1
   

Global Warming vs. Terrorism

 
 
jpinMilwaukee
 
  1  
Reply Wed 19 Jul, 2006 11:33 am
plainoldme wrote:

You can't take the idea of personal responsibility, can you? Of course not! That might mean being informed, caring about others and giving things up.

Your beliefs, or, rather, your ignorance is a danger to us all.


That is a rather large assumption about me based off of one small story.

If your goal is to inform and care about others, why don't you try doing that first next time instead of insulting me right off the bat?
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Wed 19 Jul, 2006 11:43 am
jpinMilwaukee wrote:
plainoldme wrote:

You can't take the idea of personal responsibility, can you? Of course not! That might mean being informed, caring about others and giving things up.

Your beliefs, or, rather, your ignorance is a danger to us all.


That is a rather large assumption about me based off of one small story.

If your goal is to inform and care about others, why don't you try doing that first next time instead of insulting me right off the bat?


It is not an insult to remind people who refuse to take reality seriously that they should not bring more people into the world.

You, rather, made a sophomoric remark about Gore's book that was the first insult in this exchange. When the shoe is on your foot -- even when you imagine it to be on your foot, which is the case here -- it seems to be very tight.

What skin is taken off your nose by Gore's book? Try to be adult which means being serious.
0 Replies
 
jpinMilwaukee
 
  1  
Reply Wed 19 Jul, 2006 12:14 pm
Oh 'fer christs sakes...

I'm not sure how I insulted you by moving a stack of Al's books to the New fiction section, but if your feelings are really that hurt by it.... it's your own overly-emotional problem. I suggest you simply get over it.

You, on the other hand, directed your statement towards me after one (admittedly sophmoric) story. Just because I don't buy Al's exageration hook line and sinker like you do, doesn't mean that I don't practice conservation when ever I can. Your assumptions of me are baseless, unfounded and completely inaccurate... not that you took the time to find out.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 19 Jul, 2006 12:24 pm
Global warming is evidenced from our weather patterns, but the cause of global warming is still questioned. World terrorism is evidenced by what is happening around the world, and the causes are complex as they are numerous. However, when comparing global warming and terrorism, it would seem humans can influence terrorism in a way that will be more successful for the long-term if our governments used better forms of diplomacy and understanding rather than guns and bombs.

How to achieve peace in this world should be the primary concern of all governments. We should try to help governments that needs help, but not enforce our definition of democracy and/or economy through bribes and other rewards.

Democracy must come from within, and so should peace.
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Wed 19 Jul, 2006 03:57 pm
jpinMilwaukee wrote:
Oh 'fer christs sakes...

I'm not sure how I insulted you by moving a stack of Al's books to the New fiction section, but if your feelings are really that hurt by it.... it's your own overly-emotional problem. I suggest you simply get over it.

You, on the other hand, directed your statement towards me after one (admittedly sophmoric) story. Just because I don't buy Al's exageration hook line and sinker like you do, doesn't mean that I don't practice conservation when ever I can. Your assumptions of me are baseless, unfounded and completely inaccurate... not that you took the time to find out.


Who said anything about you insulting me? You guys on the right have trouble with reading comprehension.
0 Replies
 
jpinMilwaukee
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Jul, 2006 07:46 am
plainoldme wrote:

You, rather, made a sophomoric remark about Gore's book that was the first insult in this exchange.


plainoldme wrote:
Who said anything about you insulting me?



Then who did I insult? If it wasn't you, then why are you so worked up over it?

Perhaps the comprehension problems aren't in the reading, but rather the writing.
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Jul, 2006 10:47 am
jpinMilwaukee wrote:
plainoldme wrote:



plainoldme wrote:
Who said anything about you insulting me?



Then who did I insult? If it wasn't you, then why are you so worked up over it?

Perhaps the comprehension problems aren't in the reading, but rather the writing.


You insulted Gore directly, and you attempted to insult those who hold a realistic view of the world and give credence to science indirectly, although you only made yourself appear uneducated and sophomoric.

You have to ask why I worked up? The titanic ignorance of people who deny global warming and endanger all life on this planet is why.

What right have you to endanger others? None. Yet your position is dangerous to everyone and every living thing.

Now, there are threats that we can do nothing about, such as solar dimming (perhaps) and the possibility that the world will soon go through another reversal of polarity. However, we can and must on the individual level act to stop global warming and to clean up the planet.

It is a matter of personal responsibility. It is a matter of education. It is a matter of adulthood.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Jul, 2006 10:54 am
plainoldme wrote:
jpinMilwaukee wrote:
plainoldme wrote:



plainoldme wrote:
Who said anything about you insulting me?



Then who did I insult? If it wasn't you, then why are you so worked up over it?

Perhaps the comprehension problems aren't in the reading, but rather the writing.


You insulted Gore directly, and you attempted to insult those who hold a realistic view of the world and give credence to science indirectly, although you only made yourself appear uneducated and sophomoric.

You have to ask why I worked up? The titanic ignorance of people who deny global warming and endanger all life on this planet is why.

What right have you to endanger others? None. Yet your position is dangerous to everyone and every living thing.

Now, there are threats that we can do nothing about, such as solar dimming (perhaps) and the possibility that the world will soon go through another reversal of polarity. However, we can and must on the individual level act to stop global warming and to clean up the planet.

It is a matter of personal responsibility. It is a matter of education. It is a matter of adulthood.


Is it only when people insult people you like that you get upset? Or, politicians in general?

I know that everytime someone insults Bush on A2K I immediately strat calling them an idiot or telling them I hope they can't reproduce or basically calling the intelligence into question.

Thats a natural leap. If someone insults a politician or movie maker, we should all imediately start talking about that posters mom and how fat she is. That's how adults in plainoldme's world act.
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Jul, 2006 11:01 am
Why don't you even try to address the substance of the matter - he was upset over a cavalier attitude about global warming.

It's upsetting that all the major scientific minds of the present day agree there's no more argument about the phenomenon or our contribution to it as a species, but some people see short term affluence as more pressing.
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Jul, 2006 11:08 am
McG -- I can not tolerate endangering the planet. Everyone here has Teflon in their bloodstream because some people can not cook well and some others are too lazy to clean a steel pan. This attitude of take now and forget the future -- which is largely the human way of thinking (see March-April edition of Harvard Magazine) is something I do not subscribe to.

However, that does not answer your question. Most of the time, when people insult bush, they are responding to his diplomatic and scientific policies that are dangerous for all of us.

If it should be proved that global warming is a myth and that the current degradation of the poles and the higher temperatures we are experiencing and increased hurricane frequency and force are a "blip" on the earth's climatic history, it would do no -- let me emphasize -- IT WOULD DO NO -- harm to any of us to act to preserve life and the planet for the future. In fact, anyone who says (s)he is pro-life and then says global warming is a myth is, at best, confused, and is probably an irresponsible liar.

George bush has embroiled us in an unnecessary war. He has vetoed stem cell research and funding based on superstition. He is willing to destroy the planet in environmental terms.

To criticize bush is to support life and to save the planet.

Does is make me angry to see him criticized? No.

Now, there are a few posters here whose hobby is to continue to criticize Clinton. Most of the time, I ignore them, using my father's standard: Consider the source. But, why are they beating a dead horse?

However, to criticize bush is to keep ourselves safe . . . or, as safe as we can be.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Jul, 2006 11:11 am
plainoldme wrote:
McG -- I can not tolerate endangering the planet. Everyone here has Teflon in their bloodstream because some people can not cook well and some others are too lazy to clean a steel pan. This attitude of take now and forget the future -- which is largely the human way of thinking (see March-April edition of Harvard Magazine) is something I do not subscribe to.

However, that does not answer your question. Most of the time, when people insult bush, they are responding to his diplomatic and scientific policies that are dangerous for all of us.

If it should be proved that global warming is a myth and that the current degradation of the poles and the higher temperatures we are experiencing and increased hurricane frequency and force are a "blip" on the earth's climatic history, it would do no -- let me emphasize -- IT WOULD DO NO -- harm to any of us to act to preserve life and the planet for the future. In fact, anyone who says (s)he is pro-life and then says global warming is a myth is, at best, confused, and is probably an irresponsible liar.

George bush has embroiled us in an unnecessary war. He has vetoed stem cell research and funding based on superstition. He is willing to destroy the planet in environmental terms.

To criticize bush is to support life and to save the planet.

Does is make me angry to see him criticized? No.

Now, there are a few posters here whose hobby is to continue to criticize Clinton. Most of the time, I ignore them, using my father's standard: Consider the source. But, why are they beating a dead horse?

However, to criticize bush is to keep ourselves safe . . . or, as safe as we can be.


I see why you chose a cow as an avatar now.
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Jul, 2006 11:12 am
McG -- Your last post is a non sequitor.
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Jul, 2006 03:41 pm
McGentrix wrote:
plainoldme wrote:
jpinMilwaukee wrote:
plainoldme wrote:



plainoldme wrote:
Who said anything about you insulting me?




Is it only when people insult people you like that you get upset? Or, politicians in general?

I know that everytime someone insults Bush on A2K I immediately strat calling them an idiot or telling them I hope they can't reproduce or basically calling the intelligence into question.

Thats a natural leap. If someone insults a politician or movie maker, we should all imediately start talking about that posters mom and how fat she is. That's how adults in plainoldme's world act.


I never say things like a poster's mother is fat. You must know as well as I do within whose realm that lies.

Adults in my world trust is real science, not superstition.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Jul, 2006 05:45 pm
plainoldme,

What are Al Gores credentials in the area of global warming?
Where did he study to get his doctorate?
What is his area of expertise?

If he wants to be taken seriously,then he should be willing to take the heat over his remarks.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Jul, 2006 05:50 pm
Ain't that sumt'n. Moron Bush just vetoed stem cell research funding, and he doesn't have a PhD in genetics, biology, or "humanity."
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Jul, 2006 05:56 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
Ain't that sumt'n. Moron Bush just vetoed stem cell research funding, and he doesn't have a PhD in genetics, biology, or "humanity."


But he is the President.
Part of his job is to veto legislation that he dislikes or disagrees with.

You have always complained that Bush never veto'ed anything,now you are complaining that he did.

All congress has to do is gather the votes to override the veto.
That shouldnt be to difficult.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Jul, 2006 07:43 pm
mysteryman wrote:
plainoldme,

What are Al Gores credentials in the area of global warming?
Where did he study to get his doctorate?
What is his area of expertise?

If he wants to be taken seriously,then he should be willing to take the heat over his remarks.


What are your credentials as a critic?
Where did you go to school? What did you study?
What was your area of expertise?

I see we shouldn't take you seriously since you have failed to provide any of the necessary bona fides you want to demand of others.

In case you didn't notice, Climatoligists have said the science in "Inconvenient Truth" is accurate. Do you have anything to show that it isn't? Are you a climatoligist?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 20 Jul, 2006 07:48 pm
parados, mm continues to ask stupid questions and demands of others he himself can't provide. He's one of the "morons" identified by Frank. I think he's BernardR's brother or child.
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Jul, 2006 10:55 am
mysteryman wrote:
plainoldme,

What are Al Gores credentials in the area of global warming?
Where did he study to get his doctorate?
What is his area of expertise?

If he wants to be taken seriously,then he should be willing to take the heat over his remarks.


There is a program at Boston University that answers your question. It is called University Professors and it allows people with a Ph.D. in one field to teach classes in a field in which they are interested, as long as they can demonstrate sufficient knowledge in the field and teach one course in the area in which they have a doctorate. Of course, they already have the research tools down pat. An example is an English folksinger who has a doctorate in psychology but who teaches folk lore. The man has made a career of history and music.

An educated person can do research in many fields.

Consider that most science journalists have undergraduate degrees in a particular scientific discipline and may have master's degrees in journalism. Their job is to communicate with the layperson on science.


Frankly, not many scientists are good writers: they tend to use the passive voice.

So, part of Gore's role is as university professor and part is as science journalist.
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Fri 21 Jul, 2006 10:56 am
touche, Parados! MM reserves the right to denigrate the very notion of global warming but probably has fewer credentials than Al Gore. BTW, a career in the Senate gave Gore an education of another kind.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 09/29/2024 at 05:31:36