There are many people I respect on here, so it seems very odd to me when they go so off base with critiques on their own writings.
oops...forgot the "er".....Founder
I hope this Found is right, even though it seems likely he's wrong.
Lol...just wait, now with that one Found of Greenpeace coming out again to say man doesn't have much if anything to do with global warming..the nuts are bound to grab hold of that. Even though the guy hasn't really done any recent research on the topic that I am aware of.
Sorry, I meant to say "but of course Mr. Ross knows better". Who is "Mr. Davis"? Sometimes it's difficult to sort out these folks without a program! Back to you K-man! Sheeeesh!
... Tens-of-thousands of these scientists have reached a consensus view that human-activity (CO2 emissions) have caused drastic climatic alterations on the planet over the past few decades that are causing what NYT columnist Tom Friedman correctly calls "Global-weirding". Only a small number of "denier-scientists" disagree, and GUESS WHO THEY WORK FOR??? They work for outfits like Shell, Exxon-Mobil, B.P., Halliburton, the Koch Brothers ... But, of course, Mr. Davis knows better. Why? Because he heard it on FOX or our local wing-nut station WLTP (Witless Lame Tea Party) Radio ...
Sorry Kendall, but I can't pass on this one. So what "proof" does Mr. Ross submit to back his assertion that "95% of those who insist that 'global warming' or 'climate-change' or whatever is an undeniable fact ... are paid to work in this field ..." blah, blah! OF COURSE they are (hopefully) paid to "work in this field" because they spent many years obtaining the education necessary to become qualified CLIMATOLOGISTS, OCEANOGRAPHERS, GEOLOGISTS, and (yes) METEOROLOGISTS whose job it is to study climate-patterns over millennia and determine if there are any anomalies that could pose threats to human-activity on the planet. They do so sometimes by spending months in the Arctic and collecting core-samples of ice. The scientists of NOAA (National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Agency) study ocean currents and air currents that produce the lovely - but sometimes quirky - weather we have been enjoying this winter ...
Then we have Allen Ross talking about climate change. He has this very weird idea that since we only consist of 6% of the world's population (is that even right?) that means what? We only produce 6% of the world's energy and pollution? Complete stupidity.
At least we can all agree with him about wanting a clean and secure environment.
wow, the odd balls were out this Sunday.
We had Dent trying to justify his belief that giving soldiers the chance to wear uniform approved clothing for religious reasons is bad. He decided to go down the slippery slope fallacy with his whole Devil Worship angle.
Then we had Martin showing a immense lack of knowledge in where freedom or religion comes from. It wasn't from the Bible. No where does it say you have a choice, you believe in God or burn. Like Dent, he makes the error in worrying about how other nations act. We don't dictate our actions by what other ppl do...we chose our own way.
In Brant's "Being destroyed from within" letter, he went off the rails. He wrote, "Freedom of Religion in our U.S. Constitution was based on Judeo-Christian beliefs and values."
Bullcrap. There is no such thing as freedom of religion on Christianity. Not unless you mean worship God or go to the lake of fire.
Brant also said, "Otherwise, we may end up with another Fort Hood shooter,"
Yeah..what we need are good boys like McViegh and Lee Harvey Oswald.
fred...thank you for the clarification.
Another letter today (Jan 24th) that shows a immense amount of ignorance when it revolves around the 2nd Amendment and our laws in general.
"However, the greatest threat to our Second Amendment rights ever, the United Nations Arms Trade Treaty (A.T.T.) was, totally, ignored by all the news media, except for Fox."
The greatest threat is ignorance. The UN is NOT going to have any control over any citizen's right to own a gun.
I have family that wants to see that Creation "museum". I'm hoping they just forget about it and choose to go to the Carnegie Museum in Pittsburgh instead.
If discussed in an improper way, I've noticed people try to add a bit of faith/destiny with evolution even. It's when they make the error in assuming that their is an ultimate purpose in evolution. If there is anything evolution teaches us about this thing we call reality is that big brains and intelligence is not the best way to go for a species survival. From what we know, how many species have their ever been that are closely similar to us in regards to intelligence? Now think how many species are closer to that of a dung beetle or amoeba?
Kentucky) it has NOT been disproved nor refuted!
@LTS - Sorry, I wasn't paying attention. I believe that what Darwin called "evolution" is really "adaptation through modifiction". His "Origin of Species and the Descent of Man" never suggested a straight-line descent from amoebas to modern man as shown in those simple illustrations in pre-1950s textbooks. It is more like a huge bush with multiple roots and branches. Uninformed religious fanatics assumed that Darwin depicted man as "descended from apes", but monkeys, apes, and man are all descended from an earlier primate ancestor ... While a charming and meaningful bit of folklore, the Noah story should be read as literature, but should not be taught as a literal explanation of scientific fact. During the past 170 years, Darwin's basic thesis has been "modified" by recent discoveries (the fossil record) but (despite the wishful-thinking of low-information evangelicals like the founder of that "Creation" park in Covington, Ke
There comes a point where you have moved from ignorant to a flat out liar when you willfully deny facts. In his Jan 19th LTE, Brian R. Dent made that crossing.
1)"When it has been proven that Barack Obama was born in Mombassa, Kenya"
A blatant lie.
2)"How do we have a president who bypasses Congress and the Senate, signs a United Nations Small Arms Treaty,"
fred, are you referring to adaptations and genetic changes within a species when you reference evolution? do you define an evolution of a species based on whether it inter-breeds after an appreciable change in characteristics? i think most biblical noah flood believers understand that adaptations and changes occur. the sticking point is the unsubstanciated claim somehow that the leap was made from one distinct species to another. thsi has not been supported by any credible or undeniable proof. currently, it seems the only way scientists have been able to do what evolutionists theorize is by performing complete DNA replacement. which is not allowing time and chance to perform the necessary process. to me it is like hammering the square peg in the round hole to say..."see.....this is how it happened".
We must keep track of the tack of traffic in crack!
Yes Tired, Climate-change and evolution are "theories" that have been supported by evidence discovered via precise experimentation by generations of scientists ... But, of course, all that is trumped by a Book that says that some guy named "Noah" built a big boat and saved two of every animal on the planet!
Na just was incorrect
519 Juliana St. , Parkersburg, WV 26101 | 304-485-1891