http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/2010-da...ing-the-earth/

2010 Dawned with Record Cold Gripping the Earth

Our recent cold spell comes at the end of a decade-long trend which
has seen global temperatures flatline from their peak in 1998 . or
fall.

That's right, the Earth is not warming - and hasn't been for the past
twelve years.

But don't take my word for it. In one of the hacked emails
constituting the Climategate scandal, Dr. Kevin Trenberth, head of the
Climate Analysis Section at the National Center for Atmospheric
Research, admits privately that he cannot explain the current cooler
trends. "The fact is," Trenberth writes, "we can't account for the
lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't."

The only "travesty" is that these scientists actually believed their
own preposterous ravings, or that they placed such fervent apocalyptic
faith in computer models. Did these overeducated ideologues miss the
class in Geology 101 where you learn that on countless occasions over
the last million millenia, great ice sheets covered much of the globe,
only to recede for brief periods of interglacial warming? Did they
plug that into their models? Or did they really believe this ancient
cycle was discontinued because we started up our SUVs?

There are three reasons why these climate scientists - and their
political and media enablers - need to be held to account:

1. They have used this junk science as leverage to pluck billions from
the pockets of taxpayers in the United States and throughout the West,
to subsidize everything from harebrained "green" technology that no
one wants to gigantic wealth transfers to the Third World.

2. They have used their manufactured crisis to justify massive
government power grabs at the expense of our liberty, such as the
Environmental Protection Agency recently classifying CO2 emissions -
literally our very breath - as a pollutant, and therefore under their
purview of control.

3. They have dangerously distracted people from the real climate
danger: the return of the ice.

This is just propaganda. Nothing will be achieved by going round another 10
times other than wasting much bandwidth on a subject that is off topic. Why
don't you take this up on alt.global.warming or some political NG.

David

In article ,
"aluckyguess" wrote:

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/2010-da...ing-the-earth/

2010 Dawned with Record Cold Gripping the Earth

Our recent cold spell comes at the end of a decade-long trend which
has seen global temperatures flatline from their peak in 1998 . or
fall.

That's right, the Earth is not warming - and hasn't been for the past
twelve years.

But don't take my word for it. In one of the hacked emails
constituting the Climategate scandal, Dr. Kevin Trenberth, head of the
Climate Analysis Section at the National Center for Atmospheric
Research, admits privately that he cannot explain the current cooler
trends. "The fact is," Trenberth writes, "we can't account for the
lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't."

The only "travesty" is that these scientists actually believed their
own preposterous ravings, or that they placed such fervent apocalyptic
faith in computer models. Did these overeducated ideologues miss the
class in Geology 101 where you learn that on countless occasions over
the last million millenia, great ice sheets covered much of the globe,
only to recede for brief periods of interglacial warming? Did they
plug that into their models? Or did they really believe this ancient
cycle was discontinued because we started up our SUVs?

There are three reasons why these climate scientists - and their
political and media enablers - need to be held to account:

1. They have used this junk science as leverage to pluck billions from
the pockets of taxpayers in the United States and throughout the West,
to subsidize everything from harebrained "green" technology that no
one wants to gigantic wealth transfers to the Third World.

2. They have used their manufactured crisis to justify massive
government power grabs at the expense of our liberty, such as the
Environmental Protection Agency recently classifying CO2 emissions -
literally our very breath - as a pollutant, and therefore under their
purview of control.

3. They have dangerously distracted people from the real climate
danger: the return of the ice.

Oh, I know, Michael
Crighton said it wasn't true. Oh, my god, how could all those fact
based, elitist scientists get it so wrong? The figures given to the IPCC
were wrong but, it doesn't change the overall picture of global warming.
Maybe they move the decimal point. CO2 is easy to measure and, it is
going up. It's going up by 2ppm per year.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenho..._gas_emissions

It's not going down. What do you think will happen with more and more
CO2 in the atmosphere, nothing?

The increasing Arctic temperatures are releasing methane from the once
frozen arctic tundra. On a molecule-for-molecule basis, methane is about
eight times stronger as a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.
Ibid.

Read: warmer, faster.

Pre-industrial, we were at 280 ppm CO2. At 450 ppm, the surface
temperature of the planet will rise 3C and, you can say good-bye to most
of Florida, and Galveston. We are at 387 ppm now and, if leaders sit up
and pay attention, we may be able to stop CO2 at 550ppm. But for
anything like normal, we need to get the CO2 down to 350 ppm.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...ate-numerology

Look, if global warming is a dud, we will look silly for fighting it. If
we do nothing and, it is as bad as predicted, a billion or more people
may die from famine and disease. If you had to bet, what would you
rather lose, your credibility or, your life?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects...Sea_level_rise

http://www.stormfront.org/forum/arch.../t-599023.html

It could lead to another mass extinction, including us.
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?cha...ID=00037A5 D-
A938-150E-A93883414B7F0000

Nothing wrong with doubting but, be prudent.

'Nuff said.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the
merger of state and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100119/...ting_activists
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/1/19/headlines

In article
,
Wildbilly wrote:

In article ,
"aluckyguess" wrote:

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/2010-da...ping-the-earth
/

2010 Dawned with Record Cold Gripping the Earth

Our recent cold spell comes at the end of a decade-long trend which
has seen global temperatures flatline from their peak in 1998 . or
fall.

That's right, the Earth is not warming - and hasn't been for the past
twelve years.

But don't take my word for it. In one of the hacked emails
constituting the Climategate scandal, Dr. Kevin Trenberth, head of the
Climate Analysis Section at the National Center for Atmospheric
Research, admits privately that he cannot explain the current cooler
trends. "The fact is," Trenberth writes, "we can't account for the
lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't."

The only "travesty" is that these scientists actually believed their
own preposterous ravings, or that they placed such fervent apocalyptic
faith in computer models. Did these overeducated ideologues miss the
class in Geology 101 where you learn that on countless occasions over
the last million millenia, great ice sheets covered much of the globe,
only to recede for brief periods of interglacial warming? Did they
plug that into their models? Or did they really believe this ancient
cycle was discontinued because we started up our SUVs?

There are three reasons why these climate scientists - and their
political and media enablers - need to be held to account:

1. They have used this junk science as leverage to pluck billions from
the pockets of taxpayers in the United States and throughout the West,
to subsidize everything from harebrained "green" technology that no
one wants to gigantic wealth transfers to the Third World.

2. They have used their manufactured crisis to justify massive
government power grabs at the expense of our liberty, such as the
Environmental Protection Agency recently classifying CO2 emissions -
literally our very breath - as a pollutant, and therefore under their
purview of control.

3. They have dangerously distracted people from the real climate
danger: the return of the ice.

Oh, I know, Michael
Crighton said it wasn't true. Oh, my god, how could all those fact
based, elitist scientists get it so wrong? The figures given to the IPCC
were wrong but, it doesn't change the overall picture of global warming.
Maybe they move the decimal point. CO2 is easy to measure and, it is
going up. It's going up by 2ppm per year.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenho..._gas_emissions

It's not going down. What do you think will happen with more and more
CO2 in the atmosphere, nothing?

The increasing Arctic temperatures are releasing methane from the once
frozen arctic tundra. On a molecule-for-molecule basis, methane is about
eight times stronger as a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.
Ibid.

Read: warmer, faster.

Pre-industrial, we were at 280 ppm CO2. At 450 ppm, the surface
temperature of the planet will rise 3C and, you can say good-bye to most
of Florida, and Galveston. We are at 387 ppm now and, if leaders sit up
and pay attention, we may be able to stop CO2 at 550ppm. But for
anything like normal, we need to get the CO2 down to 350 ppm.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...ate-numerology

Look, if global warming is a dud, we will look silly for fighting it. If
we do nothing and, it is as bad as predicted, a billion or more people
may die from famine and disease. If you had to bet, what would you
rather lose, your credibility or, your life?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects...Sea_level_rise

http://www.stormfront.org/forum/arch.../t-599023.html

It could lead to another mass extinction, including us.
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?cha...ID=00037A5 D-
A938-150E-A93883414B7F0000

Nothing wrong with doubting but, be prudent.

'Nuff said.

Not to worry. Hell it was 6 F. last week and TWO BIG storms are due
shortly. Colder then it has been for awhile.
Still the ocean heat sink has been diluted due to melting so solar
does not hold light energy and we get extremes.
Tis nothing read "The long Emergency" to scare the bugaboos out us?
Seems all that excess man made CO2 may be short lived. Meanwhile
infrastructure about is on hold for the last 30 years.

Bill

Snowed in blizzard reading below.

http://www.sciencenews.org/view/gene...e_use_quantum_
trick_to_harvest_light

http://www.thefarm.org/permaculture/index.html

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/02/04

--
Garden in shade zone 5 S Jersey USA

On 2/4/2010 11:20 AM, Bill who putters wrote:
In article
,
wrote:

In ,
wrote:

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/2010-da...ping-the-earth
/

2010 Dawned with Record Cold Gripping the Earth

Our recent cold spell comes at the end of a decade-long trend which
has seen global temperatures flatline from their peak in 1998 . or
fall.

That's right, the Earth is not warming - and hasn't been for the past
twelve years.

But don't take my word for it. In one of the hacked emails
constituting the Climategate scandal, Dr. Kevin Trenberth, head of the
Climate Analysis Section at the National Center for Atmospheric
Research, admits privately that he cannot explain the current cooler
trends. "The fact is," Trenberth writes, "we can't account for the
lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't."

The only "travesty" is that these scientists actually believed their
own preposterous ravings, or that they placed such fervent apocalyptic
faith in computer models. Did these overeducated ideologues miss the
class in Geology 101 where you learn that on countless occasions over
the last million millenia, great ice sheets covered much of the globe,
only to recede for brief periods of interglacial warming? Did they
plug that into their models? Or did they really believe this ancient
cycle was discontinued because we started up our SUVs?

There are three reasons why these climate scientists - and their
political and media enablers - need to be held to account:

1. They have used this junk science as leverage to pluck billions from
the pockets of taxpayers in the United States and throughout the West,
to subsidize everything from harebrained "green" technology that no
one wants to gigantic wealth transfers to the Third World.

2. They have used their manufactured crisis to justify massive
government power grabs at the expense of our liberty, such as the
Environmental Protection Agency recently classifying CO2 emissions -
literally our very breath - as a pollutant, and therefore under their
purview of control.

3. They have dangerously distracted people from the real climate
danger: the return of the ice.

Oh, I know, Michael
Crighton said it wasn't true. Oh, my god, how could all those fact
based, elitist scientists get it so wrong? The figures given to the IPCC
were wrong but, it doesn't change the overall picture of global warming.
Maybe they move the decimal point. CO2 is easy to measure and, it is
going up. It's going up by 2ppm per year.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenho..._gas_emissions

It's not going down. What do you think will happen with more and more
CO2 in the atmosphere, nothing?

The increasing Arctic temperatures are releasing methane from the once
frozen arctic tundra. On a molecule-for-molecule basis, methane is about
eight times stronger as a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.
Ibid.

Read: warmer, faster.

Pre-industrial, we were at 280 ppm CO2. At 450 ppm, the surface
temperature of the planet will rise 3C and, you can say good-bye to most
of Florida, and Galveston. We are at 387 ppm now and, if leaders sit up
and pay attention, we may be able to stop CO2 at 550ppm. But for
anything like normal, we need to get the CO2 down to 350 ppm.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...ate-numerology

Look, if global warming is a dud, we will look silly for fighting it. If
we do nothing and, it is as bad as predicted, a billion or more people
may die from famine and disease. If you had to bet, what would you
rather lose, your credibility or, your life?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects...Sea_level_rise

http://www.stormfront.org/forum/arch.../t-599023.html

It could lead to another mass extinction, including us.
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?cha...ID=00037A5 D-
A938-150E-A93883414B7F0000

Nothing wrong with doubting but, be prudent.

'Nuff said.

Not to worry. Hell it was 6 F. last week and TWO BIG storms are due
shortly. Colder then it has been for awhile.
Still the ocean heat sink has been diluted due to melting so solar
does not hold light energy and we get extremes.
Tis nothing read "The long Emergency" to scare the bugaboos out us?
Seems all that excess man made CO2 may be short lived. Meanwhile
infrastructure about is on hold for the last 30 years.

Bill

Snowed in blizzard reading below.

http://www.sciencenews.org/view/gene...e_use_quantum_
trick_to_harvest_light

http://www.thefarm.org/permaculture/index.html

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/02/04

I'm anticipating having to remove over a foot of global warming off my
drive and walk this weekend

On 2/4/2010 10:53 AM, Wildbilly wrote:
In ,
wrote:

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/2010-da...ing-the-earth/

2010 Dawned with Record Cold Gripping the Earth

Our recent cold spell comes at the end of a decade-long trend which
has seen global temperatures flatline from their peak in 1998 . or
fall.

That's right, the Earth is not warming - and hasn't been for the past
twelve years.

But don't take my word for it. In one of the hacked emails
constituting the Climategate scandal, Dr. Kevin Trenberth, head of the
Climate Analysis Section at the National Center for Atmospheric
Research, admits privately that he cannot explain the current cooler
trends. "The fact is," Trenberth writes, "we can't account for the
lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't."

The only "travesty" is that these scientists actually believed their
own preposterous ravings, or that they placed such fervent apocalyptic
faith in computer models. Did these overeducated ideologues miss the
class in Geology 101 where you learn that on countless occasions over
the last million millenia, great ice sheets covered much of the globe,
only to recede for brief periods of interglacial warming? Did they
plug that into their models? Or did they really believe this ancient
cycle was discontinued because we started up our SUVs?

There are three reasons why these climate scientists - and their
political and media enablers - need to be held to account:

1. They have used this junk science as leverage to pluck billions from
the pockets of taxpayers in the United States and throughout the West,
to subsidize everything from harebrained "green" technology that no
one wants to gigantic wealth transfers to the Third World.

2. They have used their manufactured crisis to justify massive
government power grabs at the expense of our liberty, such as the
Environmental Protection Agency recently classifying CO2 emissions -
literally our very breath - as a pollutant, and therefore under their
purview of control.

3. They have dangerously distracted people from the real climate
danger: the return of the ice.

Oh, I know, Michael
Crighton said it wasn't true. Oh, my god, how could all those fact
based, elitist scientists get it so wrong? The figures given to the IPCC
were wrong but, it doesn't change the overall picture of global warming.
Maybe they move the decimal point. CO2 is easy to measure and, it is
going up. It's going up by 2ppm per year.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenho..._gas_emissions

It's not going down. What do you think will happen with more and more
CO2 in the atmosphere, nothing?

The increasing Arctic temperatures are releasing methane from the once
frozen arctic tundra. On a molecule-for-molecule basis, methane is about
eight times stronger as a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.
Ibid.

Read: warmer, faster.

Pre-industrial, we were at 280 ppm CO2. At 450 ppm, the surface
temperature of the planet will rise 3C and, you can say good-bye to most
of Florida, and Galveston. We are at 387 ppm now and, if leaders sit up
and pay attention, we may be able to stop CO2 at 550ppm. But for
anything like normal, we need to get the CO2 down to 350 ppm.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...ate-numerology

Look, if global warming is a dud, we will look silly for fighting it. If
we do nothing and, it is as bad as predicted, a billion or more people
may die from famine and disease. If you had to bet, what would you
rather lose, your credibility or, your life?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects...Sea_level_rise

http://www.stormfront.org/forum/arch.../t-599023.html

It could lead to another mass extinction, including us.
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?cha...ID=00037A5 D-
A938-150E-A93883414B7F0000

Nothing wrong with doubting but, be prudent.

'Nuff said.

Silly, no - stupid yes.

We're already driving industry off shore. Here in little Delaware we've
lost 2 auto plants, a steel mill, DuPont's nylon plant and our only
refinery, in large part because Delaware, as an EPA friend quotes, is a
California Mini-me.

Go peddle your pap to the Indians and Chinese who are destined to be the
worlds biggest polluters. Forcing industry to go there is just
accelerating what you do not like. No question, it is cleaner in the US.

In article ,
"aluckyguess" wrote:

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/2010-da...ing-the-earth/

2010 Dawned with Record Cold Gripping the Earth

Our recent cold spell comes at the end of a decade-long trend which
has seen global temperatures flatline from their peak in 1998 . or
fall.

That's right, the Earth is not warming - and hasn't been for the past
twelve years.

But don't take my word for it. In one of the hacked emails
constituting the Climategate scandal, Dr. Kevin Trenberth, head of the
Climate Analysis Section at the National Center for Atmospheric
Research, admits privately that he cannot explain the current cooler
trends. "The fact is," Trenberth writes, "we can't account for the
lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't."

The only "travesty" is that these scientists actually believed their
own preposterous ravings, or that they placed such fervent apocalyptic
faith in computer models. Did these overeducated ideologues miss the
class in Geology 101 where you learn that on countless occasions over
the last million millenia, great ice sheets covered much of the globe,
only to recede for brief periods of interglacial warming? Did they
plug that into their models? Or did they really believe this ancient
cycle was discontinued because we started up our SUVs?

There are three reasons why these climate scientists - and their
political and media enablers - need to be held to account:

1. They have used this junk science as leverage to pluck billions from
the pockets of taxpayers in the United States and throughout the West,
to subsidize everything from harebrained "green" technology that no
one wants to gigantic wealth transfers to the Third World.

2. They have used their manufactured crisis to justify massive
government power grabs at the expense of our liberty, such as the
Environmental Protection Agency recently classifying CO2 emissions -
literally our very breath - as a pollutant, and therefore under their
purview of control.

3. They have dangerously distracted people from the real climate
danger: the return of the ice.

And your proof is?
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the
merger of state and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100119/...ting_activists
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/1/19/headlines

"Wildbilly" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"aluckyguess" wrote:

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/2010-da...ing-the-earth/

2010 Dawned with Record Cold Gripping the Earth

Our recent cold spell comes at the end of a decade-long trend which
has seen global temperatures flatline from their peak in 1998 . or
fall.

That's right, the Earth is not warming - and hasn't been for the past
twelve years.

But don't take my word for it. In one of the hacked emails
constituting the Climategate scandal, Dr. Kevin Trenberth, head of the
Climate Analysis Section at the National Center for Atmospheric
Research, admits privately that he cannot explain the current cooler
trends. "The fact is," Trenberth writes, "we can't account for the
lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't."

The only "travesty" is that these scientists actually believed their
own preposterous ravings, or that they placed such fervent apocalyptic
faith in computer models. Did these overeducated ideologues miss the
class in Geology 101 where you learn that on countless occasions over
the last million millenia, great ice sheets covered much of the globe,
only to recede for brief periods of interglacial warming? Did they
plug that into their models? Or did they really believe this ancient
cycle was discontinued because we started up our SUVs?

There are three reasons why these climate scientists - and their
political and media enablers - need to be held to account:

1. They have used this junk science as leverage to pluck billions from
the pockets of taxpayers in the United States and throughout the West,
to subsidize everything from harebrained "green" technology that no
one wants to gigantic wealth transfers to the Third World.

2. They have used their manufactured crisis to justify massive
government power grabs at the expense of our liberty, such as the
Environmental Protection Agency recently classifying CO2 emissions -
literally our very breath - as a pollutant, and therefore under their
purview of control.

3. They have dangerously distracted people from the real climate
danger: the return of the ice.

And your proof is?
--
IN the pudding. I don't need to proof anything it's the other way around.
I want to know what were going to do with all those green batteries.

On 2/5/2010 12:16 AM, aluckyguess wrote:


"Wildbilly" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"aluckyguess" wrote:

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/2010-da...ing-the-earth/


2010 Dawned with Record Cold Gripping the Earth

Our recent cold spell comes at the end of a decade-long trend which
has seen global temperatures flatline from their peak in 1998 . or
fall.

That's right, the Earth is not warming - and hasn't been for the past
twelve years.

But don't take my word for it. In one of the hacked emails
constituting the Climategate scandal, Dr. Kevin Trenberth, head of the
Climate Analysis Section at the National Center for Atmospheric
Research, admits privately that he cannot explain the current cooler
trends. "The fact is," Trenberth writes, "we can't account for the
lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't."

The only "travesty" is that these scientists actually believed their
own preposterous ravings, or that they placed such fervent apocalyptic
faith in computer models. Did these overeducated ideologues miss the
class in Geology 101 where you learn that on countless occasions over
the last million millenia, great ice sheets covered much of the globe,
only to recede for brief periods of interglacial warming? Did they
plug that into their models? Or did they really believe this ancient
cycle was discontinued because we started up our SUVs?

There are three reasons why these climate scientists - and their
political and media enablers - need to be held to account:

1. They have used this junk science as leverage to pluck billions from
the pockets of taxpayers in the United States and throughout the West,
to subsidize everything from harebrained "green" technology that no
one wants to gigantic wealth transfers to the Third World.

2. They have used their manufactured crisis to justify massive
government power grabs at the expense of our liberty, such as the
Environmental Protection Agency recently classifying CO2 emissions -
literally our very breath - as a pollutant, and therefore under their
purview of control.

3. They have dangerously distracted people from the real climate
danger: the return of the ice.

And your proof is?
--
IN the pudding. I don't need to proof anything it's the other way around.
I want to know what were going to do with all those green batteries.

If any greenie volunteers will shovel all the global warming I'm getting
this weekend they are welcome. They won't get paid but I will not have
to pollute with my gas guzzling snow thrower

In article ,
says...

If any greenie volunteers will shovel all the global warming I'm getting
this weekend they are welcome. They won't get paid but I will not have
to pollute with my gas guzzling snow thrower

I really think you need to understand that emoticons don't change the
underlying tone of an insult and that the people you derogate are
probably a lot smarter than you think they are.

On 2/5/2010 11:20 PM, phorbin wrote:
In ,
says...

If any greenie volunteers will shovel all the global warming I'm getting
this weekend they are welcome. They won't get paid but I will not have
to pollute with my gas guzzling snow thrower

I really think you need to understand that emoticons don't change the
underlying tone of an insult and that the people you derogate are
probably a lot smarter than you think they are.


and you don't know me either

In article ,
says...
On 2/5/2010 11:20 PM, phorbin wrote:
In ,
says...

If any greenie volunteers will shovel all the global warming I'm getting
this weekend they are welcome. They won't get paid but I will not have
to pollute with my gas guzzling snow thrower

I really think you need to understand that emoticons don't change the
underlying tone of an insult and that the people you derogate are
probably a lot smarter than you think they are.


and you don't know me either

Cute response.

I don't have to know *you* to recognize that you are laying out bait. If
you think you aren't and you think you aren't being insulting I suggest
you step into others' shoes for a moment and read what you've written.

I answered the embedded issue for two reasons. It was bugging me and
because you seem smart enough to do something reasonable and
constructive with a lart.

Practically speaking, on USENET we are our words. There is no
personality that exists outside our words. --Our language and
presentation convey it all and there's a permanent record of that
portrayal. What we know of each other and what we get to know of each
other are the words.

Now let me ask you a question.

If you, through some global warming inspired program were offered the
opportunity to insulate your home better, buy an energy star fridge,
freezer and stove and set up your home to use less energy and save more
money, would you take it and would the reason for the program matter
much to you?

.... I am, btw, a mostly coherent high wattage 510 nm green. It's a less
expensive way to live once you get onto it.

On Feb 6, 3:33*pm, phorbin wrote:
In article ,
says...

On 2/5/2010 11:20 PM, phorbin wrote:
In ,
says...

If any greenie volunteers will shovel all the global warming I'm getting
this weekend they are welcome. *They won't get paid but I will not have
to pollute with my gas guzzling snow thrower

I really think you need to understand that emoticons don't change the
underlying tone of an insult and that the people you derogate are
probably a lot smarter than you think they are.

and you don't know me either

Cute response.

I don't have to know *you* to recognize that you are laying out bait. If
you think you aren't and you think you aren't being insulting I suggest
you step into others' shoes for a moment and read what you've written.

I answered the embedded issue for two reasons. It was bugging me and
because you seem smart enough to do something reasonable and
constructive with a lart.

Practically speaking, on USENET we are our words. There is no
personality that exists outside our words. --Our language and
presentation convey it all and there's a permanent record of that
portrayal. What we know of each other and what we get to know of each
other are the words.

Now let me ask you a question.

If you, through some global warming inspired program were offered the
opportunity to insulate your home better, buy an energy star fridge,
freezer and stove and set up your home to use less energy and save more
money, would you take it and would the reason for the program matter
much to you?

... I am, btw, a mostly coherent high wattage 510 nm green. It's a less
expensive way to live once you get onto it.

Of course I do these things. Saving the environment is coincidental,
saving money is paramount.
My preference is for the free market to drive this issue. We all want
a clean environment and conservation but a lot of us don't want it
shoved down our throats.

In article
,
Frank wrote:

"Saving the environment is coincidental,saving money is paramount."
- Frank

You're a true ideologue, Frank.

My preference is for the free market to drive this issue.
- Frank

WASHINGTON ‹ For years, a Congressional hearing with Alan Greenspan was
a marquee event. Lawmakers doted on him as an economic sage. Markets
jumped up or down depending on what he said. Politicians in both parties
wanted the maestro on their side.
But on Thursday, almost three years after stepping down as chairman of
the Federal Reserve, a humbled Mr. Greenspan admitted that he had put
too much faith in the self-correcting power of free markets and had
failed to anticipate the self-destructive power of wanton mortgage
lending.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/24/bu...y/24panel.html

So you want to do for the environment, what the neo-liberals have done
to the banking industry. You're insane, Frank.

------

Meanwhile, north of La-La Land, back in the garden, rhubarb has broken
the surface of the soil, and some errant, unharvested potatoes, and
garlic are spreading out leaves.

Buckle up, and tape up a roll or two of dimes, here comes another season
:O)
The buckwheat and the rye have sprouted in the gardening beds
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the
merger of state and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100119/...ting_activists
http://www.democracynow.org/2010/1/19/headlines

On Feb 6, 8:54Â*pm, Wildbilly wrote:
In article
,

Â*Frank wrote:

"Saving the environment is coincidental,saving money is paramount."
- Frank

You're a true ideologue, Frank.

My preference is for the free market to drive this issue.
- Frank

WASHINGTON ‹ For years, a Congressional hearing with Alan Greenspan was
a marquee event. Lawmakers doted on him as an economic sage. Markets
jumped up or down depending on what he said. Politicians in both parties
wanted the maestro on their side.
But on Thursday, almost three years after stepping down as chairman of
the Federal Reserve, a humbled Mr. Greenspan admitted that he had put
too much faith in the self-correcting power of free markets and had
failed to anticipate the self-destructive power of wanton mortgage
lending.http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/24/bu...y/24panel.html

So you want to do for the environment, what the neo-liberals have done
to the banking industry. You're insane, Frank.

------

Meanwhile, north of La-La Land, back in the garden, rhubarb has broken
the surface of the soil, and some errant, unharvested potatoes, and
garlic are spreading out leaves.

Buckle up, and tape up a roll or two of dimes, here comes another season
:O)
The buckwheat and the rye have sprouted in the gardening beds
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the
merger of state and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100119/...1/19/headlines

What a silly comparison.