WAY! >> >> That's fine. But don't confuse any perceived conspiracies with ongoing >> climate science. >> >> You can promote your political views without attacking climate >> scientists or dismissing scientific conclusions. >> >> >> > I'm I buying in the this trilateralist >> > plan to shift more money out of the USA, no way! >> >> That's fine. But again you can promote your political views without >> attacking climate scientists or dismissing scientific conclusions. >> >> >> > Back in the 70's, the scientist >> > that started this global warming stuff, was predicting that we would be >in >> > an ice age right now. >> >> Who are you talking about? >> >> >> > You can post all of the contrived research you, it won't change the >truth. >> > Choose to believe what you want, man made global warming has not been >proven. >> >> If someone is exploiting scientific data in a partisan way to push a >> certain point of view you happen to disagree with, then fine, argue with >> them. >> >> But don't pretend the data itself doesn't exist. There is a lot of >> peer-reviewed research out there, and it isn't "contrived." >> >> If the only way to "prove" your point is to continue a risky worldwide >> experiment until we possibly screw up the planet for future generations, >> then your proof is too late to be in any way useful. >> >> It's much smarter to look at the decades of evidence we already have and >> make prudent risk management decisions. >> >> Cheers, >> -Jamie >> www.JamieKrutz.com >> >> >> >> > Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote: >> >> Wish it were that easy, James. We would be poor stewards of the land >> >> indeed if we carelessly dismissed the evidence to date. It's not >> >> particularly prudent to ignore increasing evidence that shows possible >> >> problems. >> >> >> >> The atmosphere and our use of it to store increasing amounts of >unwanted >> > >> >> greenhouse gases is a big enough subject scientifically without being >> >> sidetracked by political and economic conspiracy theories. >> >> >> >> Even if you enjoy discussing perceived conspiracies, be sure you don't >> >> confuse them with the ongoing science. >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> >> -Jamie >> >> www.JamieKrutz.com >> >> >> >> >> >> James McCloskey wrote: >> >>> What we need is waders and a big shovel to get rid of this load of >crap. >> > >> >>> >> >>> "BR" <<a hre
f="mailto:nospam@nospam.com" target="_blank">nospam@nospam.com> wrote: >> >>>> The humanity is facing it's biggest disaster in 100 000 years. Tax >raises >> >>>> won't solve anything, it demand a lot more action than that.. >> >>>> BR >> >>>> >> >>>> "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message >> >>>> news:47e2cfc2$1@linux... >> >>>>> This is what i've been saying. When Al Gore buys global offsets for >> > ten >> >>>> cents >> >>>>> and sells them for a dollar, it's a big bunch of money making >bullshit! >> >>>>> Now this trilateralist bureaucrat bunch of SOBs are going to try to >> > make >> >>>>> it a sin tax that we will all have to pay. You know once the >government >> >>>>> gets a tax passed through they will never repeal it. We will be >paying >> >>> it >> >>>>> for then on! It's a scare tactic to cow the people in to believing >> > this >> >>>>> bunch of bullshit. There is no significant man made global warming, >> > it's >> >>>>> a lie to shift the wealth out of the United States while these rats >> > and >> >>>> their >> >>>>> friends get wealthy doing it. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> "Mr. Simplicity" <noway@jose.net> wrote: >> >>>>> >> >>>>> > http://blog.mlive.com/annarbornews/2007/09/dingell_global_wa rming_may_req.h >> >>>> tml >> >>>>>> This is the biggest load of disingenuous hubris I've seen in a >while. >> >>>> More >> >>>>>> hypocracy. Whether you get it or not, your intelligence has just >been >> >>>>>> insulted and be assured that what this is really all about it >preparing >> >>>>> you >> >>>>>> to be bent over as consumption falls. Expect more of this BS as gas >> > usage >> >>>>>> goes down and therefore the tax revenue that a gallon of gas >generates >> >>> is >> >>>>>> proportionately reduced. To make up for the revenue shortfall, >we're >> >>>> going >> >>>>>> to get taxed into oblivion........and I was even sorta' thinking >about >> >>>>>> voting for a Democrat for president. The new forumla for the >American >> >>>>>> economy is to tax businesses more so that they will continue to go >> >>>> elsewhere >> >>>>>> while screwing the workers who will be losing their jobs. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> Gimme some of that. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> > > >man has always spoken in metaphoric, allegoric and or euphemistic terms...except biblicly. ya know steve i don't profess to be right because i just don't know but it seems there are a lot of people so willing to tell me how wrong i am when they're no different than me. On 22 Mar 2008 06:51:06 +1000, "Steve Cox" <stevec1@charter.net> wrote: > >Oh, forgot one important thing.... It wasn't men who came up with the "bright >idea" to confuse the language, it was Gods. >BUT it was mans idea to attempt to build the tower and according to what >the Word is all about, they would have succeded if God hadn't interviened >with the language confusion. > >"Steve Cox" <stevec1@charter.net> wrote: >> >>Rick, I HIGHLY reccomend you crack the book open and read the text for yourself. >>You keep coming up with all these goofy things about a tree being a tree >>and swinging a cat around... Man... that's all just foolishness. Please, >>read it first-THEN bring on the comments. Right now all you are doing is >>"babelling" about something you don't know anything about. Read the text.... >>It WAS all about all the Babylonians speaking Babalonian. Not a hard concept >>to understand. God wanted to break their power of agreement so he confused >>the language and no-one understood each other and the progress of the tower >>seeced. Why are you fighting such a simple, well known, taught to millions, >>established story? You are fortunate that there are (just assuming guys)a >>handful of Believers on this Forum who (you may as well face it) won't back >>down from the Truth? >> >>rick <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>again, i know the story is about language, confusion and other bright >>>ideas men come up with. >>>sorry, but i have a problem with "men" had one language thing. just >>>as i have a problem with god being suprised that adam and eve would >>>partake of the forbidden fruit when told no no no you don't. he's >>>god...for his sakes... guess he also didn't think of incest when >>>populating the earth from just one pair of peeps. i mean cain went to >>>the land of nod and eventually married...who...i don't >>>know...mom...sis...cousin rita??? >>>i believe god was smart enough to create the laws of physics that >>>allow certain things to happen under certain conditions and lets the >>>chips fall where they may. to me god doesn't kill 250 people on a >>>plane and spare one as a lesson of his devine intervention >>>capabilities. he doesn't kill half a town yet spares a church so they >>>have somewhere to mourn the dead. >>>the truely (again to me) sad thing about the differing concepts of god >>>is how their used to validate the harm we do each other. >>> >>> >>>On 22 Mar 2008 00:13:36 +1000, "Steve Cox" <stevec1@charter.net> >>>wrote: >>> >>>>http://ldolphin.org/babel.html >>> >>Point was, you simply launched a diatribe about slavery based on one word that had nothing, and I repeat, *nothing* to do with slavery. How about a game of word association, I say, "orange" you say slavery. I say balloon, you say "slavery". Get the picture yet? If you want to start a thread about how the word "fabric" offends you, feel free, but don't pass judgement and make assumptions about my intent in my reply to DJ. I wasn't talking to you, about you, or for your benefit, whoever you are. And I find it extraordinarily offensive that you would assume you have the right to cry about injustices done to other people over 150 years ago, and extrapolate that to being a permanent stigma doo
arth goes threw changes. >> True, and true. >> >> And evidence indicates there's a good chance we're involved in the >> current climate change event. >> >> >>> Should we as people stop polluting, >>> yes. >> We certainly need to be aware of the chemistry around us and how we >> interact with it. >> >> The ozone situation is a good example. Scientists noticed a change in >> the ozone layer. A human chemical cause was discovered. Policies were >> changed to stop human contributions to the problem. >> >> >>> Should we conserve, yes, I'm a conservative, not a liberal. >> Great. >> >> To conserve what we have we need to take into account any evidence that > >> shows we may have a problem. >> >> BTW climate change and conservation are not a partisan issues, in my >> view. At the very least, most people don't want to screw up the area >> where they live, no matter their politics. >> >> >>> Am I buying >>> in to the liberal's sin tax plan their trying to convince the dummies > to >>> start paying to save the world, NO WAY! >> That's fine. But don't confuse any perceived conspiracies with ongoing >> climate science. >> >> You can promote your political views without attacking climate >> scientists or dismissing scientific conclusions. >> >> >>> I'm I buying in the this trilateralist >>> plan to shift more money out of the USA, no way! >> That's fine. But again you can promote your political views without >> attacking climate scientists or dismissing scientific conclusions. >> >> >>> Back in the 70's, the scientist >>> that started this global warming stuff, was predicting that we would be > in >>> an ice age right now. >> Who are you talking about? >> >> >>> You can post all of the contrived research you, it won't change the truth. >>> Choose to believe what you want, man made global warming has not been > proven. >> If someone is exploiting scientific data in a partisan way to push a >> certain point of view you happen to disagree with, then fine, argue with > >> them. >> >> But don't pretend the data itself doesn't exist. There is a lot of >> peer-reviewed research out there, and it isn't "contrived." >> >> If the only way to "prove" your point is to continue a risky worldwide >> experiment until we possibly screw up the planet for future generations, > >> then your proof is too late to be in any way useful. >> >> It's much smarter to look at the decades of evidence we already have and > >> make prudent risk management decisions. >> >> Cheers, >> -Jamie >> www.JamieKrutz.com >> >> >> >>> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote: >>>> Wish it were that easy, James. We would be poor stewards of the land > >>>> indeed if we carelessly dismissed the evidence to date. It's not >>>> particularly prudent to ignore increasing evidence that shows possible > >>>> problems. >>>> >>>> The atmosphere and our use of it to store increasing amounts of unwanted >>>> greenhouse gases is a big enough subject scientifically without being > >>>> sidetracked by political and economic conspiracy theories. >>>> >>>> Even if you enjoy discussing perceived conspiracies, be sure you don't > >>>> confuse them with the ongoing science. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> -Jamie >>>> www.JamieKrutz.com >>>> >>>> >>>> James McCloskey wrote: >>>>> What we need is waders and a big shovel to get rid of this load of crap. >>>>> "BR" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote: >>>>>> The humanity is facing it's biggest disaster in 100 000 years. Tax > raises >>>>>> won't solve anything, it demand a lot more action than that.. >>>>>> BR >>>>>> >>>>>> "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message >>>>>> news:47e2cfc2$1@linux... >>>>>>> This is what i've been saying. When Al Gore buys global offsets for >>> ten >>>>>> cents >>>>>>> and sells them for a dollar, it's a big bunch of money making bullshit! >>>>>>> Now this trilateralist bureaucrat bunch of SOBs are going to try to >>> make >>>>>>> it a sin tax that we will all have to pay. You know once the government >>>>>>> gets a tax passed through they will never repeal it. We will be paying >>>>> it >>>>>>> for then on! It's a scare tactic to cow the people in to believing >>> this >>>>>>> bunch of bullshit. There is no significant man made global warming, >>> it's >>>>>>> a lie to shift the wealth out of the United States while these rats >>> and >>>>>> their >>>>>>> friends get wealthy doing it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "Mr. Simplicity" <noway@jose.net> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://blog.mlive.com/annarbornews/2007/09/dingell_global_wa rming_may_req.h >>>>>> tml >>>>>>>> This is the biggest load of disingenuous hubris I've seen in a while. >>>>>> More >>>>>>>> hypocracy. Whether you get it or not, your intelligence has just > been >>>>>>>> insulted and be assured that what this is really all about it preparing >>>>>>> you >>>>>>>> to be bent over as consumption falls. Expect more of this BS as gas >>> usage >>>>>>>> goes down and therefore the tax revenue that a gallon of gas generates >>>>> is >>>>>>>> proportionately reduced. To make up for the revenue shortfall, we're >>>>>> going >>>>>>>> to get taxed into oblivion........and I was even sorta' thinking > about >>>>>>>> voting for a Democrat for president. The new forumla for the American >>>>>>>> economy is to tax businesses more so that they will continue to go >>>>>> elsewhere >>>>>>>> while screwing the workers who will be losing their jobs. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Gimme some of that. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote: > >Conspiracies are another matter. > >Back to the science: Evidence shows the strong possibility that humans >contributions to greenhouse gases are currently affecting the climate. > >If you suspect that some groups are trying to exploit this data for >nefarious purposes, then fine, take on those groups. Dig into whatever >conspiracies you want. > >But don't pretend that the scientific data doesn't exist. You can >promote your political views without attacking climate scientists or >dismissing scientific conclusions. > >Cheers, > -Jamie > www.JamieKrutz.com > As I've said before, there many scientists that say it is not true. And I'll say, look at what is really behind this. People like Al Gore are profiting from this, and hanging on to power. > > >James McCloskey wrote: >> First, I don't think it is only one party that will be on this taxation band >> wagon, the bush's are trilateralist also, and others. "a thousand points >> of light" " A new world order" That's trilateral talk. >> >> Isn't it funny that China, the biggest polluter on the planet is exempt from >> the law and rules the world gov. is trying to put in place. Why? This is >> all part of the trilateralist plan to shift the money around. The world >> banks have now set up inside of China. >> >> They are trying to scare people in to a sin tax. It's about money, they >> want a sin tax to build up the rest of the world. It's about controlling >> the world economically. They want to restrict what america can build and >> do in the future. >> >> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote: >>> James McCloskey wrote: >>>> The science is about money. >>> To an extent everything is about money. But that doesn't stop people >>>from doing good, conscientious work. >>> You yourself require money to live. Should we therefore disbelieve >>> everything you say? >>> >>> No, I don't think so. That argument is really reaching. >>> >>> >>>> The science of man made global warming being >>>> a major factor is bullshit, and it is not provable. >>> LOL. The science is hardly bullshit. >>> >>> What scientists are saying is that there is a strong chance that human >>> contributions to greenhouse gases are affecting the climate. >>> >>> This is because we are dumping large and increasing amounts of >>> greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, above and beyond current natural >>> cycles. Gases that then stay in the atmosphere for extended periods, >>> decades or more. >>> >>> Keep in mind that greenhouse gases help regulate temperature on earth by >> >>> reflecting back infrared radiation. This is a good thing for our >>> survival but it can be overdone. >>> >>> Since only a tiny fraction of the gases in the atmosphere reflect >>> infrared radiation
ming our country, and woven into every conversation from here to eternity. I won't bother to explain "fabric" to you since you didn't get it last time. If you want to play the game of associating yourself with the past for sake of playing victim, I'm part American Indian (direct descendant), and "we" were here first, and the first to lose rights and freedoms here. ;-) If you want to associate history with present day people, why not claim Germany is racist and doomed because of Hitler's genocidal mania? How about the Netherlands for the barbarians? Enough of this. I only came back to be clear about how diluded you are in your assumptions in this debate. It used to be fun to hang out here and exchange opinions, however diverse, but this tangent really takes the cake - must be the twilight zone now. I guess now you'll rant about how "cake" or the word "twilight" is a "bull***" word as a result of slavery by some twisted and bizarre association as well. Have fun. "yah" <Blah@ya-ya.com> wrote: > >Why do yoy think that your opinion is the right one? Are you saying that this >country >was'nt built on the backs of slavery? How am I a hypocrite? Ask questions? >My >first post was nothing but questions. Having the guts to stand up for >what you believe in with integrity, honor and respect, but without any pansy, >pacifist whining and hiding behind labels and stereotypes". are serious? >Why did it take so long for every man to have the right same rights? Is'nt >that something we were suppose to believe in? Honor? respect? Look,do'nt >get >made at me or anyone that confronts you with the truth. I love this country >just as much as you. If I can say that with your permission. But we >have alot of work to do. We want to blame everyone else for are problems.(not >to say we are the cause of all the problems) Think what you want about my >credibility,my words can stand on there own! This makes them no less true > >"Dedric Terry" <dt@noreply.com> wrote: >> >>Before you pass judgement, make ill-informed assumptions and become a hypocrit >>yourself, read the context, ask questions, and attempt to actually understand >>other people. You just read a single word and extrapolated that into left >>field. >> >>This had nothing to do with race. You might has well launched off a diatribe >>on the problems with meteor storms on Pluto. >> >>And in case you were wondering, by "fabric" I meant guts to stand up for >>what you believe in with integrity, honor and respect, but without any pansy, >>pacifist whining and hiding behind labels and stereotypes. >> >>Btw - posting like this without your real name is cowardly and destroys >any >>credibility to your opinion, but at least it supports my argument in spades. >> >> >> >>"Yah" <Blah@ya-ya.com> wrote: >>> >>>Listen, >>>My comments are not about the article,I'm not defending the left. I just >>>find the statement "the fabric of are country" to be bullshit. We forget >>>about >>>are past and pass judgement on others. This is the self-righteousness I >>speak >>>of. As to why I do not post my name? Because of the self-righteousness >I >>>speak >>>of. Wake up! Clean up your backyard. Playing the race card? It could'nt >>be >>>played if racism was'nt true and alive today! You may look at my comments >>>as detour >>>into left field,but my comments are directed at your comment about the >"fabric" >>>of are country. The truth is almost all the founding fathers were slave >>owners,and >>>some only freed their slaves after they died. Now there is one thing I >agree >>>on >>>with you is that this place has gone way down! >>> >>>"Dedric Terry" <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote: >>>>And, btw - I can't believe anyone would even dare to post such racist > >>>>propaganda as this >>>>(and that's exactly what it is) when the original post was on radical >islam, >>> >>>>not slavery. Simply amazing. >>>> >>>>This forum really has lost it. I'm out. I've really had enough of these >>>>far fetched bizarre reactions and detours into left field. >>>> >>>>"YAH" <bla-bla@yah.com> wrote in message news:47e3dde1$1@linux... >>>>> >>>>> The fabric of are nation? What is that? Salvery? segragation? racisim? >>> >>>>> the >>>>> KKK? >>>>> self-righteousness! >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote: >>>>>>I've heard two separate commentaries (one a major news agency, the other >>>>> a >>>>>>Brit's personal rant) about how the UK is catering to the whims of Islam >>>>> - >>>>>>they've restricted the use of the Three Little Pigs story in some schools. >>>>>>England is funding Islamic schools for their Muslim citizens. They >are >>>>>>considering passing Islamic laws in some areas to appease that community >>>>>>(these were echoed in both, separate and independent commentaries - >two >>>>>>completely different viewpoints seeing the same thing happen). In effect, >>>>>>the UK is making concessions right and left and getting nothing in return >>>>> - >>>>>>just more demands. Forget their own history, people and culture, just >>> >>>>>>give >>>>>>up in the face of fear of suicide bombers, sarin gas, and extremist >>>>>>protests. >>>>>> >>>>>>The news agency report basically said exactly what you are DJ - the >US >>>is >>>>>>doing the same thing - bowing down and letting our "pacifist" leftwing >>> >>>>>>veil >>>>>>of "peace" and "equality" and "justice" dupe us into giving up those >>very >>>>>>ideals, playing right into the hands of extremism and even terrorism. >>>>>>That's the paradox that's become our country. And this is just one >case >>>>> of >>>>>>how the left is ironically proposing and touting exactly the opposite >>>of >>>>>>what is the fabric of our country. >>>>>> >>>>>>DT >>>>>> >>>>>>On 3/21/08 7:49 AM, in article 47e3bffd@linux, "Mr. Simplicity" >>>>>><noway@jose.net> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Isn't this cute? >>>>>>> http://markhumphrys.com/left.islamic.html >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This one is the kicker though, and elucidates my periodic rants better >>>>> than >>>>>>> I do: >>>>>>> http://dineshdsouza.com/books/enemy-intro.html >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Our economy is gonna bounce along the bottom for a while. This wasn't >>>>>>> necessary. Now I hear the Democrats starting to harp on the economy >>>and >>>>> tie >>>>>>> it ti Iraq. there is, most definitely, a connection. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://drsanity.blogspot.com/2007/04/selfless-narcissism.htm l >>>>>>> >>>>>>> and the following excerpt is something I've been ranting about here >>>and >>>>>>> elsewhere for years: >>>>>>> The Democrats and their g
>>> This is because we are dumping large and increasing amounts of > >>> greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, above and beyond current natural > > >>> cycles. Gases that then stay in the atmosphere for extended periods, > > >>> decades or more. > >>> > >>> Keep in mind that greenhouse gases help regulate temperature on earth > by > >> > >>> reflecting back infrared radiation. This is a good thing for our > >>> survival but it can be overdone. > >>> > >>> Since only a tiny fraction of the gases in the atmosphere reflect > >>> infrared radiation (nitrogen and oxygen don't), it doesn't take much > of > >> > >>> an increase in greenhouse gases to noticeably change the amount of heat > >> > >>> directed back toward the earth. > >>> > >>> There is strong evidence that this is what is happening now, and that > > >>> our contributions are part of the problem. Based on what we know so far > >> > >>> there is a strong chance this problem will increase over time. > >>> > >>> Given that information, it's smart to consider the implications now. > >>> > >>> > >>>> Has the earth heated > >>>> up a bit, yes, the earth goes threw changes. > >>> True, and true. > >>> > >>> And evidence indicates there's a good chance we're involved in the > >>> current climate change event. > >>> > >>> > >>>> Should we as people stop polluting, > >>>> yes. > >>> We certainly need to be aware of the chemistry around us and how we > >>> interact with it. > >>> > >>> The ozone situation is a good example. Scientists noticed a change in > > >>> the ozone layer. A human chemical cause was discovered. Policies were > > >>> changed to stop human contributions to the problem. > >>> > >>> > >>>> Should we conserve, yes, I'm a conservative, not a liberal. > >>> Great. > >>> > >>> To conserve what we have we need to take into account any evidence that > >> > >>> shows we may have a problem. > >>> > >>> BTW climate change and conservation are not a partisan issues, in my > > >>> view. At the very least, most people don't want to screw up the area > > >>> where they live, no matter their politics. > >>> > >>> > >>>> Am I buying > >>>> in to the liberal's sin tax plan their trying to convince the dummies > >> to > >>>> start paying to save the world, NO WAY! > >>> That's fine. But don't confuse any perceived conspiracies with ongoing > > >>> climate science. > >>> > >>> You can promote your political views without attacking climate > >>> scientists or dismissing scientific conclusions. > >>> > >>> > >>>> I'm I buying in the this trilateralist > >>>> plan to shift more money out of the USA, no way! > >>> That's fine. But again you can promote your political views without > >>> attacking climate scientists or dismissing scientific conclusions. > >>> > >>> > >>>> Back in the 70's, the scientist > >>>> that started this global warming stuff, was predicting that we would > be > >> in > >>>> an ice age right now. > >>> Who are you talking about? > >>> > >>> > >>>> You can post all of the contrived research you, it won't change the > truth. > >>>> Choose to believe what you want, man made global warming has not been > >> proven. > >>> If someone is exploiting scientific data in a partisan way to push a > > >>> certain point of view you happen to disagree with, then fine, argue with > >> > >>> them. > >>> > >>> But don't pretend the data itself doesn't exist. There is a lot of > >>> peer-reviewed research out there, and it isn't "contrived." > >>> > >>> If the only way to "prove" your point is to continue a risky worldwide > > >>> experiment until we possibly screw up the planet for future generations, > >> > >>> then your proof is too late to be in any way useful. > >>> > >>> It's much smarter to look at the decades of evidence we already have > and > >> > >>> make prudent risk management decisions. > >>> > >>> Cheers, > >>> -Jamie > >>> www.JamieKrutz.com > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote: > >>>>> Wish it were that easy, James. We would be poor stewards of the land > >> > >>>>> indeed if we carelessly dismissed the evidence to date. It's not > >>>>> particularly prudent to ignore increasing evidence that shows possible > >> > >>>>> problems. > >>>>> > >>>>> The atmosphere and our use of it to store increasing amounts of unwanted > >>>>> greenhouse gases is a big enough subject scientifically without being > >> > >>>>> sidetracked by political and economic conspiracy theories. > >>>>> > >>>>> Even if you enjoy discussing perceived conspiracies, be sure you don't > >> > >>>>> confuse them with the ongoing science. > >>>>> > >>>>> Cheers, > >>>>> -Jamie > >>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> James McCloskey wrote: > >>>>>> What we need is waders and a big shovel to get rid of this load of > crap. > >>>>>> "BR" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote: > >>>>>>> The humanity is facing it's biggest disaster in 100 000 years. Tax > >> raises > >>>>>>> won't solve anything, it demand a lot more action than that.. > >>>>>>> BR > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message > >>>>>>> news:47e2cfc2$1@linux... > >>>>>>>> This is what i've been saying. When Al Gore buys global offsets > for > >>>> ten > >>>>>>> cents > >>>>>>>> and sells them for a dollar, it's a big bunch of money making bullshit! > >>>>>>>> Now this trilateralist bureaucrat bunch of SOBs are going to try > to > >>>> make > >>>>>>>> it a sin tax that we will all have to pay. You know once the government > >>>>>>>> gets a tax passed through they will never repeal it. We will be > paying > >>>>>> it > >>>>>>>> for then on! It's a scare tactic to cow the people in to believing > >>>> this > >>>>>>>> bunch of bullshit. There is no significant man made global warming, > >>>> it's > >>>>>>>> a lie to shift the wealth out of the United States while these rats > >>>> and > >>>>>>> their > >>>>>>>> friends get wealthy doing it. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> "Mr. Simplicity" <noway@jose.net> wrote: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> http://blog.mlive.com/annarbornews/2007/09/dingell_global_wa rming_may_req.h > >>>>>>> tml > >>>>>>>>> This is the biggest load of disingenuous hubris I've seen in a > while. > >>>>>>> More > >>>>>>>>> hypocracy. Whether you get it or not, your intelligence has just > >> been > >>>>>>>>> insulted and be assured that what this is really all about it preparing > >>>>>>>> you > >>>>>>>>> to be bent over as consumption falls. Expect more of this BS as > gas > >>>> usage > >>>>>>>>> goes down and therefore the tax revenue that a gallon of gas generates > >>>>>> is > >>>>>>>>> proportionately reduced. To make up for the revenue shortfall, > we're > >>>>>>> going > >>>>>>>>> to get taxed into oblivion........and I was even sorta' thinking > >> about > >>>>>>>>> voting for a Democrat for president. The new forumla for the American > >>>>>>>>> economy is to tax businesses more so that they will continue to > go > >>>>>>> elsewhere > >>>>>>>>> while screwing the workers who will be losing their jobs. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Gimme some of that. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >> > >Remember where I asked you to put aside Al Gore and Exxon for a moment? Scientifically they don't matter. Don't get distracted. The scientific point is this: Evidence exists that shows the strong possibility that humans contributions to greenhouse gases are currently affecting the climate. If you really care about conservation it would be foolish to ignore decades of data in peer-reviewed scientific journals. It would be extremely limiting to cherrypick a few scientists who disagree (or who you think disagree) and ignore the rest. At some point you're directly participating in a different conspiracy of sorts, as a member of a group that deliberately ignores evidence and attacks the messengers in the process. How is that helpful? It's not. Cheers, -Jamie www.JamieKrutz.com James McCloskey wrote: > Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote: >> Conspiracies are another matter. >> >> Back to the science: Evidence shows the strong possibility that humans >> contributions to greenhouse gases are currently affecting the climate. >> >> If you suspect that some groups are trying to exploit this data for >> nefarious purposes, then fine, take on those groups. Dig into whatever >> conspiracies you want. >> >> But don't pretend that the scientific data doesn't exist. You can >> promote your political views without attacking climate scientists or >> dismissing scientific conclusions. >> >> Cheers, >> -Jamie >> www.JamieKrutz.com >> > > As I've said before, there many scientists that say it is not true. And > I'll say, look at what is really behind this. People like Al Gore are profiting > from this, and hanging on to power. > >> >> James McCloskey wrote: >>> First, I don't think it is only one party that will be on this taxation > band >>> wagon, the bush's are trilateralist also, and others. "a thousand points >>> of light" " A new world order" That's trilateral talk. >>> >>> Isn't it funny that China, the biggest polluter on the planet is exempt > from >>> the law and rules the world gov. is trying to put in place. Why? This > is >>> all part of the trilateralist plan to shift the money around. The world >>> banks have now set up inside of China. >>> >>> They are trying to scare people in to a sin tax. It's about money, they >>> want a sin tax to build up the rest of the world. It's about controlling >>> the world economically. They want to restrict what america can build > and >>> do in the future. >>> >>> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote: >>>> James McCloskey wrote: >>>>> The science is about money. >>>> To an extent everything is about money. But that doesn't stop people > >>> >from doing good, conscientious work. >>>> You yourself require money to live. Should we therefore disbelieve >>>> everything you say? >&
buying > >> in to the liberal's sin tax plan their trying to convince the dummies > to > >> start paying to save the world, NO WAY! > > > >That's fine. But don't confuse any perceived conspiracies with ongoing > >climate science. > > > >You can promote your political views without attacking climate > >scientists or dismissing scientific conclusions. > > > > > > > I'm I buying in the this trilateralist > >> plan to shift more money out of the USA, no way! > > > >That's fine. But again you can promote your political views without > >attacking climate scientists or dismissing scientific conclusions. > > > > > >> Back in the 70's, the scientist > >> that started this global warming stuff, was predicting that we would be > in > >> an ice age right now. > > > >Who are you talking about? > > > > > >> You can post all of the contrived research you, it won't change the truth. > >> Choose to believe what you want, man made global warming has not been > proven. > > > >If someone is exploiting scientific data in a partisan way to push a > >certain point of view you happen to disagree with, then fine, argue with > > >them. > > > >But don't pretend the data itself doesn't exist. There is a lot of > >peer-reviewed research out there, and it isn't "contrived." > > > >If the only way to "prove" your point is to continue a risky worldwide > >experiment until we possibly screw up the planet for future generations, > > >then your proof is too late to be in any way useful. > > > >It's much smarter to look at the decades of evidence we already have and > > >make prudent risk management decisions. > > > >Cheers, > > -Jamie > > www.JamieKrutz.com > > > > > > > >> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote: > >>> Wish it were that easy, James. We would be poor stewards of the land > > >>> indeed if we carelessly dismissed the evidence to date. It's not > >>> particularly prudent to ignore increasing evidence that shows possible > > >>> problems. > >>> > >>> The atmosphere and our use of it to store increasing amounts of unwanted > >> > >>> greenhouse gases is a big enough subject scientifically without being > > >>> sidetracked by political and economic conspiracy theories. > >>> > >>> Even if you enjoy discussing perceived conspiracies, be sure you don't > > >>> confuse them with the ongoing science. > >>> > >>> Cheers, > >>> -Jamie > >>> www.JamieKrutz.com > >>> > >>> > >>> James McCloskey wrote: > >>>> What we need is waders and a big shovel to get rid of this load of crap. > >> > >>>> > >>>> "BR" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote: > >>>>> The humanity is facing it's biggest disaster in 100 000 years. Tax > raises > >>>>> won't solve anything, it demand a lot more action than that.. > >>>>> BR > >>>>> > >>>>> "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message > >>>>> news:47e2cfc2$1@linux... > >>>>>> This is what i've been saying. When Al Gore buys global offsets for > >> ten > >>>>> cents > >>>>>> and sells them for a dollar, it's a big bunch of money making bullshit! > >>>>>> Now this trilateralist bureaucrat bunch of SOBs are going to try to > >> make > >>>>>> it a sin tax that we will all have to pay. You know once the government > >>>>>> gets a tax passed through they will never repeal it. We will be paying > >>>> it > >>>>>> for then on! It's a scare tactic to cow the people in to believing > >> this > >>>>>> bunch of bullshit. There is no significant man made global warming, > >> it's > >>>>>> a lie to shift the wealth out of the United States while these rats > >> and > >>>>> their > >>>>>> friends get wealthy doing it. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> "Mr. Simplicity" <noway@jose.net> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> http://blog.mlive.com/annarbornews/2007/09/dingell_global_wa rming_may_req.h > >>>>> tml > >>>>>>> This is the biggest load of disingenuous hubris I've seen in a while. > >>>>> More > >>>>>>> hypocracy. Whether you get it or not, your intelligence has just > been > >>>>>>> insulted and be assured that what this is really all about it preparing > >>>>>> you > >>>>>>> to be bent over as consumption falls. Expect more of this BS as gas > >> usage > >>>>>>> goes down and therefore the tax revenue that a gallon of gas generates > >>>> is > >>>>>>> proportionately reduced. To make up for the revenue shortfall, we're > >>>>> going > >>>>>>> to get taxed into oblivion........and I was even sorta' thinking > about > >>>>>>> voting for a Democrat for president. The new forumla for the American > >>>>>>> economy is to tax businesses more so that they will continue to go > >>>>> elsewhere > >>>>>>> while screwing the workers who will be losing their jobs. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Gimme some of that. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >> >Whew! hey everybody. let's take a break and cool down.Conspiracies are another matter. Back to the science: Evidence shows the strong possibility that humans contributions to greenhouse gases are currently affecting the climate. If you suspect that some groups are trying to exploit this data for nefarious purposes, then fine, take on those groups. Dig into whatever conspiracies you want. But don't pretend that the scientific data doesn't exist. You can promote your political views without attacking climate scientists or dismissing scientific conclusions. Cheers, -Jamie www.JamieKrutz.com James McCloskey wrote: > First, I don't think it is only one party that will be on this taxation band > wagon, the bush's are trilateralist also, and others. "a thousand points > of light" " A new world order" That's trilateral talk. > > Isn't it funny that China, the biggest polluter on the planet is exempt from > the law and rules the world gov. is trying to put in place. Why? This is > all part of the trilateralist plan to shift the money around. The world > banks have now set up inside of China. > > They are trying to scare people in to a sin tax. It's about money, they > want a sin tax to build up the rest of the world. It's about controlling > the world economically. They want to restrict what america can build and > do in the future. > > Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote: >> James McCloskey wrote: >>> The science is about money. >> To an extent everything is about money. But that doesn't stop people >>from doing good, conscientious work. >> You yourself require money to live. Should we therefore disbelieve >> everything you say? >> >> No, I don't think so. That argument is really reaching. >> >> >>> The science of man made global warming being >>> a major factor is bullshit, and it is not provable. >> LOL. The science is hardly bullshit. >> >> What scientists are saying is that there is a strong chance that human >> contributions to greenhouse gases are affecting the climate. >> >> This is because we are dumping large and increasing amounts of >> greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, above and beyond current natural >> cycles. Gases that then stay in the atmosphere for extended periods, >> decades or more. >> >> Keep in mind that greenhouse gases help regulate temperature on earth by > >> reflecting back infrared radiation. This is a good thing for our >> survival but it can be overdone. >> >> Since only a tiny fraction of the gases in the atmosphere reflect >> infrared radiation (nitrogen and oxygen don't), it doesn't take much of > >> an increase in greenhouse gases to noticeably change the amount of heat > >> directed back toward the earth. >> >> There is strong evidence that this is what is happening now, and that >> our contributions are part of the problem. Based on what we know so far > >> there is a strong chance this problem will increase over time. >> >> Given that information, it's smart to consider the implications now. >> >> >>> Has the earth heated >>> up a bit, yes, the e
(nitrogen and oxygen don't), it doesn't take much of >> >>> an increase in greenhouse gases to noticeably change the amount of heat >> >>> directed back toward the earth. >>> >>> There is strong evidence that this is what is happening now, and that >>> our contributions are part of the problem. Based on what we know so far >> >>> there is a strong chance this problem will increase over time. >>> >>> Given that information, it's smart to consider the implications now. >>> >>> >>>> Has the earth heated >>>> up a bit, yes, the earth goes threw changes. >>> True, and true. >>> >>> And evidence indicates there's a good chance we're involved in the >>> current climate change event. >>> >>> >>>> Should we as people stop polluting, >>>> yes. >>> We certainly need to be aware of the chemistry around us and how we >>> interact with it. >>> >>> The ozone situation is a good example. Scientists noticed a change in >>> the ozone layer. A human chemical cause was discovered. Policies were >>> changed to stop human contributions to the problem. >>> >>> >>>> Should we conserve, yes, I'm a conservative, not a liberal. >>> Great. >>> >>> To conserve what we have we need to take into account any evidence that >> >>> shows we may have a problem. >>> >>> BTW climate change and conservation are not a partisan issues, in my >>> view. At the very least, most people don't want to screw up the area >>> where they live, no matter their politics. >>> >>> >>>> Am I buying >>>> in to the liberal's sin tax plan their trying to convince the dummies >> to >>>> start paying to save the world, NO WAY! >>> That's fine. But don't confuse any perceived conspiracies with ongoing >>> climate science. >>> >>> You can promote your political views without attacking climate >>> scientists or dismissing scientific conclusions. >>> >>> >>>> I'm I buying in the this trilateralist >>>> plan to shift more money out of the USA, no way! >>> That's fine. But again you can promote your political views without >>> attacking climate scientists or dismissing scientific conclusions. >>> >>> >>>> Back in the 70's, the scientist >>>> that started this global warming stuff, was predicting that we would be >> in >>>> an ice age right now. >>> Who are you talking about? >>> >>> >>>> You can post all of the contrived research you, it won't change the truth. >>>> Choose to believe what you want, man made global warming has not been >> proven. >>> If someone is exploiting scientific data in a partisan way to push a >>> certain point of view you happen to disagree with, then fine, argue with >> >>> them. >>> >>> But don't pretend the data itself doesn't exist. There is a lot of >>> peer-reviewed research out there, and it isn't "contrived." >>> >>> If the only way to "prove" your point is to continue a risky worldwide >>> experiment until we possibly screw up the planet for future generations, >> >>> then your proof is too late to be in any way useful. >>> >>> It's much smarter to look at the decades of evidence we already have and >> >>> make prudent risk management decisions. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> -Jamie >>> www.JamieKrutz.com >>> >>> >>> >>>> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote: >>>>> Wish it were that easy, James. We would be poor stewards of the land >> >>>>> indeed if we carelessly dismissed the evidence to date. It's not >>>>> particularly prudent to ignore increasing evidence that shows possible >> >>>>> problems. >>>>> >>>>> The atmosphere and our use of it to store increasing amounts of unwanted >>>>> greenhouse gases is a big enough subject scientifically without being >> >>>>> sidetracked by political and economic conspiracy theories. >>>>> >>>>> Even if you enjoy discussing perceived conspiracies, be sure you don't >> >>>>> confuse them with the ongoing science. >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> -Jamie >>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> James McCloskey wrote: >>>>>> What we need is waders and a big shovel to get rid of this load of crap. >>>>>> "BR" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote: >>>>>>> The humanity is facing it's biggest disaster in 100 000 years. Tax >> raises >>>>>>> won't solve anything, it demand a lot more action than that.. >>>>>>> BR >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message >>>>>>> news:47e2cfc2$1@linux... >>>>>>>> This is what i've been saying. When Al Gore buys global offsets for >>>> ten >>>>>>> cents >>>>>>>> and sells them for a dollar, it's a big bunch of money making bullshit! >>>>>>>> Now this trilateralist bureaucrat bunch of SOBs are going to try to >>>> make >>>>>>>> it a sin tax that we will all have to pay. You know once the government >>>>>>>> gets a tax passed through they will never repeal it. We will be paying >>>>>> it >>>>>>>> for then on! It's a scare tactic to cow the people in to believing >>>> this >>>>>>>> bunch of bullshit. There is no significant man made global warming, >>>> it's >>>>>>>> a lie to shift the wealth out of the United States while these rats >>>> and >>>>>>> their >>>>>>>> friends get wealthy doing it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> "Mr. Simplicity" <noway@jose.net> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://blog.mlive.com/annarbornews/2007/09/dingell_global_wa rming_may_req.h >>>>>>> tml >>>>>>>>> This is the biggest load of disingenuous hubris I've seen in a while. >>>>>>> More >>>>>>>>> hypocracy. Whether you get it or not, your intelligence has just >> been >>>>>>>>> insulted and be assured that what this is really all about it preparing >>>>>>>> you >>>>>>>>> to be bent over as consumption falls. Expect more of this BS as gas >>>> usage >>>>>>>>> goes down and therefore the tax revenue that a gallon of gas generates >>>>>> is >>>>>>>>> proportionately reduced. To make up for the revenue shortfall, we're >>>>>>> going >>>>>>>>> to get taxed into oblivion........and I was even sorta' thinking >> about >>>>>>>>> voting for a Democrat for president. The new forumla for the American >>>>>>>>> economy is to tax businesses more so that they will continue to go >>>>>>> elsewhere >>>>>>>>> while screwing the workers who will be losing their jobs. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Gimme some of that. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>Racism is alive today and it goes both ways. Want to know what pisses me off? The Black Job expo, the Black phone book and the Black everything else that is exclusionary. You can't have it both ways. Then again I'm pissed at old people getting cheaper movie tickets. hehe JohnI would have loved this to be a conspiracy, or some politicans agenda. It's not. Nobody benefits from this. Bjorn R "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:47e424e1$1@linux... > > Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote: > > > >Conspiracies are another matter. > > > >Back to the science: Evidence shows the strong possibility that humans > >contributions to greenhouse gases are currently affecting the climate. > > > >If you suspect that some groups are trying to exploit this data for > >nefarious purposes, then fine, take on those groups. Dig into whatever > >conspiracies you want. > > > >But don't pretend that the scientific data doesn't exist. You can > >promote your political views without attacking climate scientists or > >dismissing scientific conclusions. > > > >Cheers, > > -Jamie > > www.JamieKrutz.com > > > > As I've said before, there many scientists that say it is not true. And > I'll say, look at what is really behind this. People like Al Gore are profiting > from this, and hanging on to power. > > > > > > >James McCloskey wrote: > >> First, I don't think it is only one party that will be on this taxation > band > >> wagon, the bush's are trilateralist also, and others. "a thousand points > >> of light" " A new world order" That's trilateral talk. > >> > >> Isn't it funny that China, the biggest polluter on the planet is exempt > from > >> the law and rules the world gov. is trying to put in place. Why? This > is > >> all part of the trilateralist plan to shift the money around. The world > >> banks have now set up inside of China. > >> > >> They are trying to scare people in to a sin tax. It's about money, they > >> want a sin tax to build up the rest of the world. It's about controlling > >> the world economically. They want to restrict what america can build > and > >> do in the future. > >> > >> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote: > >>> James McCloskey wrote: > >>>> The science is about money. > >>> To an extent everything is about money. But that doesn't stop people > > >>>from doing good, conscientious work. > >>> You yourself require money to live. Should we therefore disbelieve > >>> everything you say? > >>> > >>> No, I don't think so. That argument is really reaching. > >>> > >>> > >>>> The science of man made global warming being > >>>> a major factor is bullshit, and it is not provable. > >>> LOL. The science is hardly bullshit. > >>> > >>> What scientists are saying is that there is a strong chance that human > > >>> contributions to greenhouse gases are affecting the climate. > >>> >
ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAKPD94cGFj a2V0IGVuZD0ndyc/Pv/uAA5BZG9iZQBkAAAAAAH/2wCEAAYEBAQFBAYFBQYJ BgUGCQsIBgYICwwKCgsKCgwQDAwMDAwMEAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwM DAwMDAwMDAwBBwcHDQwNGBAQGBQODg4UFA4ODg4UEQwMDAwMEREMDAwMDAwR DAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDP/AABEIAZABLAMBEQACEQED EQH/3QAEACb/xAGiAAAABwEBAQEBAAAAAAAAAAAEBQMCBgEABwgJCgsBAAIC AwEBAQEBAAAAAAAAAAEAAgMEBQYHCAkKCxAAAgEDAwIEAgYHAwQCBgJzAQID [binary]
> > >>>> cycles. Gases that then stay in the atmosphere for extended periods, > > > >>>> decades or more. > >>>> > >>>> Keep in mind that greenhouse gases help regulate temperature on earth > > by > >>>> reflecting back infrared radiation. This is a good thing for our > >>>> survival but it can be overdone. > >>>> > >>>> Since only a tiny fraction of the gases in the atmosphere reflect > >>>> infrared radiation (nitrogen and oxygen don't), it doesn't take much > > of > >>>> an increase in greenhouse gases to noticeably change the amount of heat > >>>> directed back toward the earth. > >>>> > >>>> There is strong evidence that this is what is happening now, and that > > > >>>> our contributions are part of the problem. Based on what we know so far > >>>> there is a strong chance this problem will increase over time. > >>>> > >>>> Given that information, it's smart to consider the implications now. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> Has the earth heated > >>>>> up a bit, yes, the earth goes threw changes. > >>>> True, and true. > >>>> > >>>> And evidence indicates there's a good chance we're involved in the > >>>> current climate change event. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> Should we as people stop polluting, > >>>>> yes. > >>>> We certainly need to be aware of the chemistry around us and how we > >>>> interact with it. > >>>> > >>>> The ozone situation is a good example. Scientists noticed a change in > > > >>>> the ozone layer. A human chemical cause was discovered. Policies were > > > >>>> changed to stop human contributions to the problem. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> Should we conserve, yes, I'm a conservative, not a liberal. > >>>> Great. > >>>> > >>>> To conserve what we have we need to take into account any evidence that > >>>> shows we may have a problem. > >>>> > >>>> BTW climate change and conservation are not a partisan issues, in my > > > >>>> view. At the very least, most people don't want to screw up the area > > > >>>> where they live, no matter their politics. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> Am I buying > >>>>> in to the liberal's sin tax plan their trying to convince the dummies > >>> to > >>>>> start paying to save the world, NO WAY! > >>>> That's fine. But don't confuse any perceived conspiracies with ongoing > > > >>>> climate science. > >>>> > >>>> You can promote your political views without attacking climate > >>>> scientists or dismissing scientific conclusions. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> I'm I buying in the this trilateralist > >>>>> plan to shift more money out of the USA, no way! > >>>> That's fine. But again you can promote your political views without > >>>> attacking climate scientists or dismissing scientific conclusions. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> Back in the 70's, the scientist > >>>>> that started this global warming stuff, was predicting that we would > > be > >>> in > >>>>> an ice age right now. > >>>> Who are you talking about? > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> You can post all of the contrived research you, it won't change the > > truth. > >>>>> Choose to believe what you want, man made global warming has not been > >>> proven. > >>>> If someone is exploiting scientific data in a partisan way to push a > > > >>>> certain point of view you happen to disagree with, then fine, argue with > >>>> them. > >>>> > >>>> But don't pretend the data itself doesn't exist. There is a lot of > >>>> peer-reviewed research out there, and it isn't "contrived." > >>>> > >>>> If the only way to "prove" your point is to continue a risky worldwide > > > >>>> experiment until we possibly screw up the planet for future generations, > >>>> then your proof is too late to be in any way useful. > >>>> > >>>> It's much smarter to look at the decades of evidence we already have > > and > >>>> make prudent risk management decisions. > >>>> > >>>> Cheers, > >>>> -Jamie > >>>> www.JamieKrutz.com > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote: > >>>>>> Wish it were that easy, James. We would be poor stewards of the land > >>>>>> indeed if we carelessly dismissed the evidence to date. It's not > >>>>>> particularly prudent to ignore increasing evidence that shows possible > >>>>>> problems. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> The atmosphere and our use of it to store increasing amounts of unwanted > >>>>>> greenhouse gases is a big enough subject scientifically without being > >>>>>> sidetracked by political and economic conspiracy theories. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Even if you enjoy discussing perceived conspiracies, be sure you don't > >>>>>> confuse them with the ongoing science. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Cheers, > >>>>>> -Jamie > >>>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> James McCloskey wrote: > >>>>>>> What we need is waders and a big shovel to get rid of this load of > > crap. > >>>>>>> "BR" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>> The humanity is facing it's biggest disaster in 100 000 years. Tax > >>> raises > >>>>>>>> won't solve anything, it demand a lot more action than that.. > >>>>>>>> BR > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message > >>>>>>>> news:47e2cfc2$1@linux... > >>>>>>>>> This is what i've been saying. When Al Gore buys global offsets > > for > >>>>> ten > >>>>>>>> cents > >>>>>>>>> and sells them for a dollar, it's a big bunch of money making bullshit! > >>>>>>>>> Now this trilateralist bureaucrat bunch of SOBs are going to try > > to > >>>>> make > >>>>>>>>> it a sin tax that we will all have to pay. You know once the government > >>>>>>>>> gets a tax passed through they will never repeal it. We will be > > paying > >>>>>>> it > >>>>>>>>> for then on! It's a scare tactic to cow the people in to believing > >>>>> this > >>>>>>>>> bunch of bullshit. There is no significant man made global warming, > >>>>> it's > >>>>>>>>> a lie to shift the wealth out of the United States while these rats > >>>>> and > >>>>>>>> their > >>>>>>>>> friends get wealthy doing it. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> "Mr. Simplicity" <noway@jose.net> wrote: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> http://blog.mlive.com/annarbornews/2007/09/dingell_global_wa rming_may_req.h > >>>>>>>> tml > >>>>>>>>>> This is the biggest load of disingenuous hubris I've seen in a > > while. > >>>>>>>> More > >>>>>>>>>> hypocracy. Whether you get it or not, your intelligence has just > >>> been > >>>>>>>>>> insulted and be assured that what this is really all about it preparing > >>>>>>>>> you > >>>>>>>>>> to be bent over as consumption falls. Expect more of this BS as > > gas > >>>>> usage > >>>>>>>>>> goes down and therefore the tax revenue that a gallon of gas generates > >>>>>>> is > >>>>>>>>>> proportionately reduced. To make up for the revenue shortfall, > > we're > >>>>>>>> going > >>>>>>>>>> to get taxed into oblivion........and I was even sorta' thinking > >>> about > >>>>>>>>>> voting for a Democrat for president. The new forumla for the American > >>>>>>>>>> economy is to tax businesses more so that they will continue to > > go > >>>>>>>> elsewhere > >>>>>>>>>> while screwing the workers who will be losing their jobs. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Gimme some of that. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >You are right about that Rick. I ain't no different than you. "willing to tell me how wrong i am when they're no different than me". rick <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote: >man has always spoken in metaphoric, allegoric and or euphemistic >terms...except biblicly. ya know steve i don't profess to be right >because i just don't know but it seems there are a lot of people so >willing to tell me how wrong i am when they're no different than me. > >On 22 Mar 2008 06:51:06 +1000, "Steve Cox" <stevec1@charter.net> >wrote: > >> >>Oh, forgot one important thing.... It wasn't men who came up with the "bright >>idea" to confuse the language, it was Gods. >>BUT it was mans idea to attempt to build the tower and according to what >>the Word is all about, they would have succeded if God hadn't interviened >>with the language confusion. >> >>"Steve Cox" <stevec1@charter.net> wrote: >>> >>>Rick, I HIGHLY reccomend you crack the book open and read the text for yourself. >>>You keep coming up with all these goofy things about a tree being a tree >>>and swinging a cat around... Man... that's all just foolishness. Please, >>>read it first-THEN bring on the comments. Right now all you are doing is >>>"babelling" about something you don't know anything about. Read the text.... >>>It WAS all about all the Babylonians speaking Babalonian. Not a hard concept >>>to understand. God wanted to break their power of agreement so he confused >>>the language and no-one understood each other and the progress of the tower >>>seeced. Why are you fighting such a simple, well known, taught to millions, >>>established story? You are fortunate that there are (just assuming guys)a >>>handful of Believers on this Forum who (you may as well face it) won't back >>>down from the Truth? >>> >>>rick <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>again, i know the story is about language, confusion and other bright >>>>ideas men come up with. >>>>sorry, but i have a problem with "men" had one language thing. just >>>>as i have a problem with god being suprised that adam and eve would >>>>partake of the forbidden fruit when told no no no you don't. he's >>>>god...for his sakes... guess he also didn't think of incest when >>>>populating the earth from just one pair of peeps. i mean cain went to >>>>the land of nod and eventually married...who...i don't >>>>know...mom...sis...cousin rita??? >>>>i believe god was smart enough to create the laws of physics that >>>>allow certain things to happen under certain conditions and lets the >>>>chips fall where they may. to me god doesn't kill 250 people on a >>>>plane and spare one as a lesson of his devine intervention >>>>capabilities. he doesn't kill half a town yet spares a church so they >>>>have somewhere to mourn the dead. >>>>the truely (again to me) sad thing about the differing concepts of god >>>>is how their used to validate the harm we do each other. >>>> >>>> >>>>On 22 Mar 2008 00:13:36 +1000, "Steve Cox" <stevec1@charter.net> >>>>wrote: >>>> >>>>>http://ldolphin.org/babel.html >>>> >>> >It seems it was yah that said no or was it no that said yah;-) Seems someone have it fun on a long Friday with someone and something here;-) "Dedric Terry" <notme@nowhere.com> skrev i en meddelelse news:47e421e9$1@linux... > > Point was, you simply launched a diatribe about slavery based on one word > that had nothing, and I repeat, *nothing* to do with slavery. How about > a game of word association, I say, "orange" you say slavery. I say > balloon, > you say "slavery". Get the picture yet? > > If you want to start a thread about how the word "fabric" offends you, > feel > free, but don't pass judgement and make assumptions about my intent in my > reply to DJ. I wasn't talking to you, about you, or for your benefit, > whoever > you are. > > And I find it extraordinarily offensive that you would assume you have the > right to cry about injustices done to other people over 150 years ago, and > extrapolate that to being a permanent stigma dooming our country, and > woven > into every conversation from here to eternity. I won't bother to explain > "fabric" to you since you didn't get it last time. > > If you want to play the game of associating yourself with the past for > sake > of playing victim, I'm part American Indian (direct descendant), and "we" > were here first, and the first to lose rights and freedoms here. ;-) If > you want to associate history with present day people, why not claim > Germany > is racist and doomed because of Hitler's genocidal mania? How about the > Netherlands for the barbarians? > > Enough of this. I only came back to be clear about how diluded you are in > your assumptions in this debate. It used to be fun to hang out here and > exchange opinions, however diverse, but this tangent really takes the cake > - must be the twilight zone now. I guess now you'll rant about how "cake" > or the word "twilight" is a "bull***" word as a result of slavery by some > twisted and bizarre association as well. Have fun. > > > "yah" <Blah@ya-ya.com> wrote: >> >>Why do yoy think that your opinion is the right one? Are you saying that > this >>country >>was'nt built on the backs of slavery? How am I a hypocrite? Ask questions? >>My >>first post was nothing but questions. Having the guts to stand up for >>what you believe in with integrity, honor and respect, but without any >>pansy, >>pacifist whining and hiding behind labels and stereotypes". are serious? >>Why did it take so long for every man to have the right same rights? Is'nt >>that something we were suppose to believe in? Honor? respect? Look,do'nt >>get >>made at me or anyone that confronts you with the truth. I love this >>country >>just as much as you. If I can say that with your permission. But we >>have alot of work to do. We want to blame everyone else for are >>problems.(not >>to say we are the cause of all the problems) Think what you want
gt;>> >>>> No, I don't think so. That argument is really reaching. >>>> >>>> >>>>> The science of man made global warming being >>>>> a major factor is bullshit, and it is not provable. >>>> LOL. The science is hardly bullshit. >>>> >>>> What scientists are saying is that there is a strong chance that human > >>>> contributions to greenhouse gases are affecting the climate. >>>> >>>> This is because we are dumping large and increasing amounts of >>>> greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, above and beyond current natural > >>>> cycles. Gases that then stay in the atmosphere for extended periods, > >>>> decades or more. >>>> >>>> Keep in mind that greenhouse gases help regulate temperature on earth > by >>>> reflecting back infrared radiation. This is a good thing for our >>>> survival but it can be overdone. >>>> >>>> Since only a tiny fraction of the gases in the atmosphere reflect >>>> infrared radiation (nitrogen and oxygen don't), it doesn't take much > of >>>> an increase in greenhouse gases to noticeably change the amount of heat >>>> directed back toward the earth. >>>> >>>> There is strong evidence that this is what is happening now, and that > >>>> our contributions are part of the problem. Based on what we know so far >>>> there is a strong chance this problem will increase over time. >>>> >>>> Given that information, it's smart to consider the implications now. >>>> >>>> >>>>> Has the earth heated >>>>> up a bit, yes, the earth goes threw changes. >>>> True, and true. >>>> >>>> And evidence indicates there's a good chance we're involved in the >>>> current climate change event. >>>> >>>> >>>>> Should we as people stop polluting, >>>>> yes. >>>> We certainly need to be aware of the chemistry around us and how we >>>> interact with it. >>>> >>>> The ozone situation is a good example. Scientists noticed a change in > >>>> the ozone layer. A human chemical cause was discovered. Policies were > >>>> changed to stop human contributions to the problem. >>>> >>>> >>>>> Should we conserve, yes, I'm a conservative, not a liberal. >>>> Great. >>>> >>>> To conserve what we have we need to take into account any evidence that >>>> shows we may have a problem. >>>> >>>> BTW climate change and conservation are not a partisan issues, in my > >>>> view. At the very least, most people don't want to screw up the area > >>>> where they live, no matter their politics. >>>> >>>> >>>>> Am I buying >>>>> in to the liberal's sin tax plan their trying to convince the dummies >>> to >>>>> start paying to save the world, NO WAY! >>>> That's fine. But don't confuse any perceived conspiracies with ongoing > >>>> climate science. >>>> >>>> You can promote your political views without attacking climate >>>> scientists or dismissing scientific conclusions. >>>> >>>> >>>>> I'm I buying in the this trilateralist >>>>> plan to shift more money out of the USA, no way! >>>> That's fine. But again you can promote your political views without >>>> attacking climate scientists or dismissing scientific conclusions. >>>> >>>> >>>>> Back in the 70's, the scientist >>>>> that started this global warming stuff, was predicting that we would > be >>> in >>>>> an ice age right now. >>>> Who are you talking about? >>>> >>>> >>>>> You can post all of the contrived research you, it won't change the > truth. >>>>> Choose to believe what you want, man made global warming has not been >>> proven. >>>> If someone is exploiting scientific data in a partisan way to push a > >>>> certain point of view you happen to disagree with, then fine, argue with >>>> them. >>>> >>>> But don't pretend the data itself doesn't exist. There is a lot of >>>> peer-reviewed research out there, and it isn't "contrived." >>>> >>>> If the only way to "prove" your point is to continue a risky worldwide > >>>> experiment until we possibly screw up the planet for future generations, >>>> then your proof is too late to be in any way useful. >>>> >>>> It's much smarter to look at the decades of evidence we already have > and >>>> make prudent risk management decisions. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> -Jamie >>>> www.JamieKrutz.com >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote: >>>>>> Wish it were that easy, James. We would be poor stewards of the land >>>>>> indeed if we carelessly dismissed the evidence to date. It's not >>>>>> particularly prudent to ignore increasing evidence that shows possible >>>>>> problems. >>>>>> >>>>>> The atmosphere and our use of it to store increasing amounts of unwanted >>>>>> greenhouse gases is a big enough subject scientifically without being >>>>>> sidetracked by political and economic conspiracy theories. >>>>>> >>>>>> Even if you enjoy discussing perceived conspiracies, be sure you don't >>>>>> confuse them with the ongoing science. >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> -Jamie >>>>>> www.JamieKrutz.com >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> James McCloskey wrote: >>>>>>> What we need is waders and a big shovel to get rid of this load of > crap. >>>>>>> "BR" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> The humanity is facing it's biggest disaster in 100 000 years. Tax >>> raises >>>>>>>> won't solve anything, it demand a lot more action than that.. >>>>>>>> BR >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message >>>>>>>> news:47e2cfc2$1@linux... >>>>>>>>> This is what i've been saying. When Al Gore buys global offsets > for >>>>> ten >>>>>>>> cents >>>>>>>>> and sells them for a dollar, it's a big bunch of money making bullshit! >>>>>>>>> Now this trilateralist bureaucrat bunch of SOBs are going to try > to >>>>> make >>>>>>>>> it a sin tax that we will all have to pay. You know once the government >>>>>>>>> gets a tax passed through they will never repeal it. We will be > paying >>>>>>> it >>>>>>>>> for then on! It's a scare tactic to cow the people in to believing >>>>> this >>>>>>>>> bunch of bullshit. There is no significant man made global warming, >>>>> it's >>>>>>>>> a lie to shift the wealth out of the United States while these rats >>>>> and >>>>>>>> their >>>>>>>>> friends get wealthy doing it. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> "Mr. Simplicity" <noway@jose.net> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> http://blog.mlive.com/annarbornews/2007/09/dingell_global_wa rming_may_req.h >>>>>>>> tml >>>>>>>>>> This is the biggest load of disingenuous hubris I've seen in a > while. >>>>>>>> More >>>>>>>>>> hypocracy. Whether you get it or not, your intelligence has just >>> been >>>>>>>>>> insulted and be assured that what this is really all about it preparing >>>>>>>>> you >>>>>>>>>> to be bent over as consumption falls. Expect more of this BS as > gas >>>>> usage >>>>>>>>>> goes down and therefore the tax revenue that a gallon of gas generates >>>>>>> is >>>>>>>>>> proportionately reduced. To make up for the revenue shortfall, > we're >>>>>>>> going >>>>>>>>>> to get taxed into oblivion........and I was even sorta' thinking >>> about >>>>>>>>>> voting for a Democrat for president. The new forumla for the American >>>>>>>>>> economy is to tax businesses more so that they will continue to > go >>>>>>>> elsewhere >>>>>>>>>> while screwing the workers who will be losing their jobs. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Gimme some of that. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >Spell check on your default page ... guaranty should be guarantee Pretty clean, concise and easy to navigate pages, I like the layout Bill. It's all about delivery of content in short frames of time, as you've correctly done. Social networking pages make me absolutely insane with all the junk 'bling' all over them. Since you are familiar with Adobe stuff, no doubt you're aware they bought macromedia and now handle flash. Let me just say this. As an end user/business network installer, flash in a browser now sucks. Adobe has totalled screwed it up... why's that matter? If you design any flash components your pages likely will have a high correct load failure. How good/bad is Expression Web to operate? Proprietary components? AA "Bill L" <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote in message news:47e41e97@linux... > Purely, mon, dis be de Babylon! > > The last few weeks I've been learning web design, designing a couple sites > for my new company. What a trip! I'm a pretty competent graphic designer > with the Adobe Creative Suite stuff, but I'm using MS' new Expression Web > program, which is cool, but nothing at all like designing for print. > > Anyway, my mind is slightly overwhelmed most of the time, with brief > moments of joy when something miraculously works like I want. There's so > much new terminology to learn, and the book I bought is kind of steep (720 > pages). I learned graphics by the seat of my pants. I guess I can do the > same with this. > > Here's my first site: > > http://wammoleads.com/default.htmlI agree with Aaron, it's a clean layout, easy to grok. Bill, what CSS book are you using? Do you recommend it? Cheers, -Jamie www.JamieKrutz.com Aaron Allen wrote: > Spell check on your default page ... guaranty should be guarantee > > Pretty clean, concise and easy to navigate pages, I like the layout Bill. > It's all about delivery of content in short frames of time, as you've > correctly done. Social networking pages make me absolutely insane with all > the junk 'bling' all over them. > > Since you are familiar with Adobe stuff, no doubt you're aware they bought > macromedia and now handle flash. Let me just say this. As an end > user/business network installer, flash in a browser now sucks. Adobe has > totalled screwed it up... why's that matter? If you design any flash > components your pages likely will have a high correct load failure. > > How good/bad is Expression Web to operate? > Proprietary components? > > AA > > > "Bill L" <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote in message news:47e41e97@linux... >> Purely, mon, dis be de Babylon! >> >> The last few weeks I've been learning web design, designing a couple sites >> for my new company. What a trip! I'm a pretty competent graphic designer >> with the Adobe Creative Suite stuff, but I'm using MS' new Expression Web >> program, which is cool, but nothing at all like designing for print. >> >> Anyway, my mind is slightly overwhelmed most of the time, with brief >> moments of joy when something miraculously works like I want. There's so >> much new terminology to learn, and the book I bought is kind of steep (720 >> pages). I learned graphics by the seat of my pants. I guess I can do the >> same with this. >> >> Here's my first site: >> >> http://wammoleads.com/default.html > >This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ---=_linux47e4326b Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bach is a benevolent diety to whom all musicians should offer a prayer to save themselves from the curse of mediocrity... -- Claude Debussy ---=_linux47e4326b Content-Type: image/jpeg; name="bach_shades.jpg" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="bach_shades.jpg" /9j/4AAQSkZJRgABAgEASABIAAD/4QukRXhpZgAATU0AKgAAAAgABwESAAMA AAABAAEAAAE
aAAUAAAABAAAAYgEbAAUAAAABAAAAagEoAAMAAAABAAIAAAEx AAIAAAAUAAAAcgEyAAIAAAAUAAAAhodpAAQAAAABAAAAnAAAAMgAAABIAAAA AQAAAEgAAAABQWRvYmUgUGhvdG9zaG9wIDcuMAAyMDA1OjA2OjI4IDIwOjIz OjMwAAAAAAOgAQADAAAAAf//AACgAgAEAAAAAQAAASygAwAEAAAAAQAAAZAA AAAAAAAABgEDAAMAAAABAAYAAAEaAAUAAAABAAABFgEbAAUAAAABAAABHgEo AAMAAAABAAIAAAIBAAQAAAABAAABJgICAAQAAAABAAAKdgAAAAAAAABIAAAA AQAAAEgAAAAB/9j/4AAQSkZJRgABAgEASABIAAD/7QAMQWRvYmVfQ00AAv/u AA5BZG9iZQBkgAAAAAH/2wCEAAwICAgJCAwJCQwRCwoLERUPDAwPFRgTExUT ExgRDAwMDAwMEQwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwBDQsLDQ4N EA4OEBQODg4UFA4ODg4UEQwMDAwMEREMDAwMDAwRDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwM DAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDP/AABEIAIAAYAMBIgACEQEDEQH/3QAEAAb/xAE/AAAB BQEBAQEBAQAAAAAAAAADAAECBAUGBwgJCgsBAAEFAQEBAQEBAAAAAAAAAAEA AgMEBQYHCAkKCxAAAQQBAwIEAgUHBggFAwwzAQACEQMEIRIxBUFRYRMicYEy [binary] AEgAAAABAAIASAAAAAEAAjhCSU0EJgAAAAAADgAAAAAAAAAAAAA/gAAAOEJJ TQQNAAAAAAAEAAAAHjhCSU0EGQAAAAAABAAAAB44QklNA/MAAAAAAAkAAAAA AAAAAAEAOEJJTQQKAAAAAAABAAA4QklNJxAAAAAAAAoAAQAAAAAAAAACOEJJ TQP1AAAAAABIAC9mZgABAGxmZgAGAAAAAAABAC9mZgABAKGZmgAGAAAAAAAB ADIAAAABAFoAAAAGAAAAAAABADUAAAABAC0AAAAGAAAAAAABOEJJTQP4AAAA AABwAAD/////////////////////////////A+gAAAAA//////////////// /////////////wPoAAAAAP////////////////////////////8D6AAAAAD/ ////////////////////////////A+gAADhCSU0ECAAAAAAAEAAAAAEAAAJA AAACQAAAAAA4QklNBB4AAAAAAAQAAAAAOEJJTQQaAAAAAANLAAAABgAAAAAA AAAAAAABkAAAASwAAAALAGIAYQBjAGgAXwBzAGgAYQBkAGUAcwAAAAEAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAQAAAAAAAAAAAAABLAAAAZAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA [binary] [binary] AAAAAAAEAAAAAThCSU0EDAAAAAAKkgAAAAEAAABgAAAAgAAAASAAAJAAAAAK dgAYAAH/2P/gABBKRklGAAECAQBIAEgAAP/tAAxBZG9iZV9DTQAC/+4ADkFk b2JlAGSAAAAAAf/bAIQADAgICAkIDAkJDBELCgsRFQ8MDA8VGBMTFRMTGBEM DAwMDAwRDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAENCwsNDg0QDg4Q FA4ODhQUDg4ODhQRDAwMDAwREQwMDAwMDBEMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwM DAwMDAwMDAwM/8AAEQgAgABgAwEiAAIRAQMRAf/dAAQABv/EAT8AAAEFAQEB AQEBAAAAAAAAAAMAAQIEBQYHCAkKCwEAAQUBAQEBAQEAAAAAAAAAAQACAwQF BgcICQoLEAABBAEDAgQCBQcGCAUDDDMBAAIRAwQhEjEFQVFhEyJxgTIGFJGh [binary] ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAKICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIAogICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgCiAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAKICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgIAogICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAKICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg IAogICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAKICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIAogICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg CiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAKICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIAogICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgCiAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAK ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgIAogICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAKICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIAog ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAKICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIAogICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgCiAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAKICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIAogICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAKICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgIAogICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAKICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIAogICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgCiAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAKICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIAogICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgCiAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAKICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgIAogICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg ICAgICAgICAgICAgICAg
DS1 [binary] ---=_linux47e4326b--http://apnews.excite.com/article/20080321/D8VI00RG0.html "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote: > >http://apnews.excite.com/article/20080321/D8VHSS681.html > >"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote: >> >>I think it's time to boycott China and their products, there is no sense >in >>supporting this government in any way. >> >>http://apnews.excite.com/article/20080316/D8VELU0G0.html >> >>http://apnews.excite.com/article/20080316/D8VEM3KG0.html >http://apnews.excite.com/article/20080321/D8VI2UN0H.htmlhttp://apnews.excite.com/article/20080321/D8VHOFEG0.html "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote: > >http://apnews.excite.com/article/20080321/D8VI00RG0.html > >"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote: >> >>http://apnews.excite.com/article/20080321/D8VHSS681.html >> >>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>I think it's time to boycott China and their products, there is no sense >>in >>>supporting this government in any way. >>> >>>http://apnews.excite.com/article/20080316/D8VELU0G0.html >>> >>>http://apnews.excite.com/article/20080316/D8VEM3KG0.html >> >I don't think we're going to convince James, but it's a lot of other thinking members of this group. I hope some of them take the message, it's not about left or right, it's about doing the right thing. This group know about science (recorded music is mainly about physics and technology, right?), and the world need that kind of people right now, to cut the crap and focus on the facts given us by the scientists, and the facts tells us that we are facing rough times, even in our lifetime. So, as I said, step up to the plate, this is not religion, this is facts. This is not the end of the world, this is not the end of humanity, but this may be the end of our civilisation. In other words: no nurcery homes for you , no healthcare for your children, no law, no order ... Bjorn R "Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:47e42e99@linux... > > Remember where I asked you to put aside Al Gore and Exxon for a moment? > Scientifically they don't matter. Don't get distracted. > > The scientific point is this: Evidence exists that shows the strong > possibility that humans contributions to greenhouse gases are currently > affecting the climate. > > If you really care about conservation it would be foolish to ignore > decades of data in peer-reviewed scientific journals. It would be > extremely limiting to cherrypick a few scientists who disagree (or who > you think disagree) and ignore the rest. > > At some point you're directly participating in a different conspiracy of > sorts, as a member of a group that deliberately ignores evidence and > attacks the messengers in the process. > > How is that helpful? > > It's not. > > Cheers, > -Jamie > www.JamieKrutz.com > > > > James McCloskey wrote: > > Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote: > >> Conspiracies are another matter. > >> > >> Back to the science: Evidence shows the strong possibility that humans > >> contributions to greenhouse gases are currently affecting the climate. > >> > >> If you suspect that some groups are trying to exploit this data for > >> nefarious purposes, then fine, take on those groups. Dig into whatever > >> conspiracies you want. > >> > >> But don't pretend that the scientific data doesn't exist. You can > >> promote your political views without attacking climate scientists or > >> dismissing scientific conclusions. > >> > >> Cheers, > >> -Jamie > >> www.JamieKrutz.com > >> > > > > As I've said before, there many scientists that say it is not true. And > > I'll say, look at what is really behind this. People like Al Gore are profiting > > from this, and hanging on to power. > > > >> > >> James McCloskey wrote: > >>> First, I don't think it is only one party that will be on this taxation > > band > >>> wagon, the bush's are trilateralist also, and others. "a thousand points > >>> of light" " A new world order" That's trilateral talk. > >>> > >>> Isn't it funny that China, the biggest polluter on the planet is exempt > > from > >>> the law and rules the world gov. is trying to put in place. Why? This > > is > >>> all part of the trilateralist plan to shift the money around. The world > >>> banks have now set up inside of China. > >>> > >>> They are trying to scare people in to a sin tax. It's about money, they > >>> want a sin tax to build up the rest of the world. It's about controlling > >>> the world economically. They want to restrict what america can build > > and > >>> do in the future. > >>> > >>> Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote: > >>>> James McCloskey wrote: > >>>>> The science is about money. > >>>> To an extent everything is about money. But that doesn't stop people > > > >>> >from doing good, conscientious work. > >>>> You yourself require money to live. Should we therefore disbelieve > >>>> everything you say? > >>>> > >>>> No, I don't think so. That argument is really reaching. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>> The science of man made global warming being > >>>>> a major factor is bullshit, and it is not provable. > >>>> LOL. The science is hardly bullshit. > >>>> > >>>> What scientists are saying is that there is a strong chance that human > > > >>>> contributions to greenhouse gases are affecting the climate. > >>>> > >>>> This is because we are dumping large and increasing amounts of > >>>> greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, above and beyond current natural >
br /> >rick <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote: >>man has always spoken in metaphoric, allegoric and or euphemistic >>terms...except biblicly. ya know steve i don't profess to be right >>because i just don't know but it seems there are a lot of people so >>willing to tell me how wrong i am when they're no different than me. >> >>On 22 Mar 2008 06:51:06 +1000, "Steve Cox" <stevec1@charter.net> >>wrote: >> >>> >>>Oh, forgot one important thing.... It wasn't men who came up with the "bright >>>idea" to confuse the language, it was Gods. >>>BUT it was mans idea to attempt to build the tower and according to what >>>the Word is all about, they would have succeded if God hadn't interviened >>>with the language confusion. >>> >>>"Steve Cox" <stevec1@charter.net> wrote: >>>> >>>>Rick, I HIGHLY reccomend you crack the book open and read the text for >yourself. >>>>You keep coming up with all these goofy things about a tree being a tree >>>>and swinging a cat around... Man... that's all just foolishness. Please, >>>>read it first-THEN bring on the comments. Right now all you are doing >is >>>>"babelling" about something you don't know anything about. Read the text.... >>>>It WAS all about all the Babylonians speaking Babalonian. Not a hard concept >>>>to understand. God wanted to break their power of agreement so he confused >>>>the language and no-one understood each other and the progress of the >tower >>>>seeced. Why are you fighting such a simple, well known, taught to millions, >>>>established story? You are fortunate that there are (just assuming guys)a >>>>handful of Believers on this Forum who (you may as well face it) won't >back >>>>down from the Truth? >>>> >>>>rick <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>again, i know the story is about language, confusion and other bright >>>>>ideas men come up with. >>>>>sorry, but i have a problem with "men" had one language thing. just >>>>>as i have a problem with god being suprised that adam and eve would >>>>>partake of the forbidden fruit when told no no no you don't. he's >>>>>god...for his sakes... guess he also didn't think of incest when >>>>>populating the earth from just one pair of peeps. i mean cain went to >>>>>the land of nod and eventually married...who...i don't >>>>>know...mom...sis...cousin rita??? >>>>>i believe god was smart enough to create the laws of physics that >>>>>allow certain things to happen under certain conditions and lets the >>>>>chips fall where they may. to me god doesn't kill 250 people on a >>>>>plane and spare one as a lesson of his devine intervention >>>>>capabilities. he doesn't kill half a town yet spares a church so they >>>>>have somewhere to mourn the dead. >>>>>the truely (again to me) sad thing about the differing concepts of god >>>>>is how their used to validate the harm we do each other. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>On 22 Mar 2008 00:13:36 +1000, "Steve Cox" <stevec1@charter.net> >>>>>wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>http://ldolphin.org/babel.html >>>>> >>>> >>Thanks Aaron. Actually guaranty is one of those words you can spell both way, like advertising and advertizing. I seem to get confused a lot with English spellings. Some words fall into a kind of grey area or some other colour I can't distinguish. I'm sorry to hear they screwed up Flash, but no wuckers, I won't be writing any Flash stuff for a while! Adobe is tops in the print medias area IMHO, so most likely they will sort things out soon. Aaron Allen wrote: > Spell check on your default page ... guaranty should be guarantee > > Pretty clean, concise and easy to navigate pages, I like the layout Bill. > It's all about delivery of content in short frames of time, as you've > correctly done. Social networking pages make me absolutely insane with all > the junk 'bling' all over them. > > Since you are familiar with Adobe stuff, no doubt you're aware they bought > macromedia and now handle flash. Let me just say this. As an end > user/business network installer, flash in a browser now sucks. Adobe has > totalled screwed it up... why's that matter? If you design any flash > components your pages likely will have a high correct load failure. > > How good/bad is Expression Web to operate? > Proprietary components? > > AA > > > "Bill L" <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote in message news:47e41e97@linux... >> Purely, mon, dis be de Babylon! >> >> The last few weeks I've been learning web design, designing a couple sites >> for my new company. What a trip! I'm a pretty competent graphic designer >> with the Adobe Creative Suite stuff, but I'm using MS' new Expression Web >> program, which is cool, but nothing at all like designing for print. >> >> Anyway, my mind is slightly overwhelmed most of the time, with brief >> moments of joy when something miraculously works like I want. There's so >> much new terminology to learn, and the book I bought is kind of steep (720 >> pages). I learned graphics by the seat of my pants. I guess I can do the >> same with this. >> >> Here's my first site: >> >> http://wammoleads.com/default.html > >I have next to no experience with other programs, but the deal with EW is it is supposed to be extremely standards compliant. Nothing at all like Frontpage in that regard. I bought a book on Expression Web "Using Expression Web", but it's got plenty of CSS in it, OY! Jamie K wrote: > > I agree with Aaron, it's a clean layout, easy to grok. > > Bill, what CSS book are you using? Do you recommend it? > > Cheers, > -Jamie > www.JamieKrutz.com > > > > > Aaron Allen wrote: >> Spell check on your default page ... guaranty should be guarantee >> >> Pretty clean, concise and easy to navigate pages, I like the layout >> Bill. It's all about delivery of content in short frames of time, as >> you've correctly done. Social networking pages make me absolutely >> insane with all the junk 'bling' all over them. >> >> Since you are familiar with Adobe stuff, no doubt you're aware they >> bought macromedia and now handle flash. Let me just say this. As an >> end user/business network installer, flash in a browser now sucks. >> Adobe has totalled screwed it up... why's that matter? If you design >> any flash components your pages likely will have a high correct load >> failure. >> >> How good/bad is Expression Web to operate? >> Proprietary components? >> >> AA >> >> >> "Bill L" <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote in message news:47e41e97@linux... >>> Purely, mon, dis be de Babylon! >>> >>> The last few weeks I've been learning web design, designing a couple >>> sites for my new company. What a trip! I'm a pretty competent graphic >>> designer with the Adobe Creative Suite stuff, but I'm using MS' new >>> Expression Web program, which is cool, but nothing at all like >>> designing for print. >>> >>> Anyway, my mind is slightly overwhelmed most of the time, with brief >>> moments of joy when something miraculously works like I want. There's >>> so much new terminology to learn, and the book I bought is kind of >>> steep (720 pages). I learned graphics by the seat of my pants. I >>> guess I can do the same with this. >>> >>> Here's my first site: >>> >>> http://wammoleads.com/default.html >> >>Dedric, Wow....this one went around the bend PDQ. Maybe we should start small bites, like discussing this article: http://dineshdsouza.com/books/enemy-intro.html There is a lot there to think about. that has nothing to do with race. ;o) Deej "Dedric Terry" <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote in message news:C4091FAC.13618%dterry@keyofd.net... > I've heard two separate commentaries (one a major news agency, the other a > Brit's personal rant) about how the UK is catering to the whims of Islam - > they've restricted the use of the Three Little Pigs story in some schools. > England is funding Islamic schools for their Muslim citizens. They are > considering passing Islamic laws in some areas to appease that community > (these were echoed in both, separate and independent commentaries - two > completely different viewpoints seeing the same thing happen). In effect, > the UK is making concessions right and left and getting nothing in > return - > just more demands. Forget their own history, people and culture, just > give > up in the face of fear of suicide bombers, sarin gas, and extremist > protests. > > The news agency report basically said exactly what you are DJ - the US is > doing the same thing - bowing down and letting our "pacifist" leftwing > veil > of "peace" and "equality" and "justice" dupe us into giving up those very > ideals, playing right into the hands of extremism and even terrorism. > That's the paradox that's become our country. And this is just one case > of > how the left is ironically proposing and touting exactly the opposite of > what is the fabric of our country. > > DT > > On 3/21/08 7:49 AM, in article 47e3bffd@linux, "Mr. Simplicity" > <noway@jose.net> wrote: > >> Isn't this cute? >> http://markhumphrys.com/left.islamic.html >> >> >> This one is the kicker though, and elucidates my periodic rants better >> than >> I do: >> http://dineshdsouza.com/books/enemy-intro.html >> >> Our economy is gonna bounce along the bottom for a while. This wasn't >> necessary. Now I hear the Democrats starting to harp on the economy and >> tie >> it ti Iraq. there is, most definitely, a connection. >> >> http://drsanity.blogspot.com/2007/04/selfless-narcissism.htm l >> >> and the following excerpt is something I've been ranting about here and >> elsewhere for years: >> The Democrats and their glorious leaders, who have become so >> narcissistically invested in this country's defeat as a political >> strategy >> to accumulate power and "restore American honor", that they >> have--wittingly >> or unwittingly--decided to sell their countrymen out to the very enemy >> they >> are currently fighting. They mean well, of course. They do it for those >> wonderful 'selfless' reasons--like "peace" and "social justice" and all. >> They really support the troops . >> >> Let's just ignore the fact that they bear considerable responsibility for >> the ongoing violence and death of our troops as they enable and encourage >> the priorities of the enemy. Why should the terrorists alter their >> homicidal >> behavior? It is working! People like Nancy Pelosi are living proof of the >> effectiveness of their strategy. >> >> There really is a problem. It's a problem that has been aggravated and >> encouraged by the left in this country..........you know, the ones who >> don't quite understand that they will be the first to be slaughtered once >> they have thrown a wrench in the gears of those who are willing to >> protect >> them. They just do not get it. The Islamists parrot the leftist American >> Imperialist tripe that the leftists love to hear and ascribe to this >> country >> but the Islamists do it by design, to dupe the left into helping them >> destroy the protectors of the culture that the left hopes to protect by >> trying to appease those who will not be appeased until the leftists are >> either dead or are kneeling toward Mecca. Once it is too late, they can >> then >> whine about how pissed off they are that there's no separation between >> mosque and state...right before they are separated from their heads. I >> recognized it years ago. So did lots of other people.....funny, I didn't >> hear a peep out of OBama though. >> >> OK......now I'm of to rape the land. >> >> bye. >> >> >> >> >Don't feed the trolls! erlilo wrote: > It seems it was yah that said no or was it no that said yah;-) Seems someone > have it fun on a long Friday with someone and something here;-) > > > "Dedric Terry" <notme@nowhere.com> skrev i en meddelelse > news:47e421e9$1@linux... >> Point was, you simply launched a diatribe about slavery based on one word >> that had nothing, and I repeat, *nothing* to do with slavery. How about >> a game of word association, I say, "orange" you say slavery. I say >> balloon, >> you say "slavery". Get the picture yet? >> >> If you want to start a thread about how the word "fabric" offends you, >> feel >> free, but don't pass judgement and make assumptions about my intent in my >> reply to DJ. I wasn't talking to you, about you, or for your benefit, >> whoever >> you are. >> >> And I find it extraordinarily offensive that you would assume you have the >> right to cry about injustices done to other people over 150 years ago, and >> extrapolate that to being a permanent stigma dooming our country, and >> woven >> into every conversation from here to eternity. I won't bother to explain >> "fabric" to you since you didn't get it last time. >> >> If you want to play the game of associating yourself with the past for >> sake >> of playing victim, I'm part American Indian (direct descendant), and "we" >> were here first, and the first to lose rights and freedoms here. ;-) If >> you want to associate history with present day people, why not claim >> Germany >> is racist and doomed because of Hitler's genocidal mania? How about the >> Netherlands for the barbarians? >> >> Enough of this. I only came back to be clear about how diluded you are in >> your assumptions in this debate. It used to be fun to hang out here and >> exchange opinions, however diverse, but this tangent really takes the cake >> - must be the twilight zone now. I guess now you'll rant about how "cake" >> or the word "twilight" is a "bull***" word as a result of slavery by some >> twisted and bizarre association as well. Have fun. >> >> >> "yah" <Blah@ya-ya.com> wrote: >>> Why do yoy think that your opinion is the right one? Are you saying that >> this >>> country >>> was'nt built on the backs of slavery? How am I a hypocrite? Ask questions? >>> My >>> first post was nothing but questions. Having the guts to stand up for >>> what you believe in with integrity, honor and respect, but without any >>> pansy, >>> pacifist whining and hiding behind labels and stereotypes". are serious? >>> Why did it take so long for every man to have the right same rights? Is'nt >>> that something we were suppose to believe in? Honor? respect? Look,do'nt >>> get >>> made at me or anyone that confronts you with the truth. I love this >>> country >>> just as much as you. If I can say that with your permission. But we >>> have alot of work to do. We want to blame everyone else for are >>> problems.(not >>> to say we are the cause of all the problems) Think what you want about my >>> credibility,my words can stand on there own! This makes them no less true >>> >>> "Dedric Terry" <dt@noreply.com> wrote: >>>> Before you pass judgement, make ill-informed assumptions and become a >>>> hypocrit >>>> yourself, read the context, ask questions, and attempt to actually >>>> understand >>>> other people. You just read a single word and extrapolated that into >>>> left >>>> field. >>>> >>>> This had nothing to do with race. You might has well launched off a >>>> diatribe >>>> on the problems with meteor storms on Pluto. >>>> >>>> And in case you were wondering, by "fabric" I meant guts to stand up for >>>> what you believe in with integrity, honor and respect, but without any >> pansy, >>>> pacifist whining and hiding behind labels and stereotypes. >>>> >>>> Btw - posting like this without your real name is cowardly and destroys >>> any >>>> credibility to your opinion, but at least it supports my argument in >>>> spades. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> "Yah" <Blah@ya-ya.com> wrote: >>>>> Listen, >>>>> My comments are not about the article,I'm not defending the left. I just >>>>> find the statement "the fabric of are country" to be bullshit. We forget >>>>> about >>>>> are past and pass judgement on others. This is the self-righteousness >> I >>>> speak >>>>> of. As to why I do not post my name? Because of the self-righteousness >>> I >>>>> speak >>>>> of. Wake up! Clean up your backyard. Playing the race card? It could'nt >>>> be >>>>> played if racism was'nt true and alive today! You may look at my >>>>> comments >>>>> as detour >>>>> into left field,but my comments are directed at your comment about the >>> "fabric" >>>>> of are country. The truth is almost all the founding fathers were slave >>>> owners,and >>>>> some only freed their slaves after they died. Now there is one thing I >>> agree >>>>> on >>>>> with you is that this place has gone way down! >>>>> >>>>> "Dedric Terry" <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote: >>>>>> And, btw - I can't believe anyone would even dare to post such racist >>>>>> propaganda as this >>>>>> (and that's exactly what it is) when the original post was on radical >>> islam, >>>>>> not slavery. Simply amazing. >>>>>> >>>>>> This forum really has lost it. I'm out. I've really had enough of >>>>>> these >>>>>> far fetched bizarre reactions and detours into left field. >>>>>> >>>>>> "YAH" <bla-bla@yah.com> wrote in message news:47e3dde1$1@linux... >>>>>>> The fabric of are nation? What is that? Salvery? segragation? >>>>>>> racisim? >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> KKK? >>>>>>> self-righteousness! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote: >>>>>>>> I've heard two separate commentaries (one a major news agency, the >> other >>>>>>> a >>>>>>>> Brit's personal rant) about how the UK is catering to the whims of >> Islam >>>>>>> - >>>>>>>> they've restricted the use of the Three Little Pigs story in some >>>>>>>> schools. >>>>>>>> England is funding Islamic schools for their Muslim citizens. They >>> are >>>>>>>> considering passing Islamic laws in some areas to appease that >>>>>>>> community >>>>>>>> (these were echoed in both, separate and independent commentaries - >>> two >>>>>>>> completely different viewpoints seeing the same thing happen). In >> effect, >>>>>>>> the UK is making concessions right and left and getting nothing in >> return >>>>>>> - >>>>>>>> just more demands. Forget their own history, people and culture, >>>>>>>> just >>>>>>>> give >>>>>>>> up in the face of fear of suicide bombers, sarin gas, and extremist >>>>>>>> protests. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The news agency report basically said exactly what you are DJ - the >>> US >>>>> is >>>>>>>> doing the same thing - bowing down and letting our "pacifist" >>>>>>>> leftwing >>>>>>>&g
, and attempt to actually >>>understand >>>other people. You just read a single word and extrapolated that into >>>left >>>field. >>> >>>This had nothing to do with race. You might has well launched off a >>>diatribe >>>on the problems with meteor storms on Pluto. >>> >>>And in case you were wondering, by "fabric" I meant guts to stand up for >>>what you believe in with integrity, honor and respect, but without any > pansy, >>>pacifist whining and hiding behind labels and stereotypes. >>> >>>Btw - posting like this without your real name is cowardly and destroys >>any >>>credibility to your opinion, but at least it supports my argument in >>>spades. >>> >>> >>> >>>"Yah" <Blah@ya-ya.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>Listen, >>>>My comments are not about the article,I'm not defending the left. I just >>>>find the statement "the fabric of are country" to be bullshit. We forget >>>>about >>>>are past and pass judgement on others. This is the self-righteousness > I >>>speak >>>>of. As to why I do not post my name? Because of the self-righteousness >>I >>>>speak >>>>of. Wake up! Clean up your backyard. Playing the race card? It could'nt >>>be >>>>played if racism was'nt true and alive today! You may look at my >>>>comments >>>>as detour >>>>into left field,but my comments are directed at your comment about the >>"fabric" >>>>of are country. The truth is almost all the founding fathers were slave >>>owners,and >>>>some only freed their slaves after they died. Now there is one thing I >>agree >>>>on >>>>with you is that this place has gone way down! >>>> >>>>"Dedric Terry" <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote: >>>>>And, btw - I can't believe anyone would even dare to post such racist >> >>>>>propaganda as this >>>>>(and that's exactly what it is) when the original post was on radical >>islam, >>>> >>>>>not slavery. Simply amazing. >>>>> >>>>>This forum really has lost it. I'm out. I've really had enough of >>>>>these >>>>>far fetched bizarre reactions and detours into left field. >>>>> >>>>>"YAH" <bla-bla@yah.com> wrote in message news:47e3dde1$1@linux... >>>>>> >>>>>> The fabric of are nation? What is that? Salvery? segragation? >>>>>> racisim? >>>> >>>>>> the >>>>>> KKK? >>>>>> self-righteousness! >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Dedric Terry <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote: >>>>>>>I've heard two separate commentaries (one a major news agency, the > other >>>>>> a >>>>>>>Brit's personal rant) about how the UK is catering to the whims of > Islam >>>>>> - >>>>>>>they've restricted the use of the Three Little Pigs story in some >>>>>>>schools. >>>>>>>England is funding Islamic schools for their Muslim citizens. They >>are >>>>>>>considering passing Islamic laws in some areas to appease that >>>>>>>community >>>>>>>(these were echoed in both, separate and independent commentaries - >>two >>>>>>>completely different viewpoints seeing the same thing happen). In > effect, >>>>>>>the UK is making concessions right and left and getting nothing in > return >>>>>> - >>>>>>>just more demands. Forget their own history, people and culture, >>>>>>>just >>>> >>>>>>>give >>>>>>>up in the face of fear of suicide bombers, sarin gas, and extremist >>>>>>>protests. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>The news agency report basically said exactly what you are DJ - the >>US >>>>is >>>>>>>doing the same thing - bowing down and letting our "pacifist" >>>>>>>leftwing >>>> >>>>>>>veil >>>>>>>of "peace" and "equality" and "justice" dupe us into giving up those >>>very >>>>>>>ideals, playing right into the hands of extremism and even terrorism. >>>>>>>That's the paradox that's become our country. And this is just one >>case >>>>>> of >>>>>>>how the left is ironically proposing and touting exactly the opposite >>>>of >>>>>>>what is the fabric of our country. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>DT >>>>>>> >>>>>>>On 3/21/08 7:49 AM, in article 47e3bffd@linux, "Mr. Simplicity" >>>>>>><noway@jose.net> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Isn't this cute? >>>>>>>> http://markhumphrys.com/left.islamic.html >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This one is the kicker though, and elucidates my periodic rants >>>>>>>> better >>>>>> than >>>>>>>> I do: >>>>>>>> http://dineshdsouza.com/books/enemy-intro.html >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Our economy is gonna bounce along the bottom for a while. This >>>>>>>> wasn't >>>>>>>> necessary. Now I hear the Democrats starting to harp on the economy >>>>and >>>>>> tie >>>>>>>> it ti Iraq. there is, most definitely, a connection. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://drsanity.blogspot.com/2007/04/selfless-narcissism.htm l >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> and the following excerpt is something I've been ranting about here >>>>and >>>>>>>> elsewhere for years: >>>>>>>> The Democrats and their glorious leaders, who have become so >>>>>>>> narcissistically invested in this country's defeat as a political >> >>>>>>>> strategy >>>>>>>> to accumulate power and "restore American honor", that they >>>>>>>> have--wittingly >>>>>>>> or unwittingly--decided to sell their countrymen out to the very > enemy >>>>>> they >>>>>>>> are currently fighting. They mean well, of course. They do it for >>those >>>>>>>> wonderful 'selfless' reasons--like "peace" and "social justice" and >>>>all. >>>>>>>> They really support the troops . >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Let's just ignore the fact that they bear considerable >>>>>>>> responsibility >>>>>> for >>>>>>>> the ongoing violence and death of our troops as they enable and >>>>>>>> encourage >>>>>>>> the priorities of the enemy. Why should the terrorists alter their >>> >>>>>>>> homicidal >>>>>>>> behavior? It is working! People like Nancy Pelosi are living proof >>>of >>>>>> the >>>>>>>> effectiveness of their strategy. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> There really is a problem. It's a problem that has been aggravated >>>and >>>>>>>> encouraged by the left in this country..........you know, the ones >>>>who >>>>>>>> don't quite understand that they will be the first to be >>>>>>>> slaughtered >>>> >>>>>>>> once >>>>>>>> they have thrown a wrench in the gears of those who are willing to >>> >>>>>>>> protect >>>>>>>> them. They just do not get it. The Islamists parrot the leftist >>>>>>>> American >>>>>>>> Imperialist tripe that the leftists love to hear and ascribe to >>>>>>>> this >>>> >>>>>>>> country >>>>>>>> but the Islamists do it by design, to dupe the left into helping > them >>>>>>>> destroy the protectors of the culture that the left hopes to >>>>>>>> protect >>>>by >>>>>>>> trying to appease those who will not be appeased until the leftists >>>>are >>>>>>>> either dead or are kneeling toward Mecca. Once it is too late, they >>>>can >>>>>> then >>>>>>>> whine about how pissed off they are that there's no separation >>>>>>>> between >>>>>>>> mosque and state...right before they are separated from their >>>>>>>> heads. >>>>I >>>>>>>> recognized it years ago. So did lots of other people.....funny, I >>didn't >>>>>>>> hear a peep out of OBama though. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> OK......now I'm of to rape the land. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> bye. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >It seems we have a hell of a day here;-) Ohhh, it's seems it midnight here right now, just passed to Saturday... "DC" <dc@spammersinhell.com> skrev i en meddelelse news:47e42015$1@linux... > > Hell, I wouldn't even send Thad to hell! > > grin > > No one has any right to say any of those things. Personally, I > believe I am in more danger of hell than someone who lives as > an honest atheist all their lives and give Jesus a chance on their > deathbed. > > I cannot pass judgment on anyone's eternal destiny. > > The question that concerns me this Easter is answering the > question of what we would see if we could take a time machine > back to Jesus tomb on early Sunday morning after his death. > > Would we see a bunch of guys stealing a body, or would we > see a resurrected Lord and Saviour? > > None of us is wired so as to not understand the ramifications > of either possibility. > > DC > > > rick <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote: >>i believe in do unto others as you would have them do unto you. what >>else can be said for human behavior. of course not everyone has that >>capability due to thier genetic wiring. just as some people can kill >>without remorse others cannot accept certain "truths"; it is that >>equal deserving of eternal hell according to some religious sects i >>find problematic. after all the vengeful god of the old testament >>become the god of love in the new and i'm not really feelin' the love >>here according to the words of some. (not spoken here but lets be >>honest out in the real world you can't swing a dead cat and not hit >>someone who is willing to tell you that hell, hades, sheol is your >>final destination. >> >>On 22 Mar 2008 02:42:44 +1000, "DC" <dc@spammersinhell.com> wrote: >> >>> >>>Rick, there's some good insights here. How God works is not >>>always transparent to us. >> >>see, now that's where i think the problem lies. god should know that >>we're not going to get the message as he wants us to because we're >>human and will translate anything to our own advantage. of all the >>things to deserve eternal damnation for (if you believe in it) one >>would think that the inability to "get it" would not be one of them. >> >>would you as a parent condemn your child to a never ending life of >>torment simply because he or she couldn't understand the totality of >>you being "the creator (parent)" of them. you know, it can take only >>one gene to make someone either a murderer, saint and everything in >>between. so to me a loving, just and forgiving god would have a >>better plan then eternal suffering. we on the other hand are more >>than willing to threaten and enact all levels of retribution on others >>because we think that's what god would do. >>> >>>What concerns me is the reality of Jesus. From that issue flow all >>>others, and whether there is an objective truth here or we are >>>free to make it up as we go along. >>and whose to say where the "making up" began. it is in my nature to >>question what i see and hear and if i go to hell for it...then oh well >>it's who i am, the way i was made. >>> >>>DC >>> >>> >>> >>>rick <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>again, i know the story is about language, confusion and other bright >>>>ideas men come up with. >>>>sorry, but i have a problem with "men" had one language thing. just >>>>as i have a problem with god being suprised that adam and eve would >>>>partake of the forbidden fruit when told no no no you don't. he's >>>>god...for his sakes... guess he also didn't think of incest when >>>>populating the earth from just one pair of peeps. i mean cain went to >>>>the land of nod and eventually married...who...i don't >>>>know...mom...sis...cousin rita??? >>>>i believe god was smart enough to create the laws of physics that >>>>allow certain things to happen under certain conditions and lets the >>>>chips fall where they may. to me god doesn't kill 250 people on a >>>>plane and spare one as a lesson of his devine intervention >>>>capabilities. he doesn't kill half a town yet spares a church so they >>>>have somewhere to mourn the dead. >>>>the truely (again to me) sad thing about the differing concepts of god >>>>is how their used to validate the harm we do each other. >>>> >>>> >>>>On 22 Mar 2008 00:13:36 +1000, "Steve Cox" <stevec1@charter.net> >>>>wrote: >>>> >>>>>http://ldolphin.org/babel.html >>>> >> >Bill, Traction? Don't have a clue what you are talking about and don't think you do either. It looks like you jumped in about half way through the topic and are responding to something you know nothing about. But that's ok. I wasn't responding to you anyhow. I was responding to Rick's statement. ORIGINALLY he clearly said the tower of babel was not about languages it was about gods. As soon as you quit attacking me, I will drop the subject. "Steve, I don't think Rick gives a hoot about the story. He is talking >about his ideas on god man, trees and swingin' cats. You're prolly not >going to get any traction on that Babylonian story". rick <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote: >thanks bill. people will believe what they CAN believe more than what >they're told to believe.. hell, i was raised catholic...school...the >hole shot and if that didn't work i guess nothing will. according to >all religious soothsayers "if you don't believe the way we/i do you >are going to hell" so i guess everyone is. > > > >On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 15:39:07 -0400, Bill L <bill@billlorentzen.com> >wrote: > >>Steve, I don't think Rick gives a hoot about the story. He is talking >>about his ideas on god man, trees and swingin' cats. You're prolly not >>going to get any traction on that Babylonian story. >> >> >>Steve Cox wrote: >>> Rick, I HIGHLY reccomend you crack the book open and read the text for yourself. >>> You keep coming up with all these goofy things about a tree being a tree >>> and swinging a cat around... Man... that's all just foolishness. Please, >>> read it first-THEN bring on the comments. Right now all you are doing is >>> "babelling" about something you don't know anything about. Read the text.... >>> It WAS all about all the Babylonians speaking Babalonian. Not a hard concept >>> to understand. God wanted to break their power of agreement so he confused >>> the language and no-one understood each other and the progress of the tower >>> seeced. Why are you fighting such a simple, well known, taught to millions, >>> established story? You are fortunate that there are (just assuming guys)a >>> handful of Believers on this Forum who (you may as well face it) won't back >>> down from the Truth? >>> >>> rick <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>> again, i know the story is about language, confusion and other bright >>>> ideas men come up with. >>>> sorry, but i have a problem with "men" had one language thing. just >>>> as i have a problem with god being suprised that adam and eve would >>>> partake of the forbidden fruit when told no no no you don't. he's >>>> god...for his sakes... guess he also didn't think of incest when >>>> populating the earth from just one pair of peeps. i mean cain went to >>>> the land of nod and eventually married...who...i don't >>>> know...mom...sis...cousin rita??? >>>> i believe god was smart enough to create the laws of physics that >>>> allow certain things to happen under certain conditions and lets the >>>> chips fall where they may. to me god doesn't kill 250 people on a >>>> plane and spare one as a lesson of his devine intervention >>>> capabilities. he doesn't kill half a town yet spares a church so they >>>> have somewhere to mourn the dead. >>>> the truely (again to me) sad thing about the differing concepts of god >>>> is how their used to validate the harm we do each other. >>>> >>&gt
than willing to threaten and enact all levels of retribution on others >>because we think that's what god would do. >>> >>>What concerns me is the reality of Jesus. From that issue flow all >>>others, and whether there is an objective truth here or we are >>>free to make it up as we go along. >>and whose to say where the "making up" began. it is in my nature to >>question what i see and hear and if i go to hell for it...then oh well >>it's who i am, the way i was made. >>> >>>DC >>> >>> >>> >>>rick <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>again, i know the story is about language, confusion and other bright >>>>ideas men come up with. >>>>sorry, but i have a problem with "men" had one language thing. just >>>>as i have a problem with god being suprised that adam and eve would >>>>partake of the forbidden fruit when told no no no you don't. he's >>>>god...for his sakes... guess he also didn't think of incest when >>>>populating the earth from just one pair of peeps. i mean cain went to >>>>the land of nod and eventually married...who...i don't >>>>know...mom...sis...cousin rita??? >>>>i believe god was smart enough to create the laws of physics that >>>>allow certain thin
l.html >>>> >>+1 unrock on jo On 22 Mar 2008 09:10:51 +1000, "DC" <dc@spammersinhell.com> wrote: > > > > > > >Bach is a benevolent diety to whom all musicians should offer >a prayer to save themselves from the curse of mediocrity... > >-- Claude Debussybut if we can for the first time be a part a mitigating it's efx. then why the hell not try. On 22 Mar 2008 07:56:11 +1000, "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote: > >There has always been global disasters. > >"BR" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote: >>If the global temperature raises with more than 2 degrees celcius, we'll >>have a global disaster. It's no chance that we are going to avoid that. >So >>beware, the africans, the south asians and the south americans are coming >to >>knock on our door, and they are hungry, they are thirsty, and they are many. >>And that's just the beginning. This thing is out of control. >> >>Bjorn R >> >>"Jamie K" <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote in message news:47e41af0@linux... >>> James McCloskey wrote: >>> > The science is about money. >>> >>> To an extent everything is about money. But that doesn't stop people >>> from doing good, conscientious work. >>> >>> You yourself require money to live. Should we therefore disbelieve >>> everything you say? >>> >>> No, I don't think so. That argument is really reaching. >>> >>> >>> > The science of man made global warming being >>> > a major factor is bullshit, and it is not provable. >>> >>> LOL. The science is hardly bullshit. >>> >>> What scientists are saying is that there is a strong chance that human >>> contributions to greenhouse gases are affecting the climate. >>> >>> This is because we are dumping large and increasing amounts of >>> greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, above and beyond current natural >>> cycles. Gases that then stay in the atmosphere for extended periods, >>> decades or more. >>> >>> Keep in mind that greenhouse gases help regulate temperature on earth >by >>> reflecting back infrared radiation. This is a good thing for our >>&g
t; survival but it can be overdone. >>> >>> Since only a tiny fraction of the gases in the atmosphere reflect >>> infrared radiation (nitrogen and oxygen don't), it doesn't take much of >>> an increase in greenhouse gases to noticeably change the amount of heat >>> directed back toward the earth. >>> >>> There is strong evidence that this is what is happening now, and that >>> our contributions are part of the problem. Based on what we know so far >>> there is a strong chance this problem will increase over time. >>> >>> Given that information, it's smart to consider the implications now. >>> >>> >>> > Has the earth heated >>> > up a bit, yes, the earth goes threw changes. >>> >>> True, and true. >>> >>> And evidence indicates there's a good chance we're involved in the >>> current climate change event. >>> >>> >>> > Should we as people stop polluting, >>> > yes. >>> >>> We certainly need to be aware of the chemistry around us and how we >>> interact with it. >>> >>> The ozone situation is a good example. Scientists noticed a change in >>> the ozone layer. A human chemical cause was discovered. Policies were >>> changed to stop human contributions to the problem. >>> >>> >>> > Should we conserve, yes, I'm a conservative, not a liberal. >>> >>> Great. >>> >>> To conserve what we have we need to take into account any evidence that >>> shows we may have a problem. >>> >>> BTW climate change and conservation are not a partisan issues, in my >>> view. At the very least, most people don't want to screw up the area >>> where they live, no matter their politics. >>> >>> >>> > Am I buying >>> > in to the liberal's sin tax plan their trying to convince the dummies >to >>> > start paying to save the world, NO WAY! >>> >>> That's fine. But don't confuse any perceived conspiracies with ongoing >>> climate science. >>> >>> You can promote your political views without attacking climate >>> scientists or dismissing scientific conclusions. >>> >>><b
>> >>> But don't pretend the data itself doesn't exist. There is a lot of >>> peer-reviewed research out there, and it isn't "contrived." >>> >>> If the only way to "prove" your point is to continue a risky worldwide >>> experiment until we possibly screw up the planet for future generations, >>> then your proof is too late to be in any way useful. >>> >>> It's much smarter to look at the decades of evidence we already have and >>> make prudent risk management decisions. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> -Jamie >>> www.JamieKrutz.com >>> >>> >>> >>> > Jamie K <Meta@Dimensional.com> wrote: >>> >> Wish it were that easy, James. We would be poor stewards of the land >>> >> indeed if we carelessly dismissed the evidence to date. It's not >>> >> particularly prudent to ignore increasing evidence that shows possible >>> >> problems. >>> >> >>> >> The atmosphere and our use of it to store increasing amounts of >>unwanted >>> > >>> >> greenhouse gases is a big enough subject scientifically without being >>> >> sidetracked by political and economic conspiracy theories. >>> >> >>> >> Even if you enjoy discussing perceived conspiracies, be sure you don't >>> >> confuse them with the ongoing science. >>> >> >>> >> Cheers, >>> >> -Jamie >>> >> www.JamieKrutz.com >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> James McCloskey wrote: >>> >>> What we need is waders and a big shovel to get rid of this load of >>crap. >>> > >>> >>> >>> >>> "BR" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote: >>> >>>> The humanity is facing it's biggest disaster in 100 000 years. Tax >>raises >>> >>>> won't solve anything, it demand a lot more action than that.. >>> >>>> BR >>> >>>> >>> >>>> "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote in message >>> >>>> news:47e2cfc2$1@linux... >>> >>>>> This is what i've been saying. When Al Gore buys global offsets >for >>> > ten >>> >>>> cents >>> >>>>> and sells them for a dollar, it's a big bunch of money making >>bullshit! >>> >>>>> Now this trilateralist bure
>>preparing >>> >>>>> you >>> >>>>>> to be bent over as consumption falls. Expect more of this BS as >gas >>> > usage >>> >>>>>> goes down and therefore the tax revenue that a gallon of gas >>generates >>> >>> is >>> >>>>>> proportionately reduced. To make up for the revenue shortfall, >>we're >>> >>>> going >>> >>>>>> to get taxed into oblivion........and I was even sorta' thinking >>about >>> >>>>>> voting for a Democrat for president. The new forumla for the >>American >>> >>>>>> economy is to tax businesses more so that they will continue to >go >>> >>>> elsewhere >>> >>>>>> while screwing the workers who will be losing their jobs. >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> Gimme some of that. >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> >>> > >> >>definitely the devils work...but i forgive you. ;o) :o) ;o) :o) ;o) :o) ;o) :o) On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 16:33:56 -0400, Bill L <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote: >http://wammoleads.com/default.htmlhere it's the women'a expo...every day has something to do with boobs...though once a year they throw us guy a bone...err...a prostate exam. i'm still waiting for the color ribbon representing my...you know...stuff...;o) On 22 Mar 2008 08:28:26 +1000, "John" <no@no.com> wrote: > >Racism is alive today and it goes both ways. Want to know what pisses me >off? The Black Job expo, the Black phone book and the Black everything else >that is exclusionary. You can't have it both ways. Then again I'm pissed >at old people getting cheaper movie tickets. hehe > >Johnwtf is duid? On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 17:14:25 -0600, "Mr. Simplicity" <noway@jose.net> wrote: >Uhhhhh.......duid anyone read the article by Dinesh D'Sousa? Care to discuss >it? Care to debunk it with facts? >I'd be interested to hear arguments against it as it is so spot on, IMO, >that it should be glaringly obvious to anyone over 12 years old.. > >Of course, if you disagree with it, or with the content of my post, I'd be >winning to listen.......and if you have any family photos with everyone >wearing matching kaffiyas and AK47's.....that would be interesting to >discuss too. > >Oh yah......BTW, my name is Doug Joyce > > >"DC" <dc@spammersinhell.com> wrote in message news:47e42369$1@linux... >> >> Whew! >> >> hey everybody. let's take a break and cool down. >> >> >> >can we please for once discuss masturbation??? talk about not talked about??? On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 17:29:05 -0600, "Mr. Simplicity" <noway@jose.net> wrote: >Dedric, > >Wow....this one went around the bend PDQ. Maybe we should start small bites, >like discussing this article: > >http://dineshdsouza.com/books/enemy-intro.html > >There is a lot there to think about. that has nothing to do with race. > >;o) >Deej > >"Dedric Terry" <dterry@keyofd.net> wrote in message >news:C4091FAC.13618%dterry@keyofd.net... >> I've heard two separate commentaries (one a major news agency, the other a >> Brit's
personal rant) about how the UK is catering to the whims of Islam - >> they've restricted the use of the Three Little Pigs story in some schools. >> England is funding Islamic schools for their Muslim citizens. They are >> considering passing Islamic laws in some areas to appease that community >> (these were echoed in both, separate and independent commentaries - two >> completely different viewpoints seeing the same thing happen). In effect, >> the UK is making concessions right and left and getting nothing in >> return - >> just more demands. Forget their own history, people and culture, just >> give >> up in the face of fear of suicide bombers, sarin gas, and extremist >> protests. >> >> The news agency report basically said exactly what you are DJ - the US is >> doing the same thing - bowing down and letting our "pacifist" leftwing >> veil >> of "peace" and "equality" and "justice" dupe us into giving up those very >> ideals, playing right into the hands of extremism and even terrorism. >> That's the paradox that's become our country. And this is just one case >> of >> how the left is ironically proposing and touting exactly the opposite of >> what is the fabric of our country. >> >> DT >> >> On 3/21/08 7:49 AM, in article 47e3bffd@linux, "Mr. Simplicity" >> <noway@jose.net> wrote: >> >>> Isn't this cute? >>> http://markhumphrys.com/left.islamic.html >>> >>> >>> This one is the kicker though, and elucidates my periodic rants better >>> than >>> I do: >>> http://dineshdsouza.com/books/enemy-intro.html >>> >>> Our economy is gonna bounce along the bottom for a while. This wasn't >>> necessary. Now I hear the Democrats starting to harp on the economy and >>> tie >>> it ti Iraq. there is, most definitely, a connection. >>> >>> http://drsanity.blogspot.com/2007/04/selfless-narcissism.htm l >>> >>> and the following excerpt is something I've been ranting about here and >>> elsewhere for years: >>> The Democrats and their glorious leaders, who have become so >>> narcissistically invested in this country's defeat as a political >>> strategy >>> to accumulate power and "restore American honor", that they >>> have--wittingly >>> or unwittingly--decided to sell their countrymen out to the very enemy >>> they >>> are currently fighting. They mean well, of course. They do it for those >>> wonderful 'selfless' reasons--like "peace" and "social justice" and all. >>> They really support the troops . >>> >>> Let's just ignore the fact that they bear considerable responsibility for >>> the ongoing violence and death of our troops as they enable and encourage >>> the priorities of the enemy. Why should the terrorists alter their >>> homicidal >>> behavior? It is working! People like Nancy Pelosi are living proof of the >>> effectiveness of their strategy. >>> >>> There really is a problem. It's a problem that has been aggravated and >>> encouraged by the left in this country..........you know, the ones who >>> don't quite understand that they will be the first to be slaughtered once >>> they have thrown a wrench in the gears of those who are willing to >>> protect >>> them. They just do not get it. The Islamists parrot the leftist American >>> Imperialist tripe that the leftists love to hear and ascribe to this >>> country >>> but the Islamists do it by design, to dupe the left into helping them >>> destroy the protectors of the culture that the left hopes to protect by >>> trying to appease those who will not be appeased until the leftists are >>> either dead or are kneeling toward Mecca. Once it is too late, they can >>> then >>> whine about how pissed off they are that there's no separation between >>> mosque and state...right before they are separated from their heads. I >>> recognized it years ago. So did lots of other people.....funny, I didn't >>> hear a peep out of OBama though. >>> >>> OK......now I'm of to rape the land. >>> >>> bye. >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >no, what i said was that instead of assigning the parable to language that the metaphor was relating to how we deal with different concepts or con
/> >>> >>>> tml >>> >>>>>> This is the biggest load of disingenuous hubris I've seen in a >>while. >>> >>>> More >>> >>>>>> hypocracy. Whether you get it or not, your intelligence has just >>been >>> >>>>>> insulted and be assured that what this is really all about it
.html" target="_blank">http://wammoleads.com/default.html >i guess the other question is what religion declares a preteen girl who gets impregnated by an infinitely old god by a surrogate angel and pins the deed on a 30 something old carpenter as okey dokey and savior of us all??? not wanting to be critical but...if it were today people would be calling for the old eye for an eye thing and ignoring the vengeance is mine sayeth the lord...finishing of the phrase thing. On 22 Mar 2008 07:52:37 +1000, "DC" <dc@spammersinhell.com> wrote: > >Hell, I wouldn't even send Thad to hell! > >grin > >No one
t;>here according to the words of some. (not spoken here but lets be >>honest out in the real world you can't swing a dead cat and not hit >>someone who is willing to tell you that hell, hades, sheol is your >>final destination. >> >>On 22 Mar 2008 02:42:44 +1000, "DC" <dc@spammersinhell.com> wrote: >> >>> >>>Rick, there's some good insights here. How God works is not >>>always transparent to us. >> >>see, now that's where i think the problem lies. god should know that >>we're not going to get the message as he wants us to because we're >>human and will translate anything to our own advantage. of all the >>things to deserve eternal damnation for (if you believe in it) one >>would think that the inability to "get it" would not be one of them. >> >>would you as a parent condemn your child to a never ending life of >>torment simply because he or she couldn't understand the totality of >>you being "the creator (parent)" of them. you know, it can take only >>one gene to make someone either a murderer, saint and everything in >>between. so to me a loving, just and forgiving god would have a >>better plan then eternal suffering. we on the other hand are more >>than willing to threaten and enact all levels of retribution on others >>because we think that's what god would do. >>> >>>What concerns me is the reality of Jesus. From that issue flow all >>>others, and whether there is an objective truth here or we are >>>free to make it up as we go along. >>and whose to say where the "making up" began. it is in my nature to >>question what i se
e and hear and if i go to hell for it...then oh well >>it's who i am, the way i was made. >>> >>>DC >>> >>> >>> >>>rick <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>again, i know the story is about language, confusion and other bright >>>>ideas men come up with. >>>>sorry, but i have a problem with "men" had one language thing. just >>>>as i have a problem with god being suprised that adam and eve would >>>>partake of the forbidden fruit when told no no no you don't. he's >>>>god...for his sakes... guess he also didn't think of incest when >>>>populating the earth from just one pair of peeps. i mean cain went to >>>>the land of nod and eventually married...who...i don't >>>>know...mom...sis...cousin rita??? >>>>i believe god was smart enough to create the laws of physics that >>>>allow certain things to happen under certain conditions and lets the >>>>chips fall where they may. to me god doesn't kill 250 people on a >>>>plane and spare one as a lesson of his devine intervention >>>>capabilities. he doesn't kill half a town yet spares a church so they >>>>have somewhere to mourn the dead. >>>>the truely (again to me) sad thing about the differing concepts of god >>>>is how their used to validate the harm we do each other. >>>> >>>> >>>>On 22 Mar 2008 00:13:36 +1000, "Steve Cox" <stevec1@charter.net> >>>>wrote: >>>> >>>>>http://ldolphin.org/babel.html >>>> >>as many as the days are long my son...what's my cut??? okay, now we're really gonna piss some peeps off. enjoy the weekend for what it means to you.... On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 20:25:37 -0400, Bill L <bill@billlorentzen.com> wrote: >Thank you, Father. How many Halle Berres should I do? Give me a lot! > >rick wrote: >> definitely the devils work...but i forgive you. >> >> ;o) :o) ;o) :o) ;o) :o) ;o) :o) >> >> On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 16:33:56 -0400, Bill L <bill@billlorentzen.com> >> wrote: >> >>> http://wammoleads.com/default.html >>http://apnews.excite.com/article/20080321/D8VI3LVO2.html "James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote: > >http://apnews.excite.com/article/20080321/D8VHOFEG0.html > >"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote: >> >>http://apnews.excite.com/article/20080321/D8VI00RG0.html >> >>"James McCloskey" <excelsm@hotmail.com> wrote: >>><b
;>>>others, and whether there is an objective truth here or we are >>>>free to make it up as we go along. >>>and whose to say where the "making up" began. it is in my nature to >>>question what i see and hear and if i go to hell for it...then oh well >>>it's who i am, the way i was made. >>>> >>>>DC >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>rick <parnell68@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>again, i know the story is about language, confusion and other bright >>>>>ideas men come up with. >>>>>sorry, but i have a problem with "men" had one language thing. just >>>>>as i have a problem with god being suprised that adam and eve would >>>>>partake of the forbidden fruit when told no no no you don't. he's >>>>>god...for his sakes... guess he also didn't think of incest when >>>>>populating the earth from just one pair of peeps. i mean cain went to >>>>>the land of nod and eventually married...who...i don't >>>>>know...mom...sis...cousin rita??? >>>>>i believe god was smart enough to create the laws of physics that >>>>>allow certain things to happen under certain conditions and lets the >>>>>chi
gt;>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> OK......now I'm of to rape the land. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> bye. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >and I'm sure MalcolmX, Jesse Jackson or the Black Panthers would have/never have, ever omitted or rug swept truth. C'mon dude, that's a double bladed knife and throwing daggers at each other ain't helping any of us. > The Bull-shit American History I'm talking about is the one that was > "taught" > in most US schools..Which just happend to leave out and omit certain > truths..Hey DJ, thanks for posting that link. I read it. I thought it was very informative, and I think its right on target. Rod "Mr. Simplicity" <noway@jose.net> wrote: >Uhhhhh.......duid anyone read the article by Dinesh D'Sousa? Care to discuss >it? Care to debunk it with facts? >I'd be interested to hear arguments against it as it is so spot on, IMO, >that it should be glaringly obvious to anyone over 12 years old.. > >Of course, if you disagree with it, or with the content of my post, I'd be >winning to listen.......and if you have any family photos with e