1 - 10 Next
In response to:

The Continued Farce

Bob558 Wrote: Aug 29, 2014 12:40 PM
Okay, so go to the top of the nearest tall building on a windy day, drop a single leaf of paper over the side and then come back and explain why the data contradicts the notion that it fell at 9.8m/s^2. CO2 is a greenhouse gas. I think all the skeptics get that. I certainly do, even if Bill Nye and Al Gore can't seem to figure it out. (Check out their fraudulent experiment on Youtube. They couldn't make it work, so they outright faked it for the cameras. Anyone who understands why and how CO2 is a greenhouse gas could easily explained why it doesn't work with glass jars of CO2, but they chose to fake it instead.) Here's the thing; just proving you can't explain it any other way is okay, until you fail to explain it by CO2. As has happened since the GCM's did not predict the 17 year hiatus in warming and it now seems that the oceans do. Here's the deal; the oceans contain about 1000 times as much heat as the atmosphere. When they bring their hear to the surface, the earth warms, when they take it deep, the earth cools. That, combined with solar variation now seems to provide a much better explanation than simple 'CO2 drives global surface temps.'. Those of us who have studied this found that claim to be highly dubious, even given the physics behind the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. In short; we wish we knew how our atmosphere worked, especially in conjunction with the oceans. But we do not. Is there some increased heating due to the anthropogenic component of the CO2 in our atmosphere? Sure, very likely a significant part. But not all. And it certainly is not the controlling factor. If it were, their models would be correct and it would now be about 1 whole celcius degree warmer than it is. That, in terms of global temperature anomaly, is a lot. The models don't work. The alarmism is not science. The science indicates a lot of things, some of which is contradictory. Clearly we do not fully understand our atmosphere. That IS what the science says. The ones who claim otherwise are charlatans, abusing science for their own political ends or enjoying all the attention they receive for being lapdogs in lab coats. Those who stifle debate are losing. "Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods." - Albert Einstein
In response to:

Rev. Al Gets It Right

Bob558 Wrote: Aug 28, 2014 5:15 PM
Hmmm . . . . that part of his speech seems to have escaped the attention of the national media. Wonder why?
In response to:

Obama fails History 101

Bob558 Wrote: Aug 28, 2014 5:05 PM
You mean the "Constitutional Scholar" who has no concept of separation of powers also has no concept of history and little understanding of his own ignorance? Say it isn't so.
In response to:

A Problem Bigger than Ferguson

Bob558 Wrote: Aug 27, 2014 9:35 AM
Nope. You're wrong. End government welfare. End. It. When you subsidize something, you get more of it. Make stupidity and laziness painful. You will get far less of it. Stop feeding the wildlife and they will learn to fend for themselves.
1) If growing wheat on my property for my consumption effects interstate commerce then a law that prevents me from taking my gun, legal in almost every state, into your state or district is a clear infringement of my right to keep and bear. 2) If gay marriage is 'penumbral' to marriage, then the right to buy and sell is clearly 'penumbral' to the right to keep and bear and cannot be infringed. 3) The U.S. v. Miller SCOTUS decision says us citizens can only keep and bear those arms that would have a " . . . reasonable relation to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia . . . " seems to indicate that we CAN have fully automatic weapons. And Artillery. How can they can use this logic to outlaw sawed off shotgun without simultaneously granting the right of citizens to keep and bear military weapons? Simple; our legal justice system is no longer that. They are indoctrinated to defend the wealthy and powerful against the citizens. Hang them.
In response to:

Hug-a-thon

Bob558 Wrote: Aug 14, 2014 3:39 PM
uhm . . . . yeah, Rich, they don't get it. Why is it that nobody seems willing to report or state that simple fact. In their world all of the problems they are dealing with were caused by the incompetence of the former administration. They. Don't. Get. It. Putin, Netanyahu, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and Kim Jong-Un will all be sneering at the sight of Barrack and Hillary "hugging it out". And all of them know that the palace is being run by gypsies. Why is it nobody here seems to want to cop to that fact?
Your last statement is an abject falsehood. Not only is that statement barely intelligible, with the meaning of "outreached to unreached people groups." a bit difficult to define, the statement itself is blatantly false. The American Catholic church spent about 171 billion dollars last year. Most of it (about $100,000,000,000)on health care, most of it charitable. Further, they GAVE almost 5 billion to charities outside the church last year, in addition to their internal charitable works and missions. The American Catholic church has spent about 3.3 billion in the last 15 years on investigations and settlements for the malfeasance of their clergy. That includes ALL investigations and ALL settlements. Further, the average US church spent 15% of their budget on missions and 8% on church programs. When you consider that 65% goes to pay for church staff salaries (40.5%), facilities (18.5%) and administrative expenses (6.1%), you are wrong to say the 90% 'stays within the local church'. Perhaps in your world it is okay to pull facts and figures out of your hind end.
How about you make a substantive argument that is not an abject falsehood? From your earlier post at 11:33am "The Church in the US spends more investigating clerical crime than it does on outreach to unreached people groups." Not only is that statement barely intelligible, withthe meaning of "outreached to unreached people groups." a bit difficult to define, the statement itself is blatantly false. The Catholic church spent about 171 billion dollars last year. Most of it on health care, most of it charitable. Further, they GAVE almost 5 billion to charities outside the church last year, in addition to their internal charitable works and missions. The American Catholic church has spent about 3.3 billion in the last 15 years on settlements for the malfeasance of their clergy. That includes all investigations and all settlements. But referring to good arguments that you made last week without actually stating them surely makes you right.
1c; appeal to authority is bad enough, you fail to even explain the position or the authoritative rejection of it in your comment. 2; While I do not support her point, it is clear that spending 2 million dollars means the mission was a failure. You could have trained two Liberian physicians in the U.S. and sent them back for that kind of money. Now I know that doesn't mean you'll accomplish what you set out to do, any more than these two set out to get ebola and bring it back to the U.S. But the point stands; they chose to return at a cost that clearly did damage to the relief effort, missionary work not withstanding. Finally; we should all repent. Every day. If you think you are a Christian and without sin, I can assure you that you are wrong. We could all use a little repentance.
It doesn't matter if you know. God knows.
1 - 10 Next