I think America needs FOX NEWS!

1journeyman

Active Member
Originally Posted by MIKE22cha
Ya I'm sure everything is getting better in Iraq and Bush's poll numbers are going up.

Not as long as we talk about cutting and runnning.... Think about the message we're sending to the insurgents and the civilians. "america's about to run away...". That emboldens the insurgents and terrifies the civilians. Would you stand up to a bunch of gun toting, bomb wielding crazies if you thought in a few months they were going to have free reign to slaughter your family?
Check out The Other Iraq . It's a good website showing the good that has been done in much of Iraq already.
 

stdreb27

Active Member
Originally Posted by 1journeyman
Not as long as we talk about cutting and runnning.... Think about the message we're sending to the insurgents and the civilians. "america's about to run away...". That emboldens the insurgents and terrifies the civilians. Would you stand up to a bunch of gun toting, bomb wielding crazies if you thought in a few months they were going to have free reign to slaughter your family?
Check out The Other Iraq . It's a good website showing the good that has been done in much of Iraq already.
I agree, when people like hary reed, ---- turbin. Are screaming that we have lost in iraq we need to pull out. If I was a terrorist I'd be really happy.
 

mike22cha

Active Member

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
"Earl Aagaard, PhD, Roger L Aamodt, PhD, M Robert Aaron, Ralph F Abate, Hamed Abbas, PhD, Reza Abbaschian, PhD, Paul Abbett, Wyatt E Abbitt III, David M Abbott Jr, Ursula K Abbott, PhD, Will S Abbott, Riaz F. Abdulla, PhD, J M Abell, Philip H Abelson, PhD, Wayne Aben, Grady Ables, Earl A Abrahamson, PhD, John Abrams, David Acerni, J Wayne Achee, Hans J. Achemann, D T Achord, PhD, Ernest Achterberg, Gene Ackerman, John R Ackerman, William Ackerman, Richard E. Ackermann, Terry Ackman, Donald O Acrey, Lee Actor, Robert K Adair, PhD, Brian Adam, PhD, Chris Adam, Arthur Adams, Brook Adams, Charles K Adams, Craig Adams, Daniel Adams, PhD, Daniel B Adams Jr, Dell Adams, Donald Adams, Donald S Adams, Eugene Adams, Gail D Adams, PhD, George B Adams, PhD, Gerald J Adams, PhD, Gregory Adams, Henry Adams, Henry Adams, Howard Adams, James W Adams, Jim Adadms, John Adams, John E Adams, PhD, Kent A. Adams, Leonard C A Adams, PhD, Louis W Adams, PhD, Michael P Adams, Neil Adams, PhD, Opal Adams, Peter Adams, Phillip Adams, PhD, Richard E Adams, Richard L Adams, Robert F Adams, Roy B Adams, Roy M Adams, PhD, Steve W Adams, Walter Adams, William D Adams, William M Adams, PhD, William W Adams, Wilton Adams, PhD, Wilton T Adams, PhD, Wm J Adams, George Adcock, Rusty Adcock, MD, Lionel P Adda, PhD, Albert W Addington, Tim Addington, Bill Addison, John K Addy, PhD, C William Ade, Albert H Adelman, PhD, Barnet R Adelman, L A Adkins, Michael F Adkins, Ronald A Adkins, PhD, Norman Adler, PhD, Lt Col Jacques J Adnet, Anthrony J Adrignolo, PhD, Harry Adrounie, PhD, Richard A Adsero, Steven E Aeschbach, Stephen Affleck, PhD, Siegfried Aftergut, PhD, Jack Agan, Larry D Agenbroad, PhD, Sven Agerbek, George Aggen, PhD, Norman A Aggon, Vincent Agnello, MD, Kenneth Agnes, Mark Agnew, M C Agress, Jorge T Aguinadlo, Roy Ahalt, Robert Aharonov, Richard Ahern, Phillip Ahlberg, Kevin Ahlborg, Mark Ahlert, Terry Ahlquist, Mumtaz Ahmed, PhD, Rafique Ahmed, PhD, Robert Ahokas, PhD, H W Ahrenholz, Edward Ahrens, Rolland W Ahrens, PhD, Robert M Ahring, PhD, John J Aiello, Joseph P. Aiello, MD, S F Aiello, Phil Aigner, Brian R Ainley, Ainsworth, Alfred Ainsworth III, E Bud Ainsworth, Oscar R Ainsworth, PhD, S Aisenberg, PhD, David J Akers, Linda Akers, Willie Akers, Wayne Henry Akeson, MD, Thane Akins, Korkor Akoto, Akram, PhD, John Alai, Robert J Alaimo, PhD, Greg Alan, Vincent M Albanese, A Henry Albaugh, Ed Alberding, Timothy A Albers, MD, Edward Albert, Eric K Albert, PhD, Wm L Albert, James L Alberta, Mark W Albertsen, Frank Addison Albini, PhD, D Douglas Albrecht, Robert Albrecht, Rudolph C Albrecht, Fred R Albright, PhD, James C Albright, PhD, Robert Lee Albright, PhD, Tad B Albright, Marcus Albro, Allwyn Albuquerque, Ernest C Alcaraz, PhD, Garrett D Alcorn, MD, Luis Aldecoa, Frank Alder, Ronald G Alderfer, PhD, Thomas Alderson, PhD, Bill Aldrich, Franklin D Aldrich, PhD, Richard J Aldrich, PhD, Samuel Aldrich, PhD, Samuel Aldrich, PhD, David Aldridge, Robert Aldridge, Wm M Baldwin, Peter C Alecxih Sr, PhD, Russell J Alameda Jr, Perry B Alers, PhD, Steven J Alessandro, Alex F Alessandrini,....
The first of among 17,000 scientists
. Taken from the "Global Warming Petition" which states: We urge the United States government to reject the global warming agreement that was written in Kyoto, Japan in December, 1997, and any other similar proposals. The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind.
There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth. http://www.oism.org/pproject/s33p36.htm
I've been thinking about this and my friend has a phd, but he's a doctor. Does that mean he know anything about global warming. I'm going to look it up in popular science journal articles and see what they say.
Why do the Republicans try to not make global warming an issue? What could the best outcome be, we actualy get more energy sources and become less dependent on the oil companies? The worst outcome, there was actually global warming but we did our part and helped prevent it?
I don't see why the Republicans are so against it. Oh, wait. The oil companies have ties with the Republicans, and if we became less dependent on oil and they'll lose buisness. Wonder if that has anything to do with it
.
 

rabbit_72

Member
The war on terrorism sort of takes precedence over GW, Mike22, at this time. Unfortuantely. If the terrorists have their way, what need is there to even discuss GW, cuz you and I won't even be here. Terrorists are out to get everyone and spread terror, hence the name terrorists. I think once we can do something about that, them darn Republicans will concentrate on something else. In the meantime, as I have been saying over and over, do what you can to help preserve the enviroment. It isn't always up to just politicians to do what's right. It is up to you and me. I don't let politicians dictate how I feel and neither should you. Follow your conscience, not the media circus.
 

mike22cha

Active Member
Ok my "conscience" me that the war on terror is going to take a long time and if nothing is done about GW, then we won't have to be worried about terrorists. Honestly, I'm going to get flamed for saying this, if we were ever really conserned on terrorists, then we wouldn't be in Iraq.
You're concerned about our politicians time? Then why is abortion an issue? Will abortion destroy America or the world?
 

rabbit_72

Member
Originally Posted by MIKE22cha
Ok my "conscience" me that the war on terror is going to take a long time and if nothing is done about GW, then we won't have to be worried about terrorists. Honestly, I'm going to get flamed for saying this, if we were ever really conserned on terrorists, then we wouldn't be in Iraq.
You're concerned about our politicians time? Then why is abortion an issue? Will abortion destroy America or the world?
Never said I was concerned about our politicians time. Where did abortion come into this? That's a whole 'nother topic, and one surely to cause an uproar bigger than GW or terrorists.
I believe the original topic was the slanted, liberal views of the mainstream media. The media seems to steer clear of the issue of abortion. But the media has a field day with GW and terrorism and Iraq. IMHO, terrorism takes center stage at this point because of the very real danger. It has increased greatly since the 70's. We can all help in protecting the enviroment, each in our own homes, every single day. We can't do that with terrorism, now can we?
 

mike22cha

Active Member
Yes but we all can do our part, but America needs to start pressuring car companies to make safer cars for the enviroment, and America needs to start building their own windmills and solarpannels, etc. All our windmills or solarpannels, I forgot which one it was, is coming from Germany. Why can't we start building our own? It would create more jobs.
America is a country that was made to be a balanced government, and it should be no different now. If we put too much effort into the war on terror, then there won't be enough for GW, and vice versa.
We ourselves can make a difference, but not as much as our government can.
 

rabbit_72

Member
So, start writing your congressmen and women if this is an important issue for you. But please don't blast others because terrorism, or the lack of it, is important to them. There are many issues to solve here. Do what you can to support your ideas. That's how change happens. Go out there, write editorials, go to college and major in the enviroment or something similar and make these changes you believe in. Just remember, people who believe in terrorism obviously have no care for our world, like you do.
 

1journeyman

Active Member
Originally Posted by MIKE22cha
I've been thinking about this and my friend has a phd, but he's a doctor. Does that mean he know anything about global warming. I'm going to look it up in popular science journal articles and see what they say.
Excellent idea. Be sure to scrutinize the credentials of Al Gore, Moore, and the "global warming" crowd as well. I suspect you'll be surprised who wins the resume contest.
Originally Posted by MIKE22cha

Why do the Republicans try to not make global warming an issue? What could the best outcome be, we actualy get more energy sources and become less dependent on the oil companies? The worst outcome, there was actually global warming but we did our part and helped prevent it?
I don't see why the Republicans are so against it. Oh, wait. The oil companies have ties with the Republicans, and if we became less dependent on oil and they'll lose buisness. Wonder if that has anything to do with it
.
That's a Straw-Man argument. We're arguing over whether global warming is induced by man or not. It has nothing to do with party affiliation. It has to do with bad "science".
look at the classic DDT controversy. Rachel Carson's book "Silent Spring" helped lead to the world wide ban of DDT. She's touted has an environmental icon. Al Gore wrote the foreword to the reprinting of the paperback version. But guess what? Much of her "evidence" and work has been called into question. Meanwhile, over a million people die every year from mosquito born illnesses...
Bad science has consequences.
 

1journeyman

Active Member
Originally Posted by MIKE22cha
Yes but we all can do our part, but America needs to start pressuring car companies to make safer cars for the enviroment, and America needs to start building their own windmills and solarpannels, etc. All our windmills or solarpannels, I forgot which one it was, is coming from Germany. Why can't we start building our own? It would create more jobs.
America is a country that was made to be a balanced government, and it should be no different now. If we put too much effort into the war on terror, then there won't be enough for GW, and vice versa.
We ourselves can make a difference, but not as much as our government can.
We could turn Kansas into a giant windmill farm and not provide all of the energy needs for our country. We must go nuclear. Unfortunately the same folks who decry oil decry nuclear power...
"Balanced power" has nothing to do with focus... Can you imagine if FDR would have told Congress on Dec 8th, 1941 "Today is a day that will live in infamy... but don't lose sight on the economy. The depression is still a concern...".
 

rabbit_72

Member
Originally Posted by MIKE22cha
I've been thinking about this and my friend has a phd, but he's a doctor. Does that mean he know anything about global warming. I'm going to look it up in popular science journal articles and see what they say.
Why do the Republicans try to not make global warming an issue? What could the best outcome be, we actualy get more energy sources and become less dependent on the oil companies? The worst outcome, there was actually global warming but we did our part and helped prevent it?
I don't see why the Republicans are so against it. Oh, wait. The oil companies have ties with the Republicans, and if we became less dependent on oil and they'll lose buisness. Wonder if that has anything to do with it
.
It isn't the Republicans who are dependant on foriegn oil, We ALL are. My boss recently bought a Hummer and I just about laughed my arse off! I mean, gas prices are $3.39 a gallon here and those rich oil guys are laughing a people like him because the oil guys are making tons of money off us. I see Rublicans and Democrats, alike, driving all over the place, flying on planes and whatnot. Gimme a break on this. Stop making it about political parties. It is ALL of us making dumb choices everyday.
 

mike22cha

Active Member
I'm not saying wind is the only way, we do need a variety. I can't really write to my congressman or senator becuase unfortunately all are conservative republicans. In fact it was on of our past senators who said, "Global Warming is the best thing that has ever happened for America."
 

rabbit_72

Member
Originally Posted by MIKE22cha
I'm not saying wind is the only way, we do need a variety. I can't really write to my congressman or senator becuase unfortunately all are conservative republicans. In fact it was on of our past senators who said, "Global Warming is the best thing that has ever happened for America."
Perhaps they are the ones you should write to the most. If you don't think they share your views, then shouldn't you try to get them to see things as you do? BTW, I am sure they also care about the world as well, seeing as they want to be re-elected.
 

mike22cha

Active Member
Originally Posted by rabbit_72
It isn't the Republicans who are dependant on foriegn oil, We ALL are. My boss recently bought a Hummer and I just about laughed my arse off! I mean, gas prices are $3.39 a gallon here and those rich oil guys are laughing a people like him because the oil guys are making tons of money off us. I see Rublicans and Democrats, alike, driving all over the place, flying on planes and whatnot. Gimme a break on this. Stop making it about political parties. It is ALL of us making dumb choices everyday.
Yes we are all making dumb desicions. Both parties do make bad choices, but democrats though hypocrites, at least try to support the right desicion. Yes I have yet to see Al Gore ride a bike or hybrid to his next speaking, but at least he's putting the issue out there.
 

mike22cha

Active Member
Originally Posted by rabbit_72
Perhaps they are the ones you should write to the most. If you don't think they share your views, then shouldn't you try to get them to see things as you do? BTW, I am sure they also care about the world as well, seeing as they want to be re-elected.
True. That is why most of the issues are in office right now.
 

rabbit_72

Member
Originally Posted by MIKE22cha
Yes we are all making dumb desicions. Both parties do make bad choices, but democrats though hypocrites, at least try to support the right desicion. Yes I have yet to see Al Gore ride a bike or hybrid to his next speaking, but at least he's putting the issue out there.
If he doesn't practic what he preaches, no one will ever take him seriously.
 

1journeyman

Active Member
Originally Posted by MIKE22cha
I'm not saying wind is the only way, we do need a variety. I can't really write to my congressman or senator becuase unfortunately all are conservative republicans. In fact it was on of our past senators who said, "Global Warming is the best thing that has ever happened for America."
That is a possibility, of course... our planet has been on a cooling trend for many years. A warmer climate results in better crop yields and less heating oil usage.
 

1journeyman

Active Member
Originally Posted by MIKE22cha
... but democrats though hypocrites, at least try to support the right desicion. ...
If that is the case, then he is not "putting the issue out there" but rather trying to force you to change your lifestyle so that he can keep his.
Hypocrites make the worst spokesmen. Once you are outed as a hypocrite no one takes you seriously.
 

mike22cha

Active Member
Ok so if a new guy came in and practiced what he preached would you listen?
If what the predictions are on GW are true, then we're not on a little change in climate. The carbon rates are sky rocketing, and compared to the Medival Ice Age, the Ice Age's carbons are nothing. Also if it is true, global warming would stop the current in the Atlantic, which would send Europe and North America into an Ice Age. I don't see how that is going to help.
 

1journeyman

Active Member

Originally Posted by MIKE22cha
Ok so if a new guy came in and practiced what he preached would you listen?
If what the predictions are on GW are true, then we're not on a little change in climate. ....
Seriously read that peer reviewed report I linked.
it shows that in the 19 years where the highest greenhouse gases have occured, average temp. has actually declined.
Computer models have proven to be worthless for predicting climate change.
 
Top