Can your job really be at risk if you don’t buy into the junk science of anthropogenic global warming? Well, that certainly seems to be the case in Oregon.
As reported by the Beaver State’s KGW.com (h/t Drudge):
In the face of evidence agreed upon by hundreds of climate scientists, George Taylor holds firm. He does not believe human activities are the main cause of global climate change.
Like a George Romero movie, the article eerily continued:
Taylor has held the title of "state climatologist" since 1991 when the legislature created a state climate office at OSU The university created the job title, not the state.
His opinions conflict not only with many other scientists, but with the state of Oregon's policies.
So the governor wants to take that title from Taylor and make it a position that he would appoint.
Imagine that. But it gets worse:
In an exclusive interview with KGW-TV, Governor Ted Kulongoski confirmed he wants to take that title from Taylor. The governor said Taylor's contradictions interfere with the state's stated goals to reduce greenhouse gases, the accepted cause of global warming in the eyes of a vast majority of scientists.
Suddenly, “An Inconvenient Truth” is becoming seriously inconvenient to those who don’t believe it. Isn’t the Party on the left marketed as the big tent of tolerance?
What’s wrong with this picture?
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
This doesn't surprise me. It
February 7, 2007 - 03:47 ET by rbosqueThis doesn't surprise me. It is the left that practices "McCarthyism" as they accuse others of it. This is typical liberal hypocracy. Again, through media brain-washing, the left has managed to sway the population's beliefs. Now the truth is reduced to a concenus, and our liberties are rapidly vanishing.
Taylor? This is the governor.
February 7, 2007 - 07:58 ET by Mica the MagnificentTaylor? This is the governor. You're fired! Good night and good luck.
We believe in free speech, as long as it's liberal free speech. - - old liberal college proverb
These same alarmists, who w
February 7, 2007 - 09:48 ET by DontFeedTheTrollsThese same alarmists, who will shout 'Silence!' at any who differ with them, scream that the current administration is taking away their rights. They are insane with a lust for power.
DSG
Want your elected reps to know what you think? Go to http://www.congress.org/congressorg/home/, it's real easy.
We can log this one in right
February 7, 2007 - 03:48 ET by The Right StuffWe can log this one in right beside those staunch defenders of freedom of speech at Columbia University. The left's new motto: "We love open debate, but it depends on your definition of open."
WOW
February 7, 2007 - 04:33 ET by mostlymoderateWow! We're living in the old U.S.S.R!!!
You're not too far off. Jus
February 7, 2007 - 10:58 ET by steviep831You're not too far off. Just take a look at drudgereport headlines today:
1. Ban on walking while talking, listening to ipod. (2 people died, so let's make a new law)
2. Man sued for downloading 5 songs.
3. Proposal to launch ecological crime laws. (it may be a crime to drive an SUV?)
4. Senator to propse surveillance of illegal images on the internet (where would it end?)
And of course recently; NYC bans transfat... now it's come out that the alternatives are worse.
The list of the most hairbrained ideas running around our country as of late goes on and on. We need less gov't intrusion in our lives, not more....
and don't forget:
February 7, 2007 - 12:01 ET by winston smithand don't forget:
decertification for those who do not conform to the new GW consensus.
harsh consequences for those who would racially profile suspected terrorists.
extreme smoking bans.
forced universal screening for HIV (under serious consideration)
"hate crimes"
judges upending the will of the people on gay marriage bans.
oh, and state issued drivers licenses for illegal aliens.
This must be the dawn of the
February 7, 2007 - 12:04 ET by RunningBeerThis must be the dawn of the Global Warming Inquisition. Maybe they'll start beheading any meteorologists if they refuse to convert. But not until after they've tried the purification by fire method, of course.
I agree with everything excep
February 7, 2007 - 22:28 ET by liberal_bug_zapperI agree with everything except for the "Man sued for downloading 5 songs" bit. I think he should be prosecuted as a criminal and fined. Downloading songs without paying for them is stealing. Stealing is wrong.
Walking across the street while listening to an iPod is a personal choice... if you get hit by a car, who's fault is it? Here in Taiwan... it's always the drivers fault except in very rare cases. But because Taiwan isn't a sue happy society, this works quite well.
The ban on transfat ban is stupid and should be ignored and fines should be refused and guns brought to bear when idiots try and shut you down by force... it's time to fight.
____________________________________________________
"These are the times that try men's souls." ~ Thomas Paine
Science is dogma (and therefore dead) in OR
February 7, 2007 - 05:09 ET by UnsaneFire him? Why not violently beat him before an audience (and cameras) until he recants, and then denounces himself, science, and so on? Why not follow that by a long session in a stock in a public square where the people can pelt him with whatever they wish with impunity?
It is clear that science is dead in OR. But then, it is clear that the governor of OR has a passionate hatred of science.
"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???." - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)
Apparently, "I believe i
February 7, 2007 - 07:20 ET by richflanjApparently, "I believe in Global Warming" is the new "Seig Heil". We should soon see all of the "environmentalists" running around in brown shirts, trying to round up all of the people who disagree with them, taking them to "re-education" camps. I'm picturing Al Gore wearing the little moustache.....
"The right to be heard does not automatically include the right to be taken seriously." --Hubert Humphrey
Let me just say that the le
February 7, 2007 - 07:57 ET by liberal_bug_zapperLet me just say that the level of stupidity does not surprise me as my father lives in Oregon and voted for that bum. My dad is a bit of a left wing nutter and I tell him so every chance I get... I'm sure he appreciates his own son telling him he's an extremist just like the Nazis.
Consequently, we don't speak much.
The odd thing is, is that both he and my mother (divorced for 35 years or so) are both left wing nutters. So are most of their Baby Boomer friends... what is it with the Baby Boomers? Was it something in the water? How did they all end up so stupid? My parents don't even think any more... I used the "Scientific Method"argument to try and win them over on the Global Warming skeptical side of the issue.... didn't work... they just stated that I had been brainwashed by the corporations ... essentially the Man had gotten to me.
Who knew? It's time for skeptics to stand together and start taking these people down with real science... use the scientific method to disprove everything they claim as fact.
The beauty of using the scientific method is that once you get to actually asking them to provide a real conclusive result from properly conducted experiments which incorporate all factors which could have some influence, you'll find they almost always include several static models to come to their conclusions. As in, a static model in regards to clouds, or the effect of the sun (e.g. they take 100 years of recorded solar activity and turn it into a variable which by no means properly represents the true effects... and they completely leave out the effect of cosmic rays and other space phenomenoms.
Regardless, they cannot argue their points as facts as they only have best guesses and those have been turning out to be totally wrong.... like the estimation of greenhouse gasses they made 30 years ago, or the estimated global temp.... all wrong...and way off.
____________________________________________________
"These are the times that try men's souls." ~ Thomas Paine
Wait a minute, LBZ!I'm a baby
February 7, 2007 - 08:36 ET by Mica the MagnificentWait a minute, LBZ!
I'm a baby boomer and I'm un-lib!
I simply got over Woodstock and free love and the military-industrial complex crap. I grew up. I never bought the military's weather-machine or global cooling scares of 1974 or the global warming scares of 2007.
So don't lump all baby boomers as a bunch of kumbaya singing, pony-tail wearing, rolling- in- the -mud at Woodstock remembering, and jobs! jobs! jobs! screaming while attacking business moronic socialists.
He did it! I can't believe it but he did it! Fantastic! Jesse Jackson actually found racism in this glass of water! - - A dewey-eyed supporter
Mica May I add. Not all of us
February 7, 2007 - 08:57 ET by danboMica May I add. Not all of us gray pony tailers are libs.
For all of the crys of tolerance by the left. They're only tolerant of those who agree with them.
"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.” H.L. Mencken
liberal_bug_zapper,First of a
February 7, 2007 - 09:48 ET by msh1973liberal_bug_zapper,
First of all I want to know how you came to be a conservative if your parents are as you call them "left wing nutters". Secondly, I am a "boomer" who is very conservative. I think it was the boomers who were raised on the west coast and east coast for the most part. I was raised in the midwest, were people are "normal". LOL.
Anyway, congrats on your clear headed thinking.
I don't know about LBZ, but t
February 7, 2007 - 16:45 ET by moabgoesboomI don't know about LBZ, but the great Ronald Reagan turned this ex-lib around. And yes, I have attoned for my sins for voting for those idiots McGovern and Carter.
You can't support the troops if you don't support the mission.
bug_zapper, I'm a boomer and I agree with you.
February 7, 2007 - 11:11 ET by acaiguanabug_zapper, I'm a boomer and I agree with you.
It wasn't the water. It was the influence of the USSR's exploitation of naive innocence during the Viet Nam war. If you want to really understand it, the Universities rewarded bad behavior from 1973 forward with eliminating grades; eliminating required (hard) courses; and eliminating defined degree paths from their degrees.
So, a lot of the 'boomers' are just poorly educated. And they became poorly educated professors poorly educating children under the same rules.
So, yes, we are a spoiled and pampered lot who want to spend money on problems and then forget them.
Where the 'pass a law' to solve a problem stuff came from; I am not sure. But it sure has ruined a lot of my simple pleasures in life.
ACA
...
Hillary Clinton says: "I want to take those profits."
Hey all you Boomers out the
February 7, 2007 - 22:47 ET by liberal_bug_zapperHey all you Boomers out there,
As an addendum to what I was saying, I was raised in Oregon and Washington States. When I lived with my mother, it was on a commune in Washington State. The aging hippies and boomers who live around my mother still all have the same idealistic and totally naive view of the world and of the "MAN". They see our government as the bad influence in the world, raping and killing and murdering for money... and they see people like Castro and Chavez as heroes of the people and saviors. They also cannot distinguish between our enemies so they brand them all as freedom fighters.... so the ones I know, and the ones I've talked to are all complete idiots as far as I'm concerned.
As for how did I become a deep conservative when both my parents and all adults I knew were raving lunatic liberals? Easy, I started to read and study and understand. I questioned their constant hyperbolic dribble and realized that their ideas were logically bankrupt. They constantly would bandy about non sequiturs and hyperbole as if it was accepted truth. They didn't even try to disguise their contempt for those who thought differently than them. I grew up being taught that Ronald Reagan was Ronny Raygun (Star Wars reference) and that all conservatives were evil and wanted people to starve so they could make money. It was only after I started to dig into the claims that I realized just how filled with lies and sophistry they were.
I never did totally subscribe to the loony leftist notions, although when I was a child, I did parrot my parents. I think the real wake up for me was an argument I had with my parents and my little step brother about the first Shuttle to go into space... my little brother was telling my parents that it was the Enterprise... and I corrected him and said that it was the Columbia. Well everyone turned on me and said that I was just trying to be a know-it-all and that I was wrong. It got to the point that, while I stuck to my guns, my father sent me to my room under punishment for not agreeing with them. It was then, in my room that I realized that these people could not be trusted... I was 12 years old at the time. I became a real thinking person at that time and now know, liberals don't think... they feel.
____________________________________________________
"These are the times that try men's souls." ~ Thomas Paine
lbz,Totally confused.How can
February 7, 2007 - 23:01 ET by Blondelbz,
Totally confused.
How can you be a child of libs,,,and now be a conservative?
I was a child of (progressives) and am a conservative RW broom flying witch.
How does this happen? They tell me it is not possible.
So I am a tad confused.
And of course,
Blonde
Maturity, Blonde
February 7, 2007 - 23:18 ET by CGatton"How does this happen?"
We grew up, Blonde. It's a normal part of maturation. Wish I had the exact quote, but the gist of it is that if you're not a liberal before 30, you lack compassion, if you're not a conservative after 30 you lack maturity. Amazing how many immature people there are today, isn't it? :o)
I'm not sure what it was about the baby-boomer generation that inhibited us from maturing on schedule. (As in all things, a scheduled time is a mean time; that is, there are those who are both above and below the mean) I was actually a little early, in that it was right after the elections of '76, when I thought to myself, "why did you ever vote for that idiot Carter, Clyde?" I was 27 at the time. My wife matured far faster than I did...same election, same time, but she was only 20 at the time.
R/
Clyde
"...the aspirants to tyranny are either the...men of the state, who in democracies are demagogues,... or those who hold great offices, and have a long tenure.." - Aristotle, Politics, c350BC
Hi Blonde,Clyde is right, I
February 8, 2007 - 01:19 ET by liberal_bug_zapperHi Blonde,
Clyde is right, I grew up. The fact is, I went through my liberal leaning years from age 8 to 12... and after that, realized that the liberal belief system was vacous and without logic or any standards... if it feels good... was the mantra of the left where I grew up and even as a child, I saw how destructive it was.
My understanding as a child was formed by the trials and tribulations of my childhood. My mother and father were irresponsible children who hated authority figures and acted like (and still do) children... someone had to be the adult. So I became the adult.
Both my mother and my father are poor... and they still don't get it. They blame anyone and everyone but themselves for their situation. You see, liberals can't accept blame or fault.... yet always are demanding that same capitulation of anyone with a system of values because it takes the focus off their own failure.
Liberals are miserable people who are leeches on society. Now as for my parents, they're lucky to have me, because when the can no longer support themselves, I'll take over (I'm not telling them this, but it will happen when they really need it.) There are more liberals coming out of the Baby Boomer generation than conservatives.... many of their parents where conservative and they rebelled against their parents authority... my parents didn't really enforce any kind of rules or strict behavior guidelines, and so I think I made my own... kind of an anti-rebel rebellion.
Now that I'm almost 40, I talk with my parents and realize how sadly lacking in intelligence they are... they never learned beyond what any 20 year old knows (which isn't much) and they still react emotionally to everything.... hell, they both believe that Bush took down the World Trade Center.
Ah well, I believe my generation, or at least the ones my age, are more conservative than liberal.... and I'm not sure about generation Y, although I fear for them as the Internet has been very lopsided towards libs... look at how the Libs were able to google bomb and keep only the liberal side of the issue on the first 3 to 10 pages of google. It's sick... and we're losing the battle at the moment, but hopefully, once more of us wake up and start trying to counter the crap, we'll beat them back.
____________________________________________________
"These are the times that try men's souls." ~ Thomas Paine
lbz...Just to throw my two ce
February 8, 2007 - 01:29 ET by bigtimerlbz...
Just to throw my two cents in...I am ten years older than you, I hope you never give up the right fight....because we need people like you to keep this country strong....pass it on...or we are doomed.
Thanks.
Btw...I learned on my own too, a story opposite of yours but about the same age scenario.
LBZ Liberal? or ??
February 8, 2007 - 01:37 ET by misterbillI am a child of the depression. My father was a hard working man, but then, most people of that era were hard working. In the depression years he and my Mom had to move from a small town to the "big city" to find work. It didn't last and to my father's lifelong shame they had to go on the dole. My Dad got a sack of flour, powdered milk, eggs and believe it or not , a carton of cigarettes. He and Mom did not smoke, so they sold the cigarettes. They felt, and so did I , that FDR was fantastic man. He helped to end the depression. He instituted the CCC and the WPA. He put men and women back to work. So, I grew up a liberal. When I entered the work world , there were lots of jobs. I entered the military, got some great training and left after four years with skills that gave me a lifelong career. As my career and income improved , I started analyzing political and philosophical attitudes and ideas. At around age 26, I changed from the Democratic party to the Republican and have sat on that side since. The recent test on this site listed me as a Social Conservative. However, all the above being said, I still think FDR was one of the great Presidents. The times and travails called for a different type of society and leaders. God rest them, I was never able to win my parents over to the Republicans. They held liberal attitudes until the end of their days. As the old adage goes, "Don't judge a man until you have walked in his shoes". You are probably 30 years younger than I , so you did not get to see the problems of the 1930s. I am not contradicting you, I agree with you. I am, I hope , sharing some reasons why our parents clung to liberal attitudes and the Democrat(ic) party.
While my childhood has no c
February 8, 2007 - 04:00 ET by liberal_bug_zapperWhile my childhood has no colorful anecdote that includes the depression, I can certainly relate to having nothing. When I was young, we had to beg for food a couple of times. That shamed me.... even as a kid I knew that was not right.
Every time I have seen beggars since, I recoil in disgust, partially because I believe that there is nothing that you cannot do in this world and making money is easy if you just think outside the box, but mostly because of my own personal shame at having had to go through that experience as a helpless tag-a-long.
It was soon after that incident that we joined the commune and everything seemed fine for a while.... but it was just a false sense of security.
Anyway, I like to buck all old adages and go against the trend. I constantly judge people as it is what makes us recognize failure. My parents are of the "Don't judge me!" <<said with indignant condescension>> generation. The generation that found the one line in the Bible they liked "And do not point out the splinter that is in your
brother's eye, and ignore the beam that is in your own eye."
Yet they used it to free themselves from guilt, not to admonish people for judging.
The left's loudest cry is the cry of "Hypocrite!" and they use it as a skilled pike man to skewer their opponent.
But I always reply "Look, we are human and will make mistakes, but it is those who hold themselves to a higher standard and strive to archive it that are great. Even if they fail sometimes, they never give up trying to reach that ultimate goal. This compared to those who have no standards at all, and therefore strive for nothing, and achieve little. These the critics, the cynics, the pessimistic and angry, these little petty condescending arrogant and proud people with little or nothing to actually be proud of. I am a man of standards and values, and if I stumble, I don't belly ache about the impossibility of the standard, I get up and try harder until I achieve."
The words are only slightly different, but the meaning is the same. I always counter the hypocrite argument the Liberals throw at me... after that.... they're gone. They cannot argue as they have no center, nothing that they truly stand for and therefore, when they meet a person like me, strong in his convictions and ready for their hyperbole.... they run in fear.
One thing you said grabbed me.... "to my father's lifelong shame they had to go on the dole."
Shame. Shame? That is what is wrong.... it wasn't shame that did your father in... it was pride. Never let your pride let you go hungry. Never let your pride keep you from admitting that you don't know... and never let your pride get in the way of you and your family's future. Pride is what kept older liberals "Liberal"... but I contend that it is stupidity and laziness that makes the baby boomers like my mom and dad liberal... you see, their generation never really had it all that bad... no great depression, no world war.... and an economy that was not doing half bad if you knew how to handle yourself. Clearly, enough of the baby boomers knew how to handle themselves and they rose above the malaise.... of course, the tail end of that crap was the Jimmy Carter presidency.
____________________________________________________
"These are the times that try men's souls." ~ Thomas Paine
The problem with using the sc
February 7, 2007 - 11:16 ET by Ruths husband BenThe problem with using the scientific method or logic in arguing with the libs is they are all about "feelings" not logic. You have to speak a language that they relate to, you know, make the message "real" to them. The best way I have found is to make a "feeling statement" like this:
"I feel like you are the biggest idiot I have met today, how does that make you feel?"
Guaranteed to be a conversations starter.
The Peoples Democrap Climate Re-education Camp
February 7, 2007 - 08:10 ET by CTThe Socialist Greens cannot control themselves and their natural allies in the Democrap Party are being exposed before their timeline indicated sellout.
Creepy. Like recently with th
February 7, 2007 - 09:09 ET by HumanEventsCreepy. Like recently with that Weather Channel meteroligist who wanted any meteoroligist who is skeptical on global warming to be banned. Yes to libs the debate on global warming (of which there never was any liberal willing to engage in a debate in the first place) really is over. They know they don't have a leg to stand on so they want to just railroad their agenda through and squelch all opposition.
Liberals - by far the most intolerant people.
Richard Feynman called the
February 7, 2007 - 09:21 ET by daveinbocaRichard Feynman called the "junk science" propagated by moonbats as "cargo cult science," a bunch of fake UN experts jumping up and down waiting for the US to cough up monies in expiation of its carbon-emission sins.
Let's have an auto-da-fe---oops, that firewood burning unbelievers would add to the problem. Although at the moment, Chicago and environs would love a few degrees of warming-up.
And yet the left does not c
February 7, 2007 - 09:29 ET by WolfremAnd yet the left does not consider the consequences of their actions. As Al Gore and the socialists blame Americans for Global Warming, that message is being reported across the world. The left has complained that our actions in Iraq, the War On Terror and Pres Bush have hurt America's image around the world, however they are hurting America's image by blaming America for GW. They are blinded to their own hypocrisy by their greed and lust for power.
"Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it." - George Santayana
Wolfrem- Excellent point i
February 7, 2007 - 11:00 ET by ghotifunWolfrem-
Excellent point in regards to the damage done to the U.S. and world-wide opinion.
Quite frankly, I'm tired of the U.S. being the punching bag for the world based on the beliefs of Stalinists in this country. While I don't really care what the rest of the world thinks about the U.S., I'm really tired of the cannon fodder being produced by the left.
What Taylor can look forward to...
February 7, 2007 - 10:00 ET by PunditDotComBased on analogous precedent, George Taylor can now expect trial for heresy, bans of his works and house arrest for life. All is not lost, however, he might be "rehabilitated" about a hundred years down the road...
Interesting note, though: at least Pope Urban VIII did not initially censor Galileo - only asked that he present both sides of the argument in his book. He was prosecuted (persecuted?) only after he failed to honor that request. I imagine that Taylor would love to be able to publish both sides without fear of reprisal...
"Eppur si muove!" ["And yet, it moves!"}
I think Taylor could have a
February 7, 2007 - 11:23 ET by steviep831I think Taylor could have a religious discrimination case here. They are obviously discriminating against him because he does not believe in their religion. I think it's win-able...
Going against the Global Warm
February 7, 2007 - 10:10 ET by Mean Gene Dr. LoveGoing against the Global Warming Crowd seems to be nothing more than a modern-day heresy which crime is guilty of excommunication from your job or 'educational' circles.
And who are the ones that scream so shrilly about censorship, oppression, and stifling freedom of expression?
Gun Safety Tip #8: No matter how responsible he seems, never give your gun to a monkey. (www.imao.us)
Wait a minute... they're goin
February 7, 2007 - 10:23 ET by Hero SquadWait a minute... they're going to set fire to a climatologist in Oregon? That's a bit harsh now, isn't it?
Oh, that's very different. Never mind.
Still way too extreme, though - a non-scientist sacking a scientist for his scientific theories? I'd be on the phone to one of those "wrongful whatever" lawyers that advertise during afternoon reruns of Hogan's Heroes the moment I got that pink slip.
*****
"Was it a millionaire who said 'Imagine no possessions?'" - Elvis Costello
Haha! That's how I first read
February 7, 2007 - 10:32 ET by Mean Gene Dr. LoveHaha! That's how I first read it too, HS.
What about flaming a banana stand...?
"There's always money in the banana stand." - George Sr.
Definitely the work of a flam
February 7, 2007 - 14:08 ET by Hero SquadDefinitely the work of a flamer.
****
"Was it a millionaire who said 'Imagine no possessions?'" - Elvis Costello
HS
February 7, 2007 - 10:48 ET by Noel SheppardHS,
Well, either way, isn't this a witch hunt? :-) ns
Witch Hunt is the perfect w
February 7, 2007 - 10:54 ET by The Wicked ConservativeWitch Hunt is the perfect way to describe GW. You see on a witch hunt you're guarenteed to find what you're looking for. Heretics will be burned at the stake!
The only thing evil needs to succeed, is for good people to nothing about it.
A man-made morality tale How
February 7, 2007 - 11:15 ET by danboA man-made morality tale How the IPCC’s fairly sober summary of climate science has been spun to tell a story of Fate, Doom and human folly. Introducing spiked’s coverage of the IPCC report, James Woudhuysen and Joe Kaplinsky look at how claims of scientific truth are being used to quash debate and limit our horizons. On 2 February 2007, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) published a summary of a report due to come out in three months’ time (1). Events surrounding it show how far both the professional drafting and media interpretation of science have become infused with today’s anti-humanist politics. Politically spun and politically interpreted, science is first made incontrovertible and put on a pedestal; turned, in a word, into scientism. Then, science is used to close down political debate. Finally, it is said to confirm the folly, hubris, selfishness and general dirtiness of mankind. Whatever our pretensions, we are now supposed to be pretty loathsome compared with the grandeur of the polar ice caps that now face ruin at our hands. And, in the same spirit, what mankind could really be doing with technology becomes trivialised. http://www.spiked-on...
"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.” H.L. Mencken
...the accepted cause of gl
February 7, 2007 - 11:18 ET by Tom1969caWasn't there once a time when "the vast majority of scientists" agreed that the Sun revolved around a flat Earth?
The counter-argument I believe every one of us needs to commit to memory (because there is no liberal comeback for it) is this:
If scientists are not all in agreement on something - in other words, if the evidence can be interpreted in more than one way - then the responsible thing to do is continue research until there is one explanation which is accepted by all and all other explanations have been scientifically disproven.
Of course, doing that might get one's funding cut off. And research scientists need Porsches, too...
~~~
VOTE DEMOCRAT!
(It's easier than thinking)
Take GW to court
February 7, 2007 - 11:18 ET by Eric TurnerI'd really like to see this one taken to the courts! That'd be a hoot. Being fired for lack of a belief in a theory? Let the eco-chondriacs (or enviro-chondriacs) prove their beliefs in a court of law and that it should justify firing a man for not believing in it.
Kulongoski, Gulagski - pretty much the same, huh?
February 7, 2007 - 11:19 ET by acaiguanaKulongoski, Gulagski - pretty much the same, huh?
Shame on this Governor. But it's Oregon.
ACA
...
Hillary Clinton says: "I want to take those profits."
Kulongoski Is Oregon's Shame
February 7, 2007 - 23:01 ET by Wonder95As a resident of Oregon, let me make it clear that Do-Nothing Teddy does not speak for all of us. We've had 12 consecutive years of Democrat (not Democratic) governors, and after all that time watching them run our state into the ground, you would think that most voters would wise up. The fact that Teddy was elected to a second term demonstrates that most of the voters here either don't know how to sue their brains and think logically or are so filled with hatred for Republicans that they can see little logic in anything (or both, which is most likely the case).
Last Monday, Geroge Taylor had an amicable discussion at the Oregon Museum of Science and Industry with Phil Mote, the state climatoligist for Washingon, but the Daily Dead Fish Wrapper (aka the Oregonian) did their best to slander him before and after the talk (I discuss it on my web site), as would be expected from the MSM. I would suspect it was that appearance that earned him the governor's wrath for daring to contradict his economy destroying policies.
This reminds me of what hap
February 7, 2007 - 11:25 ET by DyneThis reminds me of what happened to a Physics professor at my university within the past year. He produced a well-written, peer-reviewed paper that listed why the World Trade Center towers couldn't have collapsed from the plane crashes alone, as it wasn't in line with the laws of physics. However, while I agreed with his conclusions based on the evidence presented, I disagreed with him about it being another government conspiracy theory. In the end, he retired and opted to continue his research.
The paper itself has been incorporated into a website here.
"I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is to try to please everyone." - Bill Cosby
So, Dyne, you must be a physicist, huh?
February 7, 2007 - 11:51 ET by acaiguanaSo, Dyne, you must be a physicist, huh? I infer that because you seem to be knowledgable as to evaluate a Physics Professor's paper on the collapse of the WTC towers. Since you are so brilliant:
I suggest you play in your backyard building a rail gun.
Keep at it until you are successful. By the way, it comes with pictures so you can see the ideas as well as feel the thrill.
ACA
...
Hillary Clinton says: "I want to take those profits."
I don't claim to have a perfe
February 7, 2007 - 12:04 ET by DyneI don't claim to have a perfect knowledge of Physics given that I've only taken 4 courses in it in my life, but what I do try to do is read what's out there on these sorts of issues and see if they provide a valid argument or not. I try my best not to force my opinion on people, but rather give them the opportunity to study it out and find out what they think.
As for the rail gun in the backyard, that project was scrapped after components began to rust from my dog's peeing on 'em.
"I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is to try to please everyone." - Bill Cosby
It's so amazing that the libs
February 7, 2007 - 11:39 ET by DarkseanIt's so amazing that the libs condemn conservatives for doing exactly what they live and breath for. They are stifling dissent in the most diligent and ferocious fashion.
In looking at political threads I frequent that discuss global warming, the enviro-chondriacs' main rebuttal is the consensus argument. Setting aside the fact its a flawed argument for a moment, the chilling thing about these actions (firing dissenters, contrarians, etc.) is that they will FORCE consensus. They will scare people into agreeing with them or they will get them fired.
Very, very scary.
Yes, Darksean, the Left's propensity toward fascism is scary.
February 7, 2007 - 11:53 ET by acaiguanaYes, Darksean, the Left's propensity toward fascism is scary.
And they smokescreen it with attacks on the totalitarian Republicans.
ACA
...
Hillary Clinton says: "I want to take those profits."
"They're stifling dissen
February 7, 2007 - 13:27 ET by mattm"They're stifling dissent..." and worse, they're stifling scientific inquiry - which promotes ignorance, which makes it easier for Libs to hoodwink the masses.
The whole GW "debate&q
February 7, 2007 - 11:59 ET by DyneThe whole GW "debate" reminds me of what I can call a daily occurrence for several months of my life a few years ago.
I've mentioned in a few other comments that, like Mitt Romney, I am a Mormon. And, for those of you who don't know about the church's missionary program, young men, starting at age 19, volunteer to spread the gospel message throughout the world for the next two years. I won't go into any details, but here's the basic outline of what to do when offering to share what we believe with people. First, we introduce ourselves and offer to share out message with them. If they decide they would like to listen, we teach a lesson and then we basically say, "If you want to know that this is right, ask God, He has all the answers." What puzzles me is that a lot of the people I met with would often ask people who knew almost nothing about the church or people who really hated us. But in the case where others decided to learn for themselves, those same bigots would literally try to scare them away with anti-Mormon propaganda, threatening excommunication, eviction from their apartment, etc.
Everyone has their choice on what religious beliefs they hold and on what side of the GW debate they're on, but in order to make a well-informed decision, they must study the issue out on their own and learn about it from the people who know what they're talking about.
"I don't know the key to success, but the key to failure is to try to please everyone." - Bill Cosby
I see this as the way that li
February 7, 2007 - 12:01 ET by bassndudeI see this as the way that liberals intend to silence the free speech of those who desent. This goes much deeper than "golbal warming". This is a mind set. Once in power, the liberals will use this tatic to squash those who do not follow the mantra of the left. Conform to the consensus or else. This come on the heels of Gore telling lies about the administration paying scientists to disagree with GW. And China, of all places, blames the west for all of it. Go figure. China and India are the major contributors to atmospheric pollution in the world today.
The tactic the politicos in the UN used is to put forth the idea that these were scientists gathered in France to release a report. This is false. They were representives of repressive countries in the world, liberal countries whose target is the USA and our capitalistic ways. This is nothing more than an extortion attempt by the UN aginst the USA.
Anthropogenic Global Warming is a myth, it is becoming a religion and it was all started by the UN and followed up by a few scientists(?) to gain notoriety and wealth. The UN wants the wealth of the USA, and they will go to any depths to get it. That isint hard for them. They are already the septic of the world.
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
This whole "politics of
February 7, 2007 - 12:32 ET by RackieThis whole "politics of submission" sounds very familiar.
The party of tolerance is no
February 7, 2007 - 12:33 ET by dmntd1The party of tolerance is no longer the Democrat Party. All one must do is go to a left-leaning blog and post as a right-winger and you experience 'tolerance' up the Whazoo. Then again, we here at NB tolerate the leftists (until they turn into a version of Hater).
Please make sure your train of thought carries freight.
Isn’t the Party on the left
February 7, 2007 - 12:40 ET by Steve L.Isn’t the Party on the left marketed as the big tent of tolerance?
You guys don't understand tolerance. In the context of Global Warming®, tolerance means that the people who believe that Global Warming® is a catastrophe "tolerate" those who think that it is only a disaster.
And to think the DimLibs acc
February 7, 2007 - 13:21 ET by Dave RAnd to think the DimLibs accuse us of being fascists. If this guy does get canned, I hope he litigates the state of Oregon into bankruptcy, and uses the most aggressive, ethically-challenged, rudest, hard-ass bottom-feeding lawyer he can find to do it - the kind whose phone number can usually be found on the cover of a match book.
I hate newspapermen.....I regard them as spies.....If I killed them all there would be news from Hell before breakfast. -William T. Sherman
All the IPCC needs to do is p
February 7, 2007 - 19:53 ET by azgolferAll the IPCC needs to do is post their models on the internet. Then we can all play with them and see how accurate they are. We can enter the parameters from say, 10,000 years ago, and see that the model succesfully computes the climate today. (Of course we'll need the source code to make sure they don't cheat).
Also - peer review is not the same thing as the scientific method. All sorts of crap has made it past peer review. Scientific consensus has never meant anything. It is the proofs and equations that count.