Biggest Con

Last time I watched the news, about half the world had record breaking low temps and about 12 inches of frozen global warming covering the ground.

peace to youraying:

 

You know as well as I do that this is a long term effect building up over at least 100 years. Today's weather is meaningless.

 

Why on earth should the burden of proof be on me? I'm not the one with a goofy theory that proposes that man can somehow significantly alter the climate...and that any climate change we do have is (1) completely harmful, and (2) caused by man.

No, the burden falls on you...particularly since many global warming advocates wish to harm through oppressive and ridiculous legislation capitalism and personal freedom.

 

Translation: it's cooler because of global warming.

You can't win with these people. It's a religion...and data means nothing to them.

 

And Al Gore is the Chief Priest.

 

If today's weather is meaningless, why do the global warming advocates cite record breaking high temps (when they happen) as evidence?

But when we have record low temps, they say "today's weather is meaningless".

Tell that to the polar bears. I bet they like the record low temps.

peace to youraying:

 

You just said it yourself. You called the global warming treaty "a goofy theory." I said it's simply a theory and and haven't been convinced yet whether it's correct. You make definitive statements about this. I don't.

Actually, there really are goofier theories out these that are currently accepted. Under the laws of quantum mechanics there is a non-zero probability that you could punch your fist right through a a one foot thick solid brick wall and neither feel a thing or hurt your hand. This is fairly strange I'd say. Einstein's theory of relativity says that time changes as an object approaches the speed of light.

There are all sorts of things in science like these two examples. Actually, I wholehearted agree with you that the theory of global warming hasn;t been adequately proved. I just disagree with you that it's been adequately disproved. I also disprove that those who support it like Al Gor are conning us.

 

Translation ridiculous. That;s exactly what I was not saying. But I know how these people ywist things.

 

I'll say this as clearly as I can. Real slow for you. I don't know whether the global warming theory is correct ot not. I said this before right? You claim to absolutely sure it's not true. OK prove it.

 

Since no one else seems to have answered this - Copernicus offered a book with mathematical and geometrical formulas to back up his claims; thus, his "proof."

Further, his theories have been proven to be fact.

The same cannot be said for global warming.

If you haven't decided if the theory is correct or not, why defend it?

 

How about the Top 6 "CONS"??

Al Gore and Barack Obama might make honorable mention, at best, considering inflation, and although both have a role as part of two larger "cons", neither has anything like a large enough role as any "stand-alone con," IMO.

Madoff doesn't even belong on the same page. Under any scenario!

My own Top Six Con Jobs over the last century, in reverse order.

#6.) The Ngo family and other associates in Southeast Asia - Those who managed to convince those in power in the United States and SEATO to prop up governments and play referee in Southeast Asia (while others made up the all rules of the game, going along) leading to and culminating in the Vietnam War, with some 5 million casualties, including 2 million killed, and costing likely more than a trillion dollars overall including the US kicking in $700 billion of that. 5,000,000+ casualties, not even counting displacements and refugees; $1,000,000,000+ costs. Not to shabby for a con!

#5.) The "Spooks" - Those, players of the 'intelligence' crowd, who managed top hoodwink the political leaders of the UN, USA, England, Russia, Israel (which took some doing), and most of the rest of the world, including their own top bosses, with the 'intelligence' situation in Iraq including the numbers of WMDs for more than a decade starting around 1993-94, for two US Presidents, and multiple other world leaders. The eventual outcome of this is the Iraq War, with some estimates of the total killed now exceeding 1,000,000, not even counting those casualties who were injured, but have survived, at what cost?? (plus 4,500,000+ refugees) and the monetary cost now having surpassed that of SE Asia. And all these figures are "and counting!" This doesn't even consider the 'ripple effect' financially on other areas including oil costs, etc. Safe to say this may well exceed 6,000,000 victims and will reach well beyond the $1 Trillion mark. Even better than the last con, I'd say.

#4.) The fear merchants - (Include Al Gore, here!) "Fear for Sale!" Not Cheap! This one is slightly different, from the last two, in that it may have actually lengthened some lives that would otherwise have been shortened. This con has been around roughly as long as I have lived, or about 60 years. And it has affected many more than those affected by the previous two 'cons', for it has, in some way or another, affected most everyone on the planet at some point, making it the most widespread con of all. The sole 'product sold' is "fear." The packaging can and does continually change, however. Over the years it has been packaged in varied containers such as nuclear war; nuclear "winter" after this nuclear war; Radioactive 'fallout' (Anyone remember any "Fallout shelters"??); complete nuclear holocaust, leading to the earth self destructing in an uncontainable chain reaction (in which case, you don't need a 'fallout shelter!'); global cooling leading to an ice age; global warming (include Al Gore & Co., here); the earth eco-systems imploding from the pressures including pollution, not even able to sustain a fraction of its population; running out of energy; fear of nuclear energy, radon -

(Colorless, odorless, highly radioactive, hazardous and toxic, are a few of the words used in the ads regarding the dangers of exposure to radon. Did you ever hear that a 15 buck, 20" 'box fan', blowing fresh air into a crawl space, onto a 'slab floor' or into a basement , and another blowing the air out the other side, if you desire, will take care of this potential hazard "on the cheap", unless you would really rather spend a few to several $G's instead, to accomplish the exact same thing? Did you ever hear that in any of the ads? No!!?? Wonder why!! Incidentally, if you live in a few floors up in a 'high-rise' in a city, as does my niece who lives on the 20th floor, you will get far more exposure to radon when walking through the local park for 10 minutes, than she could possibly get in 10 days sitting in her apartment and never leaving the place, for radon is far "heavier than air", thus "drops" and hangs around at ground level.) -

and on and on it goes, naming just a few. In the words of the late Gilda Radner (as Roseanne Roseannadanna), "It's always something!" Cover one, or actually show something to be baseless, and some new fear will be invented and championed, just to fill the void, and often within merely weeks. The need is fear to sell. For an example some of those who were selling "another Ice Age" three decades ago, are today peddling "Global warming." They survive, because enough continually are willing to buy today's "Bill of Goods." Has any good come out of this one? Certainly, but let's not overstate those benefits vs. costs. I suggest the worldwide total dollar cost over all 60 years has easily exceeded that of the Iraq War.

#3.) The Great American Financial Ponzi Scheme - (We will include Barack Obama, along with most other politicos for the last century, in this one!) The debts, obligations, unfunded liabilities and financial promises of all the United States are now near or at the level of the entire wealth of the United States, roughly. We've just tossed around $700 Billion, in one fell swoop, like it was "chump change". How's that one for a con job??

#2.) Alcohol (and other substance abuse) - ~1,800,000+ deaths a year, worldwide, just from alcohol, without other substances or counting any other associated costs.

AND far and away, the #1 con - Abortion! Around 40,000,000 a year, with every single victim having no power to prevent it, on a worldwide basis. What more can I say?

Well, there's my Top 6 "cons". Anyone have any to top them??

Ed

 

Coupla' quick points.

Barack Obama will not "ascend" to the Presidency, at all.

Presidents Tyler, Fillmore, Andrew Johnson, Arthur, Theodore Roosevelt, Coolidge, Truman, Lyndon Johnson, and Ford are the nine Presidents to have "ascended" that office, since they were the Vice-President, then they ascended to the Presidency upon the death of 8 Presidents, and the resignation of President Nixon.

Barack Obama, just as the other 33 individuals who have served as President under the constitution, has been elected to that office. 19 "in-office" Presidents were re-elected including Franklin Roosevelt 3 times.

And the only "proven choice of the people's trust" to have been newly sworn in as President is President Cleveland, who had served a previous term (1885-1889) prior to being elected in 1892 to a second term.

The wisdom of the re-election of any and/or all the 19 is a debatable speculation, I would say.

Ed

 

The three men in your poll are all con men. To that, you can add the Democratic and Republican parties, Bush, Clinton, Wall Street, crooked CEO's, union bosses, and any other trash whose hobby it is to rob from the American people.

 

Here you go now the winter storms are worse because of global warming


Winter Storms Have Grown More Devastating

by Liz Osborn
Severe winter storms that leave behind million of dollars in damage have become less common in the United States over the last five decades. But at the same time, individual storms have become more massive and destructive. Climatologists suspect that these changes in winter weather are a consequence of global

warming.http://www.currentresults.com/Climate-Change/Weather/winter-708211.php

 

So the warmer it gets the colder it gets?

I guess I just don't have enuf edjucashun to wrap my mind around this. I would think that if getting warmer made it colder that eventually the ice cap would start building up again. Then folks could go dig up the magazine articles from the 1970s that warned of the coming ice age. That said, there's a little over 2 feet of hard packed global warming on the snowmobile trails today. I'll be out enlarging my carbon footprint. :thumbs:

 

As I suspected, the nicer, friendlier JustChristian didn't last long...

What I have stressed in several threads is that they propose this complex theory without proving its basic tenets. And when anyone with conflicting data comes along--or when data comes along that discredits their theory--the opposition is shouted down with a venom that is often associated with cult members defending their belief system. Of course, not all are that way. Many approach it with objectivity...but many more do not.

remember this post?

If the jury is still out for you, why do you reserve your harshest attacks for those who see manmade global warming as a scam, a con, and a religious cult?

 

Recently, a CNN meteorologist (very well-respected) slammed the MMGW theory:

http://businessandmedia.org/articles...218205953.aspx

His points:
1. We've had warming/cooling trends before...there is no evidence that this "trend" is any different than previous.
2. Previous warming trends co-incided with global growth and prosperity. Coincidence? Unknown...but it does debunk the idea that warming=unilateral death and disaster. (Remember...Al Gore said we have a few decades left; Ted Turner says that in a few years, we will be cannibals).
3. (This one has teeth!) To make grave declarations about our earth based on a handful of years, that are statistically insignificant as a percentage of the Earth's age...is unbelievably irresponsible scientifically. The few years of data is insignificant, even if you hold to the 'young earth' theory. The scientists that believe we are billions of years old...their case is even weaker!
4. If we're going to use small time-frame samples, then why ignore that recently, we've been cooling? You can't have it both ways.

Face it, folks: the rate of people jumping ship on this theory is accelerating rapidly. It just doesn't hold up under scrutiny, and the chief proponents of it are sounding more shrill and less credible by the minute.

 

First of all, did you agree to my proposal to have a more Christian treatment of these topics? If not then I have to assume you want to continue your attacks. My offer was not unilateral.

Secondly, I didn't say anything to you that was that insulting. How does it compare with the statement of many here that those who voted for Obama are not Christians?

Finally, I have blasted the conservative statement that global warming is "a con" and absolutely not true in keeping with my understanding. What's the topic of this thread?

 

Um...I haven't attacked you. Try again.

Second...the Obama thing is off-topic, and it doesn't apply to me anyway. I've not done that.

Third...for someone that is "open-minded" about global warming...you sure do seem to defend it pretty staunchly.

 

Nowyou're starting to catch on.


January 14, 1996
Blame Global Warming for the Blizzard
By WILLIAM K. STEVENS
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpa...7A25752C0A960958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all


IT seems a paradox at first glance: How could a record snowstorm have covered much of the northeastern United States last week when the climate of the earth is warming?

Just four days after scientists announced on Jan. 3 that the average surface temperature of the globe had crept to a recorded high of nearly 60 degrees in 1995, the Blizzard of 1996 dropped more than 20 inches of snow on Central Park, the third deepest snowfall ever measured there. More than two feet fell on other parts of the Northeast corridor.

But not only are blizzards and global warming compatible, some experts cite evidence suggesting that climatic changes associated with global warming are actually creating more severe snowstorms.