Like a growing number of Christian leaders, Pope Benedict XVI is concerned about our stewardship of the Earth. At Christmas Mass, the pope spoke of our “ill-treated world†and “the abuse of energy and its selfish and reckless exploitation.†The Vatican also recently started purchasing carbon credits to offset its energy use.
Meanwhile, some conservatives, such as Brit Hume of Fox News, have claimed that the text of the pope’s World Day of Peace message, to be delivered Tuesday, shows that the pope is a global warming skeptic. Hardly. The pope appropriately warns against drawing hasty conclusions on how to find an ecological balance. But he also says that “prudence does not mean failing to accept responsibilities and postponing decisions†and that technologically advanced countries need to reassess their high level of energy consumption and “search for alternative sources of energy and for greater energy efficiency.â€
Posted by Kristin Mehler
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- BlueJay on Let immigrants run
- Monkeyhawk on Let immigrants run
- Chrisfrommactown on Let immigrants run
- BlueJay on Let immigrants run
- Monkeyhawk on Too many exemptions
- JWink on Too many exemptions
- LonnythePlumber on Jail consultants straining patience
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
165 Comments
The Vatican has released the text of the pope’s annual world peace day message, to be delivered January 1.
He writes: “Respecting the environment does not mean considering material or animal nature more important than man…. It is important for assessments in this regard to be carried out prudently, in dialogue with experts and people of wisdom, uninhibited by ideological pressure to draw hasty conclusions… it is essential to sense that the earth is our common home and… to choose the path of dialogue rather than the path of unilateral decisions.”
Al Gore and the Pope? Wow, cool this place off!
Pastor Steven Marsh at Eastminster Presbyterian Church advocates for strong government solutions to environmental stewardship. Perhaps that is what the Pope is wishing for as well. It’s not like the Catholic Church has no history of physically enforcing it’s viewpoint.
Blog monitor, watch this thread closely, it’s going to be crowded and long. I expect the usual bad players and lots of insults and name-calling.
The Pope and the Catholic Church just went on republican’s hit list.
“The Pope and the Catholic Church just went on republican’s hit list.”
Really? Why would that be?
Outlander,We all know it’s heresy to even consider that GW may be actually happening or that mankind may have a hand in it. It’s sure to piss republicans off.
Responsible stewardship of the planet is so anti-republican. Obviously the Pope is attacking conservative family values.
I’m thinking it’s pretty obvious that Al Gore paid the Pope off.
I have read the complete text of the pope’s World Day of Peace message.
Unlike Algore and his many butt-boys here on the BLOG, the pope cautions that we need to proceed cautiously. He encourages scientific debate!
No XXX, no fear from the religious-right-repblican here, I fully support the pope!
Please give us all a break. Mother earth (like it is a real mother, or maybe it is a real mother, to some of you) has been taking care of itself for millions of years before man set foot on terra ferma. This is just a subject that the usefull idiots can utilize their grey matter on and feel important. If it is such a great big deal, how come you people only talk about the problem and then do nothing about it. Set the example, live green. Don’t use cars, or turn your lights on, or use the commode. Walk, live in the dark, and use the outhouse. This is just another con job to set up a new round of taxes to extract money from the working class so all of the greenies can kick back, enjoy your cars, lights, and commodes (while probably enjoying a little gonja or blow). W2k fizzled out, and so will global warming. Besides, how come if global warming is the case, are the ice caps growing. Fuzzy science lives in fuzzy minds. Happy new year.
Hey Mehler, keep up the party line.
This is good news and in line with the general rising feeling among MOST Christians as to responsible stewardship of the Earth.
What’s this? Am I reading this blog right?
The libs are supporting Christians?
Why are we being constantly pounded by save the world scenario. Pope stick to saving souls.
The Eagle staff really needs to read things, completely, before they make claims that are not warranted:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=501316&in_page_id=1811&ito=1490
The Pope, like most people, feels the environment is important, but that people are MORE important.
The Pope urges the faithful not to fall into worship of the Earth.
The Pope condemns “Climate Change Prophets of Doom”The leader of more than a billion Roman Catholics suggested that fears over man-made emissions melting the ice caps and causing a wave of unprecedented disasters were nothing more than scare-mongering.
The German-born Pontiff said that while some concerns may be valid it was vital that the international community based its policies on science rather than the dogma of the environmentalist movement.”http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/worldnews.html?in_article_id=501316&in_page_id=1811&ito=1490
“
The Catholic Church is a religious AND a political body.
This is the Church “hedging its bets”
“In the spring, the Vatican hosted a conference on climate change that was welcomed by environmentalists.
But senior cardinals close to the Vatican have since expressed doubts about a movement which has been likened by critics to be just as dogmatic in its assumptions as any religion.
In October, the Australian Cardinal George Pell, the Archbishop of Sydney, caused an outcry when he noted that the atmospheric temperature of Mars had risen by 0.5 degrees celsius.
“The industrial-military complex up on Mars can’t be blamed for that,” he said in a criticism of Australian scientists who had claimed that carbon emissions would force temperatures on earth to rise by almost five degrees by 2070 unless drastic solutions were enforced.”—–And the Pope is warning AGAINST “unilateral actions” — funny, the same thing many of us in the “anti man-made GW” crowd have been saying for a long time now.
Hey Paul,
I agree whole heartedly!
The pope is squarely on the side of reason. A position that the GW prophets of doom must avoid like cock roaches hiding from the light!
“the pope spoke of our “ill-treated world” and “the abuse of energy and its selfish and reckless exploitation.”
Amen your holiness. Amen.
I am free to ignore the Pope when he does not speak “from the Throne of St. Peter” — when he does not CLAIM infalibility.
I do not need that option, with his holiness’s most recent statement.
I do lament that theology, in general, lacks any training in economics, whatsoever. Especially within my own faith.
However, do NOT be persuaded that, when religious people lament the division of wealth or resources, that those same religious people will support the use of force, to redistribute same.
It is a call for the individual to be more generous.
A call that the Church has always made.
The Catholic Church has always stood AGAINST socialism and AGAINST communism.
The State can not take the place of private charity.
“But he also says that “prudence does not mean failing to accept responsibilities and postponing decisions” and that technologically advanced countries need to reassess their high level of energy consumption and “search for alternative sources of energy and for greater energy efficiency.”
Apparently the pope IS versed in economics and responsible decision making thereto.
The greatest source of untapped energy is in the conservation of it. And what FOOL could be against innovation and efficiency?
What the Pope said:
The Vatican has released the text of the pope’s annual world peace day message, to be delivered January 1.
He writes: “Respecting the environment does not mean considering material or animal nature more important than man…. It is important for assessments in this regard to be carried out prudently, in dialogue with experts and people of wisdom, uninhibited by ideological pressure to draw hasty conclusions… it is essential to sense that the earth is our common home and… to choose the path of dialogue rather than the path of unilateral decisions.”
Path of dialogue rather than unilateral decisions.
A new concept to the GW Alarmists.
I will stop blogging forever.
Posted by: Kansas | December 24, 2007 at 07:20 PM
Note the Capn and his flame baiting shots that the Wichita Eagle is too cowardly to delete.
I said 1 January 2008.
But you know the Capn isn’t man enough to put his own name on the blog, even though he has put my name, my email and my address on the blog.
CapnAmerica has trolled, has had more than two dozen nics, yet somehow I am the problem on the blog?
yeah right…
CapnAmerica is all yours blog world, I don’t like to hang with cowards like CapnAmerica or those who support his tactics.
By the way:
Maybe we ought to open up ANWR, so we can sell that oil to Japan, provide US jobs and US tax revenue, and perhaps Japan won’t have to produce “flammable ice” :
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601086&sid=aiUsVKaqDA7g
Japan will do what is BEST for Japan.
The US should do the same!
The Catholic Church has always stood AGAINST socialism and AGAINST communism.
Posted by: econ101 | December 27, 2007 at 10:49 AM
While I would agree that the Catholic Church has a record attacking communism especially the last Pope(he spoke out against Capitalism also). Socialism I dont think the Church is at all hostile too, you’ll find that in Monasteries and Convents often live according to socialism too a benign form of communism. Dorthy Day was both a devout Catholic and a socialist who had been honored by the Church and is even in the process of being canonized also her Catholic Worker organization still exists
“…is important for assessments in this regard to be carried out prudently, in dialogue with experts and people of wisdom, uninhibited by ideological pressure to draw hasty conclusions…” (Papal speech)
That is Papaleze for peer reviewed scientists — without inhibitions of ideological pressure — ANTI GW flakes –
“In October, the Australian Cardinal George Pell, the Archbishop of Sydney, caused an outcry when he noted that the atmospheric temperature of Mars had risen by 0.5 degrees celsius.
“The industrial-military complex up on Mars can’t be blamed for that,” he said…”
Posted by: econ101 | December 27, 2007 at 10:13 AM
The Australian Cardinal is correct — The “industrial-military complex up on Mars” is NOT the cause.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-on-mars.htm
“So what’s causing Mars’ warming? According to Global warming and climate forcing by recent albedo changes on Mars (Fenton 2007), massive planet darkening storms have been observed over the last 30 years. These reduce the planet’s albedo (reflectivity) so the planet absorbs more of the sun’s energy – this has a warming effect.”
Tom”Subsidiarity” is a principle that has long been supported by the Catholic Church, as well as other Christian faiths:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsidiarity
Subsidiarity stands in direct contradiction to state-mandated socialism.
Now, convents and religious orders are a separate matter, entirely. Voluntary contracts or agreements or cooperatives are not the same as state-mandated socialism.
This seems to be about reducing carbon emissions.
‘Papal Message for ‘08 World Peace Day’http://www.zenit.org/article-21248?l=english#
“One area where there is a particular need to intensify dialogue between nations is that of the STEWARDSHIP OF THE EARTH’S ENERGY RESOURCES.
The technologically advanced countries are facing two pressing needs in this regard: on the one hand, to reassess the high levels of consumption due to the present model of development, and on the other hand to invest sufficient resources in the search for alternative sources of energy and for greater energy efficiency.”
“Unlike Algore and his many butt-boys here on the BLOG, the pope cautions that we need to proceed cautiously. He encourages scientific debate!”
Posted by: Hank | December 27, 2007 at 09:12 AM
Hank should mail the Pope the list of 400 compiled by Marc Morano.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Marc_Morano
http://www.desmogblog.com/400-prominent-scientists-dispute-global-warming-bunk
I’m sure the Pope will be swayed by some non-scientific non-peer reviewed “opinions”, some unqualified people, and out-of-context quotes from qualified NON-deniers. /sarcasm OFF
cosmosthe list of 400 contains not even one name that is not a higher authority than you, or any other WEBlogger, for that matter.
the list of 400 contains not even one name that is not a higher authority than you, or any other WEBlogger, for that matter.
Posted by: econ101 | December 27, 2007 at 04:14 PM
As Ben is not about just now and may not see that post and justifiably take issue with it, I hereby do so on his behalf.
“cosmosthe list of 400 contains not even one name that is not a higher authority than you, or any other WEBlogger, for that matter.”
This is not a reply. Cosmos has been representing the mainstream view of climate scientists on this blog, people who are also more qualified than “any other WEBlogger” (which, BTW, is not necessarily true of the 400). It is quite relevant what the ties and actual peer reviewed work done on climate science that scientists have done. Most of the opposition/denial of global warming comes from people who are ideologically committed to the argument of “government regulation of businesses/economy” invariably equals bad/socialism. It is a knee jerk political reaction, not actual skepticism.
econ101,
Anyone with a tiny bit of common sense has a “higher authority” and less bias than
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Richard_S._Courtney“Richard S. Courtney is a Technical Editor for CoalTrans International (journal of the international coal trading industry)…”
There are others in the “400″ who are like Courtney, and unqualified re climate science.
Some of the “400″ might be qualified, but offer only “opinions”, “essays”, etc, NOT peer-reviewed climate science.
And ironically, some of the “400″ actually state that humans ARE causing global warming — Marc Morano quotes them out-of-context, to make them look like “deniers”.
AgainThose who agree with you are “experts” —Those who do not agree with you are not “experts” —
This says more about you than it does about any of the supposed experts, on either side of the issue.
Again, for the record, many of us are willing to believe that some small amount of warming is occuring.
Even if man is responsible for any of that very small amount of warming, man’s impact on that warming is probably very, very small.
Regardless of the cause of any warming, we seriously doubt the ability of government to stop any such warming, without drastic, draconian measures.
As the FOX poll showed us, roughly 37% of the population either believes that NO warming is happening, or that man is not causing any such warming. Another few percentage points thinks warming is happening but has no opinion as to why.
Therefore, of the roughly 60% of the population that is willing to believe that many might be causing global warming, you must convince roughly 84% of THOSE people that your “cure” is not worse than the “disease” — and if you come off looking like “reefer madness” or “the end is near” street corner, aluminum foil hat doomsday nuts, you will not get your 83%.
You will get some of us to go along with tax credits for conservation.
Likewise, tax credits for alternatives.
NO! However, will be the answer to higher taxes, “carbon” or otherwise.
The majority will be with me on that.
This isn’t a matter of religion or morality or stewardship. It’s much simpler than that; either we take care of the earth or the earth will take care of us. The first thing we must do is limit and eventually decrease our numbers to less than half the current population. If we don’t nature will, and nature is less forgiving than we are. It may not stop at less than half and go for total extinction of the species.
By the way, the bias of the political activists is evident in the fact that they NEVER mention all the hedges and caveats, that the “scientists” place in their own “peer reviewed” studies.
Also, what makes you think that a college professor, with the “publish or perish” mandate on academics, and the liberal bias of just about every college campus, does not have even GREATER bias than the employee of any coal company?
YOUR bias is “pure” —MY bias is “corrupt”?
JedFrankly, you are a nut.You are exactly the kind of person that the Pope has warned us about.The Earth is here for US.The Earth is to serve the people.The people are NOT to serve the Earth.You sound like other crack pots before you, Thomas Malthus, for one, Margaret Sanger for another, Adolf Hitler, and his need for “living space” as another.
If calamity comes, so be it. It will come naturally. Do not play God and force population controls or economic growth numbers on us.
That is the way of the tyrant.
You feel YOU should decide who lives and dies, who reproduces and who does not?
No, not you.
No, not the government.
Pall,Your bias is attached to your holdings in Peabody Coal Co. and their next quarter’s earnings.
Pall,
the way to decide who reproduces is really quite simple; the RR, of which you are a part, is loudly against the sin of sex. All we need to do is help you live up to your own ideals.
JedYour bias is attached to your very obvious hatred of mankind.
“AgainThose who agree with you are “experts” —Those who do not agree with you are not “experts” — ”
Posted by: econ101 | December 27, 2007 at 07:23 PM
The experts are people like the authors listed in the Annex, and in the References at the end of the chapters at, http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/ar4-wg1.htm
All econ101 has is people like Courtney, and very non-scientific essays, op-eds, etc.
econ101 does not understand the difference between science, and the garbage from the deniers.
Most of the recent warming IS human-caused — it cannot be explained by solar activity, and/or other “natural” factors.
cosmosMOST?
Even your supposed experts are not in 100% agreement on that, are they?
Peer reviewed GW skeptics:
http://www.globalwarmingskeptics.info/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=520
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=f80a6386-802a-23ad-40c8-3c63dc2d02cb
http://pubs.acs.org/subscribe/journals/esthag-w/2005/aug/policy/pt_skeptics.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_global_warming_consensus
Your “peer review” is a joke:
“The fact is, that peer-review conducted by like-minded scientists who derive a living from flogging the global warming mantra, is a perfect setup for careless evaluation. Yet that is exactly what “peer-review” in the ecophobe realm is; like-minded insiders checking each other’s work. We know this to be true, because serious criticism leveled by skeptics is simply brushed off using personal attacks and politics.”
http://cjunk.blogspot.com/2007/08/real-peer-review.html
“nobody who disagrees with us is our peer, therefore, nobody who disagrees with us can do peer review of OUR work”!
econ101,
Your 2nd link in your 8:15 post, “Peer reviewed GW skeptics” is to Marc Morano’s list of “400″, which I posted about earlier,http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2007/12/a-duty-to-care.html#comment-95000350
Your Wiki link probably contains the same people as Morano’s “400″ list.
econ101 also does not under the peer review process.
econ101 has no debate skills, no logic, and no understanding of climate science.
And econ101, if you’re impressed by the phrase “IPCC expert(sic) reviewer”, all that’s required to become a “reviewer” is to ask to see the draft.
cosmos has no business on a blog as he has no tact nor good manners.
cosmosYou are a radical on this issue. A Zealot with no interest in hearing any opposing view.Those you list as experts have been criticized, in whole or in part, by many other scientists who are every bit as qualified.
It is YOU and the other members of your GW religion who refuse to even consider the questions and objections of the experts who oppose your faith.
Uh oh paulthecon is melting down again!
Oh I wanna play too.
“Blah bullcrap blah!! RANT! yackety schmackety! Blah!The majority will be with me on that.
Posted by: econ101 | December 27, 2007 at 07:23 PM
Yeah uh, you let us know when you start hearing their voices there paul.
“If calamity comes, so be it!”
Yeah I think this kinda disqualifies you from further debate on this or pretty much any issue there paul. Let’s just cross our fingers and HOPE for the best?
You should use quotes or some device to separate what I might have actually said, from the rather juvenile, classless and clueless stuff you added to what I actually said.
UH, clueless and classless juvenile, the “if calamity comes” comment was in response to someone who wants to DELIBERATELY reduce world population by 50%.That person obviously supports genocide, and is on par with Thomas Malthus, Margaret Sanger and Adolf Hitler.Are you in the same camp with the Eugenics movement?
You “chicken littles” are worried about what happens, if we do nothing.
I am FAR more worrieda about you fanatics, who want to kill off 50% of the world population, in order to “save” the planet.
You want to destroy the planet, in order to “save” the planet?
The Earth serves humanity, humanity does not, and will not, serve the Earth.
“If calamity comes, so be it!”
Yeah I think this kinda disqualifies you from further debate on this or pretty much any issue there paul. Let’s just cross our fingers and HOPE for the best?
Posted by: J R | December 27, 2007 at 09:07 PM
You should use quotes or some device to separate what I might have actually said, from the rather juvenile, classless and clueless stuff you added to what I actually said.
Posted by: econ101 | December 27, 2007 at 09:12 PM
Well looky there. Ol’ mean nasty picksonpaul DID use quotes.
Got any other whines?
Wait let me help you hit yourself some more first.
You want to destroy the planet, in order to “save” the planet?
The Earth serves humanity, humanity does not, and will not, serve the Earth.
Posted by: econ101 | December 27, 2007 at 09:18 PM
Uh huh. Please note clarity as to posting your exact words and punctuation.
Um…who here has said one word about destroying the Earth to save it? Well besides you I mean?
And the Earth serves humanity? Yup sure does. It is our only home. We can’t all move into your little imaginary world. SO we’d best protect the environment of the Earth that is well suited to us wouldn’t ya say? How’s about we TRY and keep it so suitable for those not yet born too?
Can I get an amen or do you have more quibbles?
“Um…who here has said one word about destroying the Earth to save it? Well besides you I mean?”
The above asked by our classless anti-social juvenile.
The answer, for those who can read better than a 5th grader:”The first thing we must do is limit and eventually decrease our numbers to less than half the current population. If we don’t nature will, and nature is less forgiving than we are. It may not stop at less than half and go for total extinction of the species.
Posted by: Jed | December 27, 2007 at 07:27 PM “—-Someone who wants to reduce world population by 50% wants to destroy the Earth. At the very least, they want to destroy 50% of the Earth’s actual value.
The Earth is worth nothing without people.
“You are a radical on this issue. A Zealot with no interest in hearing any opposing view.”
Posted by: econ101 | December 27, 2007 at 09:00 PM
econ101, your so-called “opposing views” are not credible science.
Your list of “400″ is proof of that. It offers essays, blogs, op-eds, etc, instead of science. It also quotes some credible scientists who believe that humans are causing global warming out-of-context, to falsely make them into “deniers”.
Credible science does not depend on deceptions from people like Marc Morano.
The “earth is nothing without people.”
And a half twist to equating the human population of the Earth with the Earth ITSELF?
You are taking extreme liberties with what Jed posted paulthecon. And Jed is more respected than you here. Of course, pretty much everyone is.
And you call me juvenile and another poster a nut?
“Someone who wants to reduce world population by 50% wants to destroy the Earth.”
They DO? How is it you make that stretch.
Paul you make it so easy, I should be ashamed of myself.
Amuse us all some more.
Hey Paul I have great fun “destroying” you.
Surely you should accuse me of plotting to destroy the Earth by association?
You have already destroyed yourself, as evidenced by your resume’ and your inability to make a rational point, other than projecting your hate.Cosmos is wrong.Thats ok.He manages to be productive and wrong.You?You are wrong and destructive.
Do you want me to hand you a larger shovel there paul?
Now you are looking to make cosmos an ally with you against me by calling him productive and wrong?
Yes, well good luck.
I have the psychological ability to debate without getting angry, and the ability to debate without dehumanizing my opponents.
Cosmos is no ally, he just does not fit, easily, into an obvious classification, under DSM IV — as some other Bloggers.
Pall,Your bias is attached to your holdings in Peabody Coal Co. and their next quarter’s earnings.
Posted by: Jed | December 27, 2007 at 07:32 PM
Which paulthecon answered with:
JedYour bias is attached to your very obvious hatred of mankind.
Posted by: econ101 | December 27, 2007 at 07:39 PM
Huh? No denial of paul’s tie to a fossil fuels company? Instead a rather nasty and baseless shot?
SsssssssssssBOOM wahhhhh!
The sound paulthecon makes when he explodes!
It has been a pleasure serving you up this evening paul.
“I have the psychological ability to debate without getting angry, and the ability to debate without dehumanizing my opponents.”
Uh huh. I can prove otherwise. You already did yourself just a bit ago.
“cosmos has no business on a blog as he has no tact nor good manners.”
Notice the post utterly lacking in tact, good manners, or anything other than a flame.
Re: KansasDNFTT
Al Gore is in this for his own profit:
http://cheatseekingmissiles.blogspot.com/2007/03/global-warming-burns-hole-in-al-gores.html
econ101,
econ101, if I’m “wrong”, then WHY does Marc Morano use deceptions in his list of “400″?
Morano incorrectly claims that scientists who believe that humans ARE causing global warming are deniers.
If I’m “wrong”, then why do I have credible, peer-reviewed science to support my opinions… and econ101 has nothing?
econ101,
Thank you for again proving my point, by making false attacks at Gore, instead of all the credible peer-reviewed scientists that Gore relies on.
uh huh.
Let me save anyone the trouble.
Paulthecon’s link is to….another blog!
Re: KansasDNFTT
Posted by: ksagnostic | December 27, 2007 at 11:08 PM
It will be a pleasure NOT missing ksassnostic when I depart this blog. :)
“It will be a pleasure NOT missing ksassnostic when I depart this blog. :)”Posted by: Kansas
That would be when…? :-)
guess
One wonders what form the troll will take in his next incarnation.
Interesting that Kansas is bugging out right as the WEBlog announces plans to re-vamp the format.
When he can’t get his way, he takes his ball and goes home.
Oops . . . I forgot.
JMKansas has no balls . . .
That would be when…? :-)
Posted by: Steven Davis | December 27, 2007 at 11:49 PM
guess
Posted by: Kansas
*****
Based on past experience of JM’s leaving “to go to Mississippi” and re-appearing as Kansas, I’m guessing “never.”
Interesting that I’m bugging out as I have obligations for the next year.
It’s probably killing the Capn that he isn’t clued in on my private life.
Keep the sad little blog Capn, it’s the only thing that keeps you going.
And that’s even sadder – the Capn can’t live without blogging.
Oh and Capn, I didn’t realize you were that short.
What did you wrestle in college?
Midget Class?
J R,
Of course econ101’s link is to another blog. All that econ101 has to support his false opinions re humans causing global warming is blogs, op-eds, etc.
econ101: “Al Gore is in this for his own profit.”
econ101, why did Gore donate his share of the $1.5 million Nobel Peace Prize to the non-profit group, Alliance for Climate Protection?
And econ101, why did Gore donate 100% of his profits from his AIT documentary and book, to trying to stop global warming?
What are you gassing about, Kansas?
I’m of average height and weight.
Average for what? The pygmy tribe?
Sorry, I think the word of JMKansas cannot be trutsted (note this one):
“Here is a New Year’s Resolution that all the Libs will enjoy.
“I will stop blogging forever.
“Primarily because I will be busy from obligations.
“That, and the Libs here on the blog will not be able to use me as a target.
“Nothing a Lib fears more than not knowing what the other side is up to.
“The unknown will absolutely kill them.”Posted by: Kansas | December 24, 2007 at 07:20 PM
hmmm….
Kansas–
I have no idea why you think you know how tall I am, and I’m not going to dignify your BS by asking you to clarify.
I would be short for the playing in the NBA, but relative to everybody else, I’m exactly average.
Looks like once again you don’t know what the hell you’re talking about.
Not terribly surprising.
Also, Kansas–
When you break your promise and don’t “stop blogging forever,” will you then admit that you are a liar?
I won’t be here to make such a statement Capn.
So, get over yourself, you’ll have to spew out your angst against something or someone else.
Looks like you are avoiding putting your height here on the blog, letting the public decide if you shortness is average or not.
I would say you are much below average. Even with lifts, you wouldn’t make average height.
StevenD., JR, and XXX all have met me.
Let them tell you, since you don’t believe me, apparently.
Re kansas,
Do not feed the obnoxious, lying, zero credibilty troll.
Oh, yeah, Chas too.
I’ve met you as well, Capn, and you didn’t strike me as either short or tall. “Average” I think is the word you used.
WTF is up with the troll? I go away for a little vacation, and he’s promising to leave at the New Year? Is this to be believed, or is it just another lie?
I’m not holding my breath.
Okay Capn, I understand why you are embarrassed to post your “average” height. heh
Oh, Oh, Kansas…
Sorry the man/JM [sic] doesn’t measure up in any real way…
He smells way too much…
Nite all.
Not very environmentally friendly with that SUV you drive Capn. Must be a real gas hog.
Are you stalking people again, Troll? Is this how you get your jollies?
Why should care Tom? Are you Capn’s momma?
Hey, thanks, Tom.
Yup, you are correct, sir.
I think the troll wants me to give my height for some bizarre reason.
Perhaps to start ferreting out personal information on me? Only the troll knows . . .
And only the troll cares.
Ciao, comrades.
Sleep well and wake up tomorrow determined to in some small way take our country back from the ruling junta . . . .
Why don’t you answer the question?
Or are you just a cowardly smear of subhuman sewer slime? Don’t bother answering this one – it’s rhetorical.
(chortles)
Hehehe, I also don’t have an SUV.
But keep shooting in the dark, TrollBoy.
You’re bound to get something right in the next three days . . . or not . . .
Okay, so it was a 4 wheel drive.
And unfortunately for you, not all four wheel drive vehicles are SUV’s, so once again you got nuthin’.
There’s all time 4 wheel drive, there’s on demand 4 wheel drive, and there’s as needed 4 wheel drive.
My vehicle is one of those.
Sad.
Just sad.
You’re right Capn, you would need a courtesy step to get into a SUV. What was I thinking? :)
Capn,
And then there are 2wd SUV’s. Don’t forget those.
What was I thinking? :)
Posted by: Kansas
That’s the problem, you aren’t thinking.
And yet . . . you post.
Hence the reason so many detest you.
Be sure and stick a flag in your belt for tomorrow Capn. You will be visible to cars then while you are walking in the snow.
At Christmas Mass, the pope spoke of our “ill-treated world” and “the abuse of energy and its selfish and reckless exploitation.”
Cosmos,
I think it should be obvious that today’s so-called “conservatives” listen to the Pope only when it suits their political, economic, or theocratic purposes.
“It will be a pleasure NOT missing ksassnostic when I depart this blog. :)”
Childish punnish insult.
Re: KansasDNFTT
Here is a conference that some of you greens should try to attend:
http://www.heartland.org/NewYork08/newyork08.cfm
Al Gore will NOT debate:
http://www.globalwarmingheartland.org/Assets/Images/NYTHeartland10.30.pdf
A French scientist calls Al Gore a “crook”:http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601088&sid=aVvwX1RTVGr8&refer=muse
econ101,
Claude Allegre? Ouch, econ101 better put some ice on that!
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/11/les-chevaliers-de-lordre-de-la-terre-plate-part-i-allgre-and-courtillot/
econ101,
Do you actually believe that science is done by “debating”?
Science is “debated” via the peer-review process. Science is about the science, not the scientists.
Climate science has been done since the 1800’s,http://www.aip.org/history/climate/timeline.htm
And Heartland is a “free-market” think(sic) tank that does not do any climate science. http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Heartland_Institute
The IPCC administration is just that , a bunch of administrators that doesn’t do any climate science – yet cosmos keeps referring to them.
I peer reviewed Kansas and found his posted debunking of man-made global warming to be sound science.
The debate on this issue should now end.
Now we can focus on preparing for how to deal with naturally recurring climate cycles.
Efforts made in any other direction should be outlawed and any law-breakers should be hung out to dry in the scalding hot sun.
‘Annexes: (1)Glossary, (2)AUTHORS, (3)Reviewers, (4)Acronyms’http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg1/ar4-wg1-annexes.pdf
See also the “References” at the end of each chapter.http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/ar4-wg1.htm
disney.go.com/characters/mickey/index.html
disney.go.com/vault/archives/characterstandard/mickey/mickey.html
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mickey_Mouse
atv.disney.go.com/playhouse/mmch/index.html
http://www.mickey-mouse.com/
The deniers and foot draggers as to to global warming are growing more and more desperate.
desperate?
Things are going our way.
Time is on our side.
Man will NOT reduce carbon use.
The world will not end.
And, the GW crowd will end up looking like the “flat Earth society”.
“Man will NOT reduce carbon use.”
Uh yeah fossil fuels agent paulthecon.
We already ARE.
The Holcomb coal fired power plant? In your face shill.
“Time is on our side.”
Is it? Do you mean Americans will gladly do along with the permanent occupation of Iraq?
Paulthecon you should read more than actuarial tables and bottom lines. You are way outta touch.
“The world will not end.”
Huh? I thought upthread you were saying that Jed and me and everyone concerned with protecting the environment was destroying the Earth!
A drop in the Ocean.A meaningless symbolic measure.Symbolizing only the stupidity of the GW crowd.Something for future generations to laugh about.
The world will use more carbon, every year, than the year before, for the next several decades.
The world will not end.
The GW crowd will look ridiculous.
Jed wants to kill off half of the world population.He must.There is no other way to reduce the worlds human population by 50%.Apparently, there are others, upthread, who agree with Jed.
Kansas will burn more coal, this year, than the year before.This will continue for decades.
The USA will burn more coal, this year, than the year before. We will continue to increase our use of coal every year.
The world will burn more coal, each and every year, than the year before, continuing way past our lifetimes.
Argue with the U.S. Government:
http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/ieo/coal.html
Coal use will increase every year.
Is this your big melt down paul?
Geez after more than a year of having me hand you your butt all you can do is offer me bigger helpings?
“The world will use more carbon, every year, than the year before, for the next several decades.”
This delusion seems to fill you with glee!
Um…why?
Because you are and have been a trader and stock holder in fossil fuels?
Americans are DYING in Iraq not for but BECAUSE of people like you paul.
Go on melt down some more and then I have an offer for you. You trade in things. See if you can get me interested.
LOLMelting?You seem to find “heat” or “warming” just about everywhere, especially if it does not exist!
I just proved to you, with a link to a US Government website, that the US Government agrees with me: World coal use will increase until atleast the year 2030!
I am living in the REAL world.
You are not.
The rest of the world deals with the life and death issues of feeding their starving people, keeping their people warm in the winter, and transporting food and medicine.
The touchy-feely green movement speaks of future hazards, if we believe your gloom and doom.
Most of the world does not have the luxury to worry about hypothetical, futuristic problems. They are dealing with life today, or death, tomorrow, if they don’t use coal and other carbon based fuels.
It is really that simple.
The world is not willing to let people die, today, for your future, bogus, climate “goals”.
By the way, I work hard and am smarter than the “average bear”.
If I thought there was an energy alternative out there, that could take the place of oil and coal, I would be buying into it. I would be selling it to other people. I would be trying to get rich on it, myself.
There few HONEST ways to make money in the green movement right now, only the scams of the Enron-executive-created “carbon credits” and, perhaps, selling windmills or solar panels.
Tax credits might help somewhat, in getting those industries off the ground. Economically, they can’t make it on their own just yet.
Caulk, weather stripping, foam and fiber glass insulation, these things have been around for years.
Not nearly as “sexy” as your alternatives might be.
However, I am guessing that insulation products will save more energy, over the next decade, than any new or alternative energy source will produce.
Now you don’t want me to go dig up posts of yours as to veto of SCHIPS, the denial of insurance claims for a dying young woman, etc etc etc do ya paul?
YOU as compassionate?
Yeah you never met a profit margin ya didn’t love.
Maybe you sell insurance real good. Here ya don’t sell so well.
This isn’t a matter of religion or morality or stewardship. It’s much simpler than that; either we take care of the earth or the earth will take care of us. The first thing we must do is limit and eventually decrease our numbers to less than half the current population. If we don’t nature will, and nature is less forgiving than we are. It may not stop at less than half and go for total extinction of the species.
Posted by: Jed | December 27, 2007 at 07:27 PM
Advocating a holocaust? Who decides who lives and who dies?
Sick people are on this blog.
Another new energy source happens to be carbon based. Japan will use Methane Hydrate:
http://www.jdc.co.jp/methanehydrates.html
https://www.llnl.gov/str/Durham.html
http://www.mh21japan.gr.jp/english/index.html
“World coal use will increase until atleast the year 2030!”
Again with the cheerful punctuation.
Telling.
What stake do YOU have in fossil fuels that makes you so happy that what you THINK will happen will be reality there Paul?
You make your fortune polluting the planet?
MY motives and interests are not inside my wallet or portfolio.
Max as usual you do not know what you are posting about.
Take my advice and stay out of it.
You DON’T want paulthecon for a friend.
Here is a better link for Japan’s new (Carbon) energy source:
https://www.llnl.gov/str/Durham.html
JR, this has nothing to do with Paul.
I’d like to see Jed clarify his statement.
How will Jed reduce the human population from 6 billion to 3 billion?
JR, you defending Jed on this?
“I just proved to you, with a link to a US Government website, that the US Government agrees with me: World coal use will increase until atleast the year 2030!
I am living in the REAL world.
You are not.”
Posted by: econ101 | December 28, 2007 at 11:17 PM
econ101, do have any idea how OFTEN the DOE has wrongly forecast future energy use?
Enjoy your free-market, think(sic) tank generated fantasies, econ101.
http://www.desmogblog.com/bureaucrats-clutterripple-clean-coal-push
“At least eight clean coal plants, more than a third of those on the drawing board, have been canceled, delayed or rejected by regulators this year. Developers cite soaring construction costs, technology hurdles and uncertainty about regulation of greenhouse gases.”
Your motives are in your hatred for those who have done better than you.Your motives are in a sick, twisted envy.If you knew for sure that the Earth would be just fine, if you knew for sure that GW was a cruel hoax, you would still support restrictions on our freedoms, restrictions on our use of energy, and more taxes on our energy use.Why?Because you hate success.Because you hate industry.Because you hate profit.Because YOU are miserable and WE must all share in your misery.
Jed is not here.
Unlike paul, I do not talk about posters who are not about.
I also do not post outright lies.
Hey Max?
Ask “econ” better known and before you got here as Paul to show you the email he says he has from a girlfriend I don’t have. Apparently this person unknown to me asked Paul to be nice to me so I would not beat her up.
Now maybe he has invented something in the meantime. But when he posted THAT lie more than 2 months ago he had no proof because there isn’t any.
We can disagree Max. But I don’t lie. And Paul is here for himself and nothing else.
CosmosAt least 8 coal plants were completed, in China and India, since Thanksgiving.
You greens are outsourcing our industry to China, by keeping our energy costs too high!
See this is a theme with you Paul.
You project. Except for when you lied on me, I have never been angry or ranting with you. I DO speculate as to you.
Maybe you ARE miserable. Probably you should be. I would be if I had done the things you have.
I don’t hate profit. I just would like to see it a little better shared than with sellouts like yourself.
Get angrier Paul. You’ve shown that you can.
Monologue some more Paul.
Yep I hate you. But I beat you everytime we meet and that is good enough for me.
You hate me and it only grows every time I hand you yourself on a mirror.
“You greens are outsourcing our industry to China, by keeping our energy costs too high!”
Posted by: econ101 | December 28, 2007 at 11:47 PM
econ101, so you STILL have not figured out that it’s CHEAPER to increase energy efficiency, than to build new, very EXPENSIVE power plants?
Is that because you’re closely tied to the fossil-fuel industry? Or because you’re just plain, ahh, duhh, STUPID!???
The wiser utilities are investing in higher energy efficiency, and renewable sources.
Everything I have posted on this Blog is true, to the best of my knowledge and ability.
What the Juvenile Rogue poster is upset about is that I beat him at his own game, and I did so while telling the absolute truth.
He has lied about the emails he sent to me, at first claiming that he had not sent any at all.I then proved that he had.
Someone DID send me an email, asking me to play nice with him.
I never claimed that “she” claimed abuse.
I would imagine, based on the Juvenile’s posts, here, that might be possible, but I never said it. He said it about himself!
Also, I did say, previously, that I had no proof as to who the “defender” was, for sure. I was wrong to take “her” word for it.
It might even be the Juvenile, himself. He is know to Troll, frequently.
He has called me several names, and made several insults against me. None of them true.
He is a hypocrite, a liar, and a hateful blogger.
That is why I refuse to use his name.
(Though I certainly have his real name, on several of his threatening emails, that he sent to me.)
I do not get paid to post here.
He claims that I do.
I am not a “scab” — having never, even once, crossed a picket line.He claims that I am a scab.
I am not a “chicken hawk” as he claims.I served in the Marines under Jimmy Carter.
I was not “medically discharged” as he claims.I was honorably discharged.
I am not “guilty of child endangerment” as he claims.I have never even been charged with such a crime.I have NO criminal record at all.In a civil suit, brought by George Tiller, I won my case in the 10th Circuit Court, The United States Supreme Court stated no such case ever should have happened, I was given a new trial, and at the new Trial, I did not even have to appear, the new Judge dismissed the case!Even so, the Juvenile poster says I am guilty of some unknown, uncharged “crime” — when I won the case in question and there was NEVER a criminal case against me at all.
I might add, Tiller’s own attorney sent a written motion, to the Court, saying there was never any criminal charge against me, in the matter!
This is stupid stuff.
I want to talk about issues.
We have another Blogger, however, who stated, on this Blog, and in hatefull emails to me, that he wants me to stop contributing.
He never contributes anything of any weight, he never has any facts, just attack dog tactics, every single time he posts.—-Eleanor Roosevelt: “Great minds talk about ideas, average minds talk about events, small minds talk about people.”—-We have very ample evidence of a very small mind, who always resorts to personal attacks and always reduces the level of debate, on this Blog, to a bully in a sandbox.
I renew my offer of a truce, to the Juvenile, and everyone else;
No personal attacks.Stick to issues.Avoid personalities or assignment of motives.
The Juvenile rejected the truce offer, last time.
Apparently, he thinks he can say whatever he wants, and lie whenevery he wants.
But, he will cry whenever challenged, whenever called on his outrageous behaviour.
Just like the school yard bully that he is.
Anyway, enough.
Sorry Bloggers, I have done my best to spare all of you, and myself, this boring, recurring spat.
AndI dont hate anyone.That IS a waste of energy.
Ok I made this offer before.
Now I say that econ aka paul is a at the least a shill and maybe a paid poster for fossil fuels. Well that is just me. Ok lots of other posters think so too.
In any case.
I said I have an offer for econ. I do.
Paul aka econ?
Here is my offer to you.
We pay lip service to causes here. I have mine you have yours.
But as many readers as we have, it is still just a voice each of us has to a cause.
Here is the deal. I think global warming is real and I think man’s activity has some role in it. Too, I see no negative in getting away from fossil fuels.
You are a trader yes? Here is my offer.
You will not post again ever as relates to fossil fuels or global warming.
In exchange, I offer you choice of any three issues of your choosing and I will never again post as to them.
1 for 3 is more than fair is my take as to exchange in ideology. What say ya paul? Are ya deeper than your wallet?
You are about to show the whole blog and all our readers.
econ101,
So… is that because you’re closely tied to the fossil-fuel industry?
Or…???
Posts crossed.
My offer stands paulthecon.
Oh and anything you have or can invent on me feel free to post here.
I am content in your lack of evidence AND imagination.
That last of yours? Back it up.
Let’s do dueling bonedigs even.
You’re negotiating from the point of having beaten yourself.
Heh.
I THINK I have been fighting this clown paul for a long time.
Ok go ahead paul. Post my name.
“Apparently, he thinks he can say whatever he wants, and lie whenevery he wants.”
That’s SOME of what paulthecon ranted.
Catch me in a lie paul. I don’t do that now or “whenevery”.
JR Rimel
Saturday, October 07, 2006 12:34 AMwho is paying you
Mr.Rosell
Who is sponsoring you to post on the WEblog?
From the tips of your fingers…..to the depths of a distant soul…..words touch hearts
type carefullyJ
——–One of several emails sent by the Juvenile, over several months, before he quit blogging for awhile.I deleted most of his trash.However, he did tell me that it was his goal to run me off, and that I “wouldn’t last long”.
Come on, libs, what would you think of a Conservative who did this to a liberal?
I take it you don’t have the fortitude or are otherwise motivated not to accept the deal I offerred you then Paul F Rosell?
Ok.
Oh and why don’t you get REAL creative and fake the email you SAID you had from someone else about me?
Bring it boy. I’ve dealt with your sort before.
Running off posters?
How many good posters did “kansas” and his many nics drive away?
Nope it is just you I want paul.
You are the most irredeemable poster I have ever encountered.
And, NOThe 1st Amendment makes no qualification as to issues covered or not covered.
Your “offer” looks rather small, compared to that document.
I will post whenever I want, about whatever I want.
And I will continue to ask that your more outrageous posts to be deleted. Especially those in which you threatened to attack my family. I do not believe that the Eagle has deleted any of my postings.
The Juvenile can not make the same claim.—–Eleanor Roosevelt: “Great minds talk about ideas, average minds talk about events, small minds talk about people.”
Oh and the last time you pulled this stunt you set “kansas” off threatening a “JR Rimmel”.
You might want to be certain about names you post here.
I am.
More lies?
Go get or create where I ever threatened to attack your family.
I feel sorry enough for them as it is.
You offered your version of a peace treaty.
I gave you mine.
You don’t get to dictate terms anymore than I do.
Kansas is Kansas.
I feel no obligation to defend or criticize him.
If Kansas has done any “wrong” —does that excuse you, to trash and disrespect others, in revenge?
You are a Zealot, one who thinks that EVERYTHING done, in support of your twisted “cause” is justified.
You have admitted your hatred.
I have stated, honestly, that I hate noone, not even you.
Actually, I pity you.
Grow up. Deal with the fact that a majority of Americans often disagrees with your view of the world.
Deal with the fact that you can not shut us up.
Deal with the fact that this is not your Blog, or your world, and that rules of civility dictate that you improve your behavior.
Stick to issues.
You only tell us how small you are, when you make personal attacks.
Actually, back when the Eagle didnt cover up email addresses, the email address I got, JBird, on the email, matched your email on the Blog.
Beyond that, one email I received said EXACTLY the same thing as your one of your Blog posts, soon thereafter.
Also, I have told you, for months, that I kept a few of your emails.
You at first denied that you sent any at all. Then, you said you might have sent a few, after I posted one.
This is the first time that you have denied that you actually sent a specific email.
This is a petty fight, JR.
Can you not win on the issues?
Is it not possible for you to make a valid point, based on facts?
Eleanor Roosevelt: “Great minds talk about ideas, average minds talk about events, small minds talk about people.”
Whatever paulie.
I’ll put my reputation on this forum up against yours any day.
And I do almost every day.
And every TIME I reduce you to the snivelling little liar you are.
Yeah I asked who was paying you.
I aint the only one wonders.
I also told you I would do my best to show you for what you were.
And I just did. Again.
Like ya say. You’ve had months and months. You SAID you had an email from my girlfriend ( I didn’t have one at the time) saying that I was a drug and alcohol abuser. You also implied that you got the impression that this fictional female was afraid of me. Or you making me mad.
Why not admit it was a lie in a moment when I had your back to the wall? You were probably drinking and I had you wound up like always. You went too far.
Just admit it.
“I peer reviewed Kansas and found his posted debunking of man-made global warming to be sound science.
“The debate on this issue should now end.”
So says Mr. Free Enterprise the socialists are coming alarmist. Max, you have no credibility on this issue for the simple reason that you are a knee jerk conservative on issues like government regulation and “socialism” who honestly appears to be of the demented opinion that wealth redistribution is the most critical issue facing this country. Global warming has to be hooey because it must be a tool of those who want a strong central government to get into our business.
There seems to be some major confusion here.
Peer reviewed science is research that has been submitted to journals refereed by people in the same field. It is not easy, and some journals are harder to get into than others. The IPCC is a panel that does not conduct research except to do a meta-review of peer revied science related to climate. This means that they have reviewed literally hundreds of studies by a variety of scientists researching a variety of factors relating to climate. These studies were NOT conducted by environmentalist shills (many of them are international and do not have the free market verses regulation obsessions that characterize American politics, and frankly they probably give a rat’s ass about those obsessions. The meta-analysis is what came out of the IPCC, and it is compelling. It is a compilation of peer reviewed research. And for the fools who think that the IPCC is a “tool” for the UN to get into our bidness, understand this. The UN is a group of nations. The pressure from UN member nations on the IPCC has been universally to UNDERSTATE their conclusions.
Peer reviewed scientists are people who have published peer reviewed research, but when they state their personal opinions on a political issue they do not have the same credibility as actual peer reviewed research. Scientists are human beings. When a scientist comes out and makes positive statements about a politicized issue, it always pays to see a) who they are affiliated with the statement and b)have they been politically active in any other issue. This goes to the heart of what cosmos does when he he shows the political affiliations of “global warming skeptics”. Someone should rightly be immediately suspicious when someone sponsored by a group like the Heartland Institute makes a statement, because their stand on an issue is predictable.
The tragedy here is that the conservative movement in the US has been hijacked by two groups of people (one of whom it must be admitted has always been a part of the conservative movement), the anarcho-capitalists and the christian rightists. However, even christian rightists are hardly of one mind when it comes to global warming, and there has been, in the past, a real history of environmental stewardship and activism on the part of the REPUBLICAN party. However, lately the idea of government regulation for environmental quality or to head off predictable problems has been seen in the same light as “wealth redistribution” and “socialism”. It is seen as a “liberal” trojan horse.
That view, ladies and gents, is, to put it absolutely bluntly but accurately, stupid. Regardless of what methods are used to address the issue of global warming and where they come from, the science from multiple lines of evidence is providing overwhelming evidence that:
1) Global warming is happening.
2) More recent research in this decade is definitively pointing in the direction that anthropogenically generated CO2 and other gases, plus deforestation, are contributing to global warming.
This research is not ideologically driven, it comes from multiple international sources.
On the other hand, most of the “deniers” can be traced back to very partisan think tanks.
Here is the review. Note the truly international list of contributers. Note the citations.
Paul, Hank, and the rest of you, finding a guy who argues against global warming is not a peer reviewed scientific reply, even if it comes from a “peer reviewed” scientist. When cosmos identifies their political affiliations, which are relevant, that is not an ad hominum. Cosmos’ personal qualifications are not relevant to the accuracy of his information.
Enough with the bullsh*t.
Forgot the link:
http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/ar4-wg1.htm
JRWhat I said was true.History:You told ME that I was some kind of coward, since I did not post on every thread.I then noticed that YOU rarely posted on the substance abuse threads.I then got a very harsh, rather weird email, from someone telling me to be nice to you. As I told you, before, I got a “virus” warning while reading that email and I deleted it. I can’t be sure where the virus came from, or if it was even in that email, but it popped up as I was reading that email.No, I have no way of knowing if this person was even who “she” said she was. It could have been from you, it could have been anyone.I NEVER said that this person claimed you were an abuser.I did say that I was not about to reveal any names or email addresses to you, for “her” own safety.
Nothing I have done even remotely compares to what you have done.
You have gone so low as to ask who is paying the health insurance for my children, and gone into family matters and asked the Blog about my address.
You are obsessed.
Again, lets stick to issues.
You have never “destroyed” me, and you never will.
If I were to make a list of my 10 biggest goals or issues in life, this Blog would not be on that list. No more than taking a walk or reading the paper or playing a game, for fun.
DSM IV lists a few catagories for people who have an inflated sense of self-importance, in the lives of other people. Intrusiveness also seems to fit. That, and a lack of “reciprocity” — meaning that you do not have the ability to “bargain in good faith” and see no reason to follow the “golden rule” since you, somehow, are “special”.
It is called “grandiosity” and it is found in many disorders, a few in particular.
I am far more humble.
Gratified when the public supports my views.
Unswayed when I am a minority of one.
When the world does not agree with me, I fault myself for not explaining my views better.
Try that approach, would you?
AndI even used your nic, this time.By mistake.I will try not to do so, again.
Here are the type of organizations econ101 relies on for his science(sic).
‘Prominent Skeptics Organizations’http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science/skeptic-organizations.html
Paulthecon?
You would use ANYTHING you THOUGHT you had or thought you could invent on me.
You’ve already proved it and several times. What is regrettable is that in your zeal, innocent people may suffer because of your paranoia and wish to get back at me.
Know I can and will use anything I have or can find on you. But I do so more responsibly.
I can stand by any post I have ever made here.
Have at it and post anything. You aren’t even a creative liar.
To take the readership on a tour of your past false accusations, free interpretations and outright lies and those just about me would take all the time I have to post. And the record is already available in the archives for anyone who wants to look.
To take you to task for ALL of your blather? I try to keep up. But an exposition of the past in that would become a full time job.
Again, I’ll let the record stand.
Oh and just as an aside. I can find something respectable in every single poster that does or pretty much ever has posted on this forum.
You are the exception. And I will treat you accordingly.
LOLYah right.I got to you. I got to you by not backing down.I get compliments from lots of people, frequently, on this Blog. The same people that you just tried to claim, for yourself.However, I am not here to win a popularity contest.I know, full well, that I do not always have majority support of the other posters. That is not my goal in life. I stopped seeking approval soon after I learned how to walk.I am rather sure that most of the other posters wish that YOU would grow up, and stick to the issues. I also know they would prefer that I just ignore you, when you try your best to bait me and attack me.
Everything I have ever posted here is true, to the best of my knowledge and ability.
Absolutely everything that I have posted, concerning you, is true.
Projecting as well as “reverse projecting” are also part of your personality type.
Grandiosity.Paranoia.Problems with reciprocity.Intrusive behavior.Controlling behavior.Difficulty with apologies.
I am not the least bit paranoid about you, though you claim that I am. It bugs me that you asked the Blog, once, to help you figure out my living address.
It also bugs me that you wanted to know personal details about my family.
Some of your out of control, out of line posts, about me, have even been deleted by the Eagle.
I have been in the public eye, before. I learned then that nobody who makes a difference, in this world will be universally loved.
It is enough, for me, that I am proud of my own efforts, and that I know I deserve some respect, for those efforts.
You hate me not for whatever imagined or contrived things I might have “done” to you. Instead, you hate me for what I believe, and you can not admit that, to yourself. You also can not bear the idea that my views are widely held, even in the majority, at times. Your ego does not allow you to believe that you could ever be wrong, or that the world might disagree with the great and powerful person that you think you are. Therefore, it is easier for your psche to focus all of your anger at me. Even if I can point to another Blogger who has agreed with me, on every point I make, it doesnt matter. You can not deal with issues. Convince yourself that I am, therefore, the only person that disagrees with you on some of your kooky ideas, and all is well in your twisted mind.
You are the one that wants to put land mines on the Mexican border.
You are the one that wants to eliminate the current state of Israel.
You are the one that wants to legalize prostition as a way to “better” life for women.
Sure, you can find a few other people that agree with you on those things. None of them will ever win an election if they say it in public, however!
It is ok to have wild, crazy ideas. I did not tell you that you had no right to spout them. I did not tell you to quit Blogging. I did not tell you that you would not last long, with the views that you hold. I did not ask who was “paying” you, to post your anti-Israel tripe.
I told you, then and now, that I disagree strongly with your views. I never tried to deny you the right to speak those views, as you have with me. (Of course, I will continue to request that references that you make, to my family, be deleted.)
I learned how to deal with bullies back in grade school.
You have told me, directly, to quit posting. You have told me, repeatedly, that I “will not last long”.
I am still here.
Throw some more sand, you unstable crybaby.
It is not your sandbox!
I will go back to ignoring you.
Eleanor Roosevelt: “Great minds talk about ideas, average minds talk about events, small minds talk about people.”
CosmosThe Union of Concerned Scientists is a very leftist front group.They always have been.They have never been an unbiased source on anything.Yes, I post what I want, you can post and link what you want.But dont expect me to take the UCS seriously.