Not even at $10 a gallon ?

[Ceska]

Ceska, I have posted many links to info about a lot of this stuff.

http://www.dailytech.com/Blogger+finds+Y2K+bug+in+NASA+Climate+Data/article8383.htm

The whole thing with the errors in Nasa's data is covered here, but that won't matter, and common sense doesn't matter.

The link to the Nasa data provided by this blog is not dealing with worldwide global temperatures. It is dealing with "Annual Mean Temperature Change in the United States - Annual and five-year running mean surface air temperature in the contiguous 48 United States (1.6% of the Earth's surface) relative to the 1951-1980 mean". This tells us absolutely nothing about global warming worldwide. Thus the mismatch with Nasa's Climate Utility Data.

You can find it if you open the link provided by the blog and step back to NASA's source material. You can find the exact data the blog cited here under "tabular data" 7/8 down the page.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/

This is exactly why it is important to provide references to your sources whenever possible so they can be verified for accuracy or challenged based on their merits. You have been misinformed by that blog.

Sometimes common sense alone is not enough.

I love my country and I realize that this whole global warming thing is used as an excuse by a lot of people to place hardships on the people of this country.

I respect your love of country and feel sorry for the hardships you or those that you know have experienced. Please understand that global warming is not a deliberate attempt by some fringe liberal group to burden them - it is a scientific consensus.

The last time I posted any info, which had plenty of references to what I was saying and enough info for people who are willing to dig a little bit to find out what I am saying is true.

All I got was people half way looking at what I posted and saying that they didn't trust any website that wasn't a .gov or .org. Yet their info came from .com and .net sites and they were fine.

The web extension is less important than the source itself. For example, you made a claim about Nasa - so I used Nasa as a source. You made a claim about oil companies - so I used the American Petroleum Institute as a source. The fact that they are .gov and .org respectively is less important.
Examine everything you read with a skeptical eye - especially those things you already believe.

If you don't agree with their point of view then you are ridiculed and treated like an idiot.

You are not an idiot. You are simply too trusting of what you read.

 

[Facetious]

Ok, that's fine, I buy that. What percentage of the time do you agree with the way the Republican party votes (as a bloc) in Congress? My guess is that you agree with them at least 75% of the time. No??

I don't keep track. I will tell you that I'm laissez faire-ish socially so long as people mind their own business and don't attempt to come back and clobber me (and the greater society) with their agenda. *often referred to as "tyranny of the majority" . . . Boo ! :scream:

Additionally, I believe that both the Rs & Ds pilfer, plunder, misallocate and disrespect the tax revenues they receive and with that, they simply dip into a greater percentage of our earned income later in order to supplement those very funds of which had "vanished". (stolen)
Today, politicians are everywhere they shouldn't be and nowhere where they should, i.e. - absent or on extended vacations.

Where else can you get a job where you're 95% unaccountable for your actions, get pandered, lobbied, lunched, dined etc. ad nauseam) . . and the people continue to kiss your ass ? !!!

You'll tend to find it fairly consistent that the last place I want to be is at the whim of denny "bastard" (hastert), that asshole with the wig . . oh yeah, trent "lot", "blink" peelosi and that guy that claimed that some kid rode up on a skateboard (in an area of Nevada that had no paved streets or sidewalks) simply to say "Harry I wanna be just like you when I grow up" (Reid).

You'll also find it consistent that I'll vote in principle, opting out of the D or R selections voting for a losing indep. or libertarian candidate.

I'm also a strong advocate of communities supporting and adopting abandoned (and sacrificed) dogs, cats etc. Now get your asses out of the house today and head on over to your local, overpopulated (thank the foreclosure disaster) pet shelter and do a good deed TODAY ! If adoption isn't
feasible, why not donate a fresh bag of pet chow ?

Now this is stuff we should all be able to agree on :thumbsup:

 

[86150]

The link to the Nasa data provided by this blog is not dealing with worldwide global temperatures. It is dealing with "Annual Mean Temperature Change in the United States - Annual and five-year running mean surface air temperature in the contiguous 48 United States (1.6% of the Earth's surface) relative to the 1951-1980 mean". This tells us absolutely nothing about global warming worldwide. Thus the mismatch with Nasa's Climate Utility Data.

You can find it if you open the link provided by the blog and step back to NASA's source material. You can find the exact data the blog cited here under "tabular data" 7/8 down the page.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/

This is exactly why it is important to provide references to your sources whenever possible so they can be verified for accuracy or challenged based on their merits. You have been misinformed by that blog.

Sometimes common sense alone is not enough.



I respect your love of country and feel sorry for the hardships you or those that you know have experienced. Please understand that global warming is not a deliberate attempt by some fringe liberal group to burden them - it is a scientific consensus.



The web extension is less important than the source itself. For example, you made a claim about Nasa - so I used Nasa as a source. You made a claim about oil companies - so I used the American Petroleum Institute as a source. The fact that they are .gov and .org respectively is less important.
Examine everything you read with a skeptical eye - especially those things you already believe.



You are not an idiot. You are simply too trusting of what you read.

I'm not the one who believes everything I read, the whole man made global warming thing is not consensus, there are many scientists that call it hogwash. But as they don't count do they?

If it is MAN MADE and consensus, please explain the warming of Mars and Jupiter, along with Jupiter's moons. PLEASE explain why the changes in temperature seem to dovetail with sunspot activity.

PLEASE explain why the last time temperatures were a good bit higher, the whole planet went through a renaissance when disease was down, crops were much more abundant because there was much more area for planting, and there was a general upgrade in the lives with respect of the arts, technology and industry over the whole world.

Lest we forget that the planet is still emerging from a small ice age.

I don't believe everything I read, but I do know that more holes get shot in the whole Man Made global warming THEORY every day.

This is a recent report by one of the leading climatologists that is wreaking havoc on the theory of man made global warming, there again for some reason this won't count either.

http://climate.uah.edu/june2008.htm

And this explains the way the ecosystem actually works and certainly explains the how climate fluctuations happen better than the "science" that is behind the man made global warming theory.

http://www.weatherquestions.com/Roy-Spencer-on-global-warming.htm#GW101


That one probably won't count either for some reason.

 

[86150]

I'm also a strong advocate of communities supporting and adopting abandoned (and sacrificed) dogs, cats etc. Now get your asses out of the house today and head on over to your local, overpopulated (thank the foreclosure disaster) pet shelter and do a good deed TODAY ! If adoption isn't
feasible, why not donate a fresh bag of pet chow ?

Now this is stuff we should all be able to agree on :thumbsup:[/QUOTE]

Yeah I have two cats and two dogs, one is about 9 and the other is 3. He was adopted from the local animal clinic where someone had rescued him in the dead of winter. He was missing a lot of hair and was half starved.

He is great now and I'm glad I got him because he is deaf, and I can keep him safe inside a nice HUGE fenced in yard.

 

[86150]

I didnt threaten, I didnt report. G'head and ask a mod if you want.

I made a comment about 'fucking someone' on a 'porn board'. Just had to underline that to emphasize that fucking is more inline with the theme of this board than arguing oil prices.

uh huh, we believe you too.

Look if you are gonna say something like that, don't backpedal and deny it, AT LEAST have to stones to stand behind what you said.

 

[Torre82]

uh huh, we believe you too.

Look if you are gonna say something like that, don't backpedal and deny it, AT LEAST have to stones to stand behind what you said.

Backpedal and deny? This isnt real life, anyone can scroll up and read.

Tell ya what, when you can take a joke and provide links to ALL the big claims.. (renewable oil, companies in agreement on resources, etc) then the topic will be taken seriously.

 

[Nester6]

And just what kind of trouble are we in right now?

Of course, what the fuck do I know? I'm just a lowlife, deserving-of-no-respect liberal. It's all my fault anyway, right? Too bad Bush can't run for a third term.....he'd get us out of this mess.

He damn well would before BarakHussein Obama would. Obama is a clueless individual with a nice smile. Period.

 

[Nester6]

Just who do you think will actually PAY that "w

Taxing the big oil companies more is an assinine idea! Who would make up the tax? You at the pump. It doesn't work that way.

 

[ddon]

Hey thanks for the welcome Friday .

Just so everyone knows who the oil industry is out for... http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/01/business/01cnd-exxon.html?hp

Yes I know, profits are good for everyone right? I have a hard time accepting that.

On a side note, it looks like the Chinese are doing something right . http://chinadaily.com.cn/life/2008-08/01/content_6896622_5.htm

 

[Facetious]

You are not an idiot. You are simply too trusting of what you read.

I don't know if he's necessarily an "idiot". He appears to be quite independent and free of the need for govt. assistance, why is that such a horrible thing ? -> more rations available for those who need them (or not) ? It's like an extra sandwich in every loaf ! He's one less mouth for the govt. to feed, agree with his thesis or not. :dunno:

I cannot see where I'd be better off living out my life with somebody else calling the shots (socialism), granted, there are those who need that kind of assistance, be they, recently laid off , suffer from severe illness, are handicapped etc.
These are, as I have come to know, "safety net" types of public assistance. I champion the fact that these might be in place in the event that myself or another extended member of my family, a friend etc. would need them, but to mandate that some govt. goon is going to tell me that of where I may take up employ, how much I will be salaried, what I can or cannot eat or drink, determine precisely how much I pay for things, that I must sign over a waiver that my organs may be harvested following a potential untimely death, only to be transplanted in some double murderer from San Q prison :thefinger:1orglaugh . . . at taxpayer expense, what kind of bicycle that I'll be riding to work in the rain everyday, how many hours of work furlough I'll have to submit every month (without any previous criminal history), what kind of mexican grown tomatoes that would be available at my local government grocery commissary, the slant of the curriculum of the local publik skool apparatus (after the "bannation" of home and / or private education) Whoops ! My bad, that one's already partially underway, etc. etc. etc.

You guys, the "perfect society" had been a miserable failure ! Must you revise every event in history, simply so that you will be accepted into "your group" ? Have you ever challenged your own perceptions ! ! Ever ? Well, try it sometime for a change. I know, I know, you'll follow the same 'ol tired mantra "If only commyism had been applied more appropriately (last time test), we would have a perfectly flawless society today . . "

The other thing is - If you're on psyche pharmaceuticals today get off ! It's affecting judgement.

:sing: and ya don't ha-ve to live like a refu - jay

 

[Jagger69]

He damn well would before BarakHussein Obama would. Obama is a clueless individual with a nice smile. Period.

Well-informed and objective, factual response. Thanks for the drivel.