Previous 21 - 30 Next
In response to:

Environmental Pessimism

firetoice Wrote: Jul 20, 2014 9:50 AM
The current "evidence" is "tainted" by the "adjustments" made to it. The actual data rarely "sees the light of day", even after FOIA requests.
Slim ? ? ? ? ? None
Another case where the CIC "learned it from the media". RIGHT!
In response to:

Apology to an Anti-Chicken Bigot

firetoice Wrote: Jul 18, 2014 10:46 AM
ROTFLMAO!
In response to:

Apology to an Anti-Chicken Bigot

firetoice Wrote: Jul 18, 2014 9:28 AM
"You don't tug on Superman's cape You don't spit into the wind You don't pull the mask off that old Lone Ranger And you don't mess around with Mike" (HT and apology to Jim Croce)
In response to:

Walking For Life

firetoice Wrote: Jul 12, 2014 4:49 PM
US EPA uses a figure of $9 million as the "societal cost of a life unnecessarily shortened", regardless of the age of the person whose life was allegedly "unnecessarily shortened", when justifying new or expanded environmental regulations. Virtually every abortion results in a "life unnecessarily shortened". Therefore, using the EPA figure, abortion-on-demand in the US since Roe vs. Wade has cost US society ~$500 trillion; and, that is merely the economic cost.
Of course, since they discriminate against the wealthy young. (sarc off)
There is very little material delivered by USPS which is so time sensitive that weekly delivery would not be sufficient. That change alone could reduce delivery personnel by a factor of six. Combined with curbside delivery, the reduction could be even greater.
In response to:

An Opportunity For Congressman Issa

firetoice Wrote: Jun 28, 2014 8:11 AM
You'll have to continue to wait until Eric Holder is no longer the AG.
US EPA uses $9 million as the "societal cost of a life unnecessarily shortened", regardless of the age of the person whose life was allegedly "unnecessarily shortened". Abortion, in almost all cases, unnecessarily shortens a life to the maximum extent possible. Multiplying the EPA figure by the 55+ million abortions in the US since Roe vs. Wade results in a "societal cost" of ~$500 trillion. Perhaps if the moral cost of abortion is insufficiently persuasive on its own, the economic cost might help move the discussion forward. Something must!
In response to:

Is There a Climate Bubble?

firetoice Wrote: Jun 25, 2014 8:21 AM
If much of future warming is "baked in", as has been asserted on numerous occasions, the only hope for the future of the planet is an immediate reduction of global CO2 and other GHG emissions to ZERO. Anything less comprehensive would not be adequate. Of course, if the real issue is global governance and income and wealth redistribution, then the economic downfall of the developed nations would be sufficient.
Previous 21 - 30 Next