1 - 10 Next
In response to:

Modern Feminism: A Teenage Boy’s Dream

Earl50 Wrote: Aug 28, 2014 3:21 PM
The irony of all this is that despite all the so-called gains from decades of the feminist movement can we really say that women are better off? Has the culture of death (abortion and abortifacient contraceptives) freed women from unwanted pregnancies? Are women who reach their late 30's and early 40's that suddenly want to have a child but find themselves struggling with infertility really happier with their life decisions? Are women who gave it their all for their career and suddenly wake up after 20 or 30 years and realize what men have been giving up for centuries think they made all the right choices? Are the multitudes of women that have college degrees that find ever fewer men with equivalent education because the primary and secondary school systems have become feminized better off? I would say for a great many women that bought into the lies of feminism the answer would be no to many if not all these questions. Not that they would ever admit it but those of us standing on the outside looking in have to wonder about an ideology that is really driven by one thing, sex, as being morally and intellectually bankrupt.
Let's face it, Ann is in the commentary/entertainment business and the old saw that any PR is good PR. And while I understand her point and generally agree with it vis-a-vis the need for missionary work at home I do think many are called to international missionary work and especially needed are doctors that provide our world class medical service to people who otherwise would never have that level of medical care. Having said all that, the vicious personal attacks by many so-called Christians are a scandal to the faith. How her supposed lack of charity toward international missionary work justifies an abject lack of charity on the part of her critics is a mystery to me. Surely more can be accomplished in impacting her future work by charitably pointing out other points of view rather than vitriol and ad hominum attacks. Pulling the plank out of their own eye surely comes to mind here.
In response to:

Has John McCain Lost His Mind?

Earl50 Wrote: Aug 07, 2014 11:48 AM
I didn't need to even read the article to answer this question with a question. Its not "Has he lost his mind?", its when exactly did he lose his mind? I maintain it was some time ago.
In response to:

Election Lawfare and the 2014 Senate Races

Earl50 Wrote: May 01, 2014 4:12 PM
No, but I can show you video from Philly where the new Black Panthers kept legitimate voters from casting their ballot.
Am I the only one that thinks taking advice from left wing nuts that have trolled their way onto this article is probably not a good idea? I know, I know, they are just trying to help us out by advising us on the best candidate for us to put up against Billary. And I suspect they would LOVE a candidate that will disgust the base and be seen as half a loaf of goodies from the the low information voters. As for me, looking at the pitiful results we got with candidates like McCain, Romney, et al I will take a true conservative that can make our case. You would think after what will be 8 years of unmitigated disaster that a majority of voting Americans would actually get it.......you would think.....
Uh, that is interesting but really not important as Bush rightly had more electoral college votes. You can wish for something different but its in the history books. You see in our system the candidate with the most electoral college votes actually wins irrespective of the popular vote total. Of course we all know what the numbers would have really been had the networks not called the election for Algore long before the polls closed. Bush would have won the popular vote as well.
The problem faced by AGW proponents is that every day and in every way the observed, well documented and scientifically valid data seems to point to warming having paused despite all modeling predictions to the contrary. Without the models AGW is discredited because the models are the very basis for correlation of global climates and CO2. And we now know what we strongly suspected when the models could not be calibrated to historical data, they are wrong and do a very poor job indeed in simulating a complex system like our global climate. So I do indeed believe that AGW is a hoax and the evidence mounts every day. When a pyramid scheme begins to approach its crescendo the proponents become all the more strident. That is what we are seeing here with the ad hominum attacks against the tens of thousands of scientists that are skeptical of AGW of which I am proudly one.
Please do not confuse them with facts when they can hold onto a failed ideology. That is most unkind. :-)
Actually if you look closely at the data, CO2 levels rise with warming and not the other way around. If you look at the long-term trends (say over the last 300,000 years) you will see multiple events of warming followed very closely by increases in CO2 levels. The fact is that none of the climate models have accurately predicted the leveling off of warming over the last 15 years nor could they account for the Middle Ages warming period. When a model can't be calibrated to historical data and cannot predict the future, said model is wrong. Period. As a geologist and geophysicist with advanced degrees I can tell you with certainty that the global climate has always changed and will always change irrespective of whether man is spewing CO2 or not. And even if I grant you that anthropogenic sources are responsible for some of the warming (which I do not by the way), all the prescriptions promoted by AGW proponents are abject nonsense and will have a much greater negative impact on humanity than a few degrees of warming over thousands of years.
In response to:

The House GOP Sounds Retreat (Or Should.)

Earl50 Wrote: Jan 27, 2014 3:53 PM
More like aBS, cBS, nBS, cnBS, pmsnBS........
1 - 10 Next