myiW Current Conditions and Forecasts Community Forums Windsurfing Videos Buy and Sell Services
 
Hi guest · myAccount · Log in
 SearchSearch   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   RegisterRegister 
PROOF: Obama IS the end of the free world
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 407, 408, 409  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
boggsman1



Joined: 24 Jun 2002
Posts: 3488
Location: at a computer

PostPosted: Tue Apr 06, 2010 4:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mrgybe wrote:
swchandler wrote:
It's my understanding that the gecko on Geico commercials is cast, at least in speech, as Australian.


He (it?) has a cockney accent........East London.


Thought so. I know you're American, Mr G, Im speaking of the land you hail from.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mrgybe



Joined: 01 Jul 2008
Posts: 2551

PostPosted: Tue Apr 06, 2010 5:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

feuser wrote:
The public perception may be that, for the time being, most notably since the attention of the public was successfully diverted from the core facts.


We live in a sound bite world. The average Joe simply isn't interested in understanding the science, but rather, relies on 2 minute news clips to gauge the impact on him. In my view, the spokespeople for the scientific community have done an appalling job in selling their point of view. They scared us all with their doomsday talk and sniffingly dismissed as stupid all who questioned their findings. Now that it's uncovered that they grossly exaggerated the likely impacts and their science is flawed, they are backing off and carrying out all types of internal investigations. The public sees this and is rightly skeptical.....a skepticism that is increased when they see the massive number of climate delegates tripping around to the most exotic spots in the world at taxpayer expense.

Maybe global warming is occurring and maybe we should be concerned.........I don't know. As with any decision we use our own experiences to judge those who are leading the global warming sales pitch.......and increasing numbers of people don't trust them.......it's that simple. It's the untrustworthy "sales people" you should be mad with, not the skeptics.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mrgybe



Joined: 01 Jul 2008
Posts: 2551

PostPosted: Tue Apr 06, 2010 5:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

boggsman1 wrote:
I know you're American, Mr G


Does that mean I'm ugly too?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mrgybe



Joined: 01 Jul 2008
Posts: 2551

PostPosted: Tue Apr 06, 2010 5:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mac wrote:
Rather than give the energy companies the "day off" from criticism, I looked up the safety record of Massey. Not so good.


If Massey and it's leadership have failed to maintain proper safety standards, they should be punished severely.

I think you are well aware that I was referring to your dismissal of the Times article as unimportant. I disagree......it's one more item that lessens the credibility of the global warming community. If we really are at a "tipping point" wouldn't the people who are most convinced of that awful fact do all they could to slow down the arrival of the impending catastrophe? Apparently not.........they are content, every year, to create a massive carbon footprint by traveling in huge numbers to exotic locations to hold meetings that could be achieved via teleconference. Maybe they are less fearful than they want us to be?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
isobars



Joined: 12 Dec 1999
Posts: 13857

PostPosted: Tue Apr 06, 2010 6:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

From Interfaith voices 1/13/2006
(Audio file of the interview it at
http://interfaithradio.org/audio/download/7 ):

Host: “Are you then calling for the redistribution of wealth in society?”

Obama’s new pastor, Rev Jim Wallis: ”Absolutely, without any hesitation. That’s what the gospel is all about.”

Geez, is there NO one in Obama's bloodline or mentor chain -- no one who conceived, raised, or academically or spiritually advised him -- who doesn't hate the U.S. and capitalism AND support at least one of the heinous -isms?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
keycocker



Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Posts: 3235

PostPosted: Tue Apr 06, 2010 10:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Working from a database of one sentence from one guy is the kind of evidence many people on both sides of the GW issue take as gospel as well
I do not see enough data to make a definite conclusion about the hundreds of folks O met on the way up or the complex issues of global warming.
It is a shame that it became a US political issue when it is really all about science. Those skeptics who say it is all a liberal plot are thinking that scientists of the world mold themselves into the US model of politics. A science team in Iceland probably does not have a clue what a Republican is or care if Al Gore made a film.
"Al who? Excuse us we need to break camp because the ice is breaking up early this year."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 4998

PostPosted: Tue Apr 06, 2010 11:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mrgybe—you just don’t seem to get it. It is you that I am dismissing. You don’t seem to be interested in an honest debate, and while you talk about being nice, you have such immense need to show how smart you are that you often act pretty nasty.

So first, you complain about scientists, 20,000 of them, traveling to Bali for a climate change for a conference. Do you really think that 20,000 of any profession traveling to a conference would have a lesser impact? Or do you think it would be more appropriate to schedule such a conference in Odessa or Crawford, Texas? But after I remind you that Rupert Murdoch owns your source, the London Times, I’ll help you with the math. The figure in the article of 46,000 tonnes of Carbon dioxide represents a tiny fraction of the worlds generation of CO2. Here’s my source: http://co2now.org/. It estimates total emissions of 8.7 billion tons in 2008, and notes that CO2 levels are now 389.91 ppm, measured at Moana Loa in Hawaii. I’m not going to convert tonnes to tons, but rest assured that the emissions for the Copenhagen conference were about 0.2% of a days emissions. If CO2 emissions matter, maybe we should plan to slow their growth.. Now neither the exaggerated claims of the London Times, or the fact that bankers spent millions traveling to conventions while the economy was melting down under the burden of their bad loans, has anything to do with whether or not global warming is an issue. But I know that you aren’t interested in actually reviewing any of the science behind global warming, when presented with facts you don’t rise to the debate, but say “I’m going to bed.” Sleep well.

This behavior of avoiding debate when someone counters you is by now well established. And it is frequently accompanied by attacks, despite your critiques of others for speaking vilely. A few examples. Typos. I have a windsurfing friend who doesn’t spell so well. But he gives a lot back to windsurfing, and is very smart in other ways. I could not imagine correcting his spelling, and I cannot imagine how impoverished your self esteem is that you need to find such cheap ways to feel superior. But every time someone who disagrees with you mis-spells a word, or doesn’t proof read their work you wag your literary finger to show us how smart you are. How sad, but most of us have noted that you don’t respond to the substance offered.

You’ve attacked me numerous times, arguing with scorn that I rely on Wikipedia and claiming to have forgotten more about numerous things than I’ll ever know. You seem desperate to weigh your accomplishments against others—without knowing either what theirs might be, what their values might be, or revealing why you think you’re so hot. For the record, I used Wikipedia once, for a very general bit of information where precision was not important. I usually cite my sources—and read others citations to see what I’ve missed and whether they are credible.

You’ve managed to defend teabaggers in this forum without commenting, or criticizing, the bigotry at the fringe of the movement. Having studied American History, they seem very like the Know Nothings of the 19th Century, and their attacks on immigrants could come directly from that earlier movement. You’ve called me paranoid when I’ve noted where their funding comes from—Dick Armey, Glen Beck, our friend Don Blankenship of Massey coal, the company with the fine safety record, and such organizations as Americans for Prosperity, run by Tim Phillips, who was Ralph Reed’s former partner in the lobbying firm Century Strategies. The group is funded by Koch family foundations — a family whose wealth is derived from the oil industry. Grass roots, or Astroturf?

You’ve defended Chevron in Richmond without ever mentioning air quality, or responding to my comments about that being the fundamental issue. You’ve blamed environmentalists for stopping all expansions of refinery in this Country. But more recent news show demand for refined products is flat in California, and it just may be that has something to do with Chevron’s decision.

You’ve defended DDT without responding to concerns that I’ve raised about bioaccumulation and insect resistance, and used it to rail against, and say, yes vile things about environmentalists. You got most of the facts wrong on that one too.

Then you have the gall to complain that I hurt your feelings when I said you seem to get your stuff off libertarian sites! Is it just a coincidence that so much of it seems to be taken directly from such sites? I think not.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mrgybe



Joined: 01 Jul 2008
Posts: 2551

PostPosted: Tue Apr 06, 2010 11:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

swchandler wrote:
Regarding the mac/mrgybe interplays, I think both are very sharp characters, but I often wonder about their tone towards each other.


You and keycocker were wondering why I get a little testy with mac at times (and, you may have noticed, with no-one else on this forum). His latest post which starts........"Mrgybe—you just don’t seem to get it. It is you that I am dismissing".......may provide you with a little insight.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
feuser



Joined: 29 Oct 2002
Posts: 1393

PostPosted: Wed Apr 07, 2010 8:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

mrgybe wrote:
feuser wrote:
The public perception may be that, for the time being, most notably since the attention of the public was successfully diverted from the core facts.


We live in a sound bite world. The average Joe simply isn't interested in understanding the science, but rather, relies on 2 minute news clips to gauge the impact on him. In my view, the spokespeople for the scientific community have done an appalling job in selling their point of view. They scared us all with their doomsday talk and sniffingly dismissed as stupid all who questioned their findings. Now that it's uncovered that they grossly exaggerated the likely impacts and their science is flawed, they are backing off and carrying out all types of internal investigations. The public sees this and is rightly skeptical.....a skepticism that is increased when they see the massive number of climate delegates tripping around to the most exotic spots in the world at taxpayer expense.

Maybe global warming is occurring and maybe we should be concerned.........I don't know. As with any decision we use our own experiences to judge those who are leading the global warming sales pitch.......and increasing numbers of people don't trust them.......it's that simple. It's the untrustworthy "sales people" you should be mad with, not the skeptics.



Well, true. We do live in a sound bite world. However, I think at some level any adult should be able to make the distinction between a message's content and it's delivery.


Maybe global warming is occurring and maybe we should be concerned.........I don't know.


In context, this is like saying: Maybe we're doing harm, and until we know for sure that we are doing harm we'll continue doing what we're doing.

Except, we're beyond this point. Now we're saying: We know we're doing harm, we know we can't continue what we're doing, but until we know exactly how much damage we're doing, we'll continue just the same.

Constantly killing the debate because of personal failures and parroting damaging press for the involved scientists is irresponsible and dangerous, don't you think?

_________________
florian - ny22

http://www.windsurfing.kasail.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
keycocker



Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Posts: 3235

PostPosted: Wed Apr 07, 2010 8:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

.....You and keycocker were wondering why I get a little testy with mac at times (and, you may have noticed, with no-one else on this forum). His latest post which starts........"Mrgybe—you just don’t seem to get it. It is you that I am dismissing".......may provide you with a little insight......
Yes I understand.
Your reason is because
MAC DIDIT
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 407, 408, 409  Next
Page 4 of 409

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

myiW | Weather | Community | Membership | Support | Log in
like us on facebook
© Copyright 1999-2007 WeatherFlow, Inc Contact Us Ad Marketplace

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group