Previous 31 - 40 Next
In response to:

Al Gore Versus '2016'

Nick705 Wrote: Sep 29, 2012 12:50 PM
Same reason Obozo does, until he's forced to next month. Much easier to make lying assertions and pick up your $milions.
In response to:

Al Gore Versus '2016'

Nick705 Wrote: Sep 29, 2012 12:49 PM
You don't understand the topography of Greenland. The interior is depressed hundreds of feet below the coastal rim. Even if - which no verifiable science admits - this were to melt, it wouldn't be going anywhere, certainly not into the sea. Another scare used by Gore in his lying film is that the Northwest Passage around the north of N. America would be open due to melting sea ice. Big deal. What he failed to mention is that it has been opening and closing regularly down the ages, the last time in 1940. The "20 feet" claim is a number Gore and the "sky is falling we're all going to die" alarmists pulled out of their hats to scare the gullible like you. Educate yourself: http://www.second-opinions.co.uk/inconvenient-untruths.html
In response to:

Al Gore Versus '2016'

Nick705 Wrote: Sep 29, 2012 12:40 PM
To be fair, Gore talks about NON-floating ice, as on Greenland and Antarctica, not the arctic. If a lot of it melted it would raise sea levesl. However, the "evidence" of this happening is faked. While the parts of Antarctic ice that his film shown shrinking is true, in other parts it is expanding. Somehow, he failed to show that. And while showing glaciers retreating [as has gone on since the beginning of time - advancing and retreating glaciers carved out the Great Lakes and pushed boulders as far south as Central Park, NY] it doesn't show them advancing in other places like New Zealand. In Alaska some years ago the tour guide on a helicopter trip over a glacier said it was advancing so fast it threatened a village.
In response to:

Al Gore Versus '2016'

Nick705 Wrote: Sep 29, 2012 12:30 PM
After An Inconvenient Truth was shown in schools in the UK, members of parliament and parents sued the government because kids were crying themselves to sleep over drowning bears and having nightmares that they would either be drowned or roasted. Lord Monckton, who had been Margaret Thatcher's scientific adviser, challenged each part of the movie. Finally, the highest court in the land issued a stinging refutation, listing the errors, swisted data and just plain fraud in the film. Here is the best link: http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckton/goreerrors.html
In response to:

Al Gore Versus '2016'

Nick705 Wrote: Sep 29, 2012 12:24 PM
More links. Watch especially the Monckton one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BdRG8RLSxU4&feature=player_embedded http://www.kusi.com/weather/colemanscorner/81583352.html http://www.cfact.org/a/1652/Monckton-names-names-on-Climategate http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/146138
In response to:

Al Gore Versus '2016'

Nick705 Wrote: Sep 29, 2012 12:21 PM
But he DID go to 'Nam, while Bush stayed home. Wait a minute. Gore's service, despite his claim of being in the thick of the action was to man a 50-caliber typewriter miles from the front line. Bush flew supersonic jet fighters in the Air National Guard, practicing interceptions with a second jet, each pilot taking turns at intruder and interceptor. AT NIGHT. OVER THE GULF. His plane had one engine. If that quit he would have gone into the sea, as his dad did in WWII. And he volunteered for Vietnam, but was turned down as the jet he was qualified on was being phased out, and he had too little remaining time on his hitch to requalify. As to Dems' AWOL charge: His commanding general said he had more than satisfied the required service days.
In response to:

Al Gore Versus '2016'

Nick705 Wrote: Sep 29, 2012 12:07 PM
No, it's what America is afraid to see. Luckily, more and more Americans now see that the flashy, glib and smooth-talking guy she slept with took off the next morning with her wallet, maxed out her credit cards and spent her kids' and grandkids' college funds. Now he's come back with "Aw, c'mon, hon. Give me another chance."
In response to:

Truth 1725

Nick705 Wrote: Sep 26, 2012 1:05 PM
Q: Define the extreme in mixed emotions. A: A Christian Scientist with a ruptured appendix.
In response to:

Truth 1725

Nick705 Wrote: Sep 26, 2012 1:02 PM
Wasn't that what the major said while scr*wing Hotlips in M*A*S*H?
In response to:

Truth 1725

Nick705 Wrote: Sep 26, 2012 1:01 PM
You obviously have no idea of the discipline science demands. Religion states that it has the "revealed truth" (each religion insists that theirs is the really, really genuine revealed truth and the others are fraudulent) and as awkward facts emerge to disprove these truths, they must be ignored, denounced as "godless" or twisted to fit. It took the Catholic Church 400 years to admit that maybe Galileo had something re. Earth circling the sun. Science tries to explain phenomena with a theory, supported by factual evidence. Scientific theories are called "falsifiable." If new evidence emerges to contradict them, they must be modified, or in some cases replaced. There is no "revealed truth" in science.
In response to:

Truth 1725

Nick705 Wrote: Sep 26, 2012 12:53 PM
Lot was some kind of guy, wasn't he? He lets his daughters get him drunk, scr*ws them and they become pregnant. But it's Lot's wife who is turned to a pillar of salt by God. Pointless and horrible. And this is the "Good Book"? Witnesses swear an oath on it? Members of Congress and the President swear their oaths of office on it? What great lesson are we to learn from this disgusting rubbish? Remember, every bit is the Word of God. With this justification, for almost one and a half thousand years, from the early Catholic Church, through the Inquisition, the Crusades, the Conquistadors, and even after, men went forward with the Word on their lips and the Cross on their shields, and slaughtered those of no, or different, religions.
Previous 31 - 40 Next