Posted on 09/05/2008 8:03:09 PM PDT by FocusNexus
Pass it along to the next double-digit IQ stoner in line.
No way, it makes me love her even more!
The first sentence says it all. Author’s a left-wing communist kook. F’im.
AWESOME! :)
Sounds good to me.
It would seem to violate the law of noncontradiction, wouldn't it? But then again, these are liberals were are talking about.
I know these authors are leftist, godless, american hating scum, but what I’m always surprised by is how laughably stupid they are. For every one greenie, leftist, godless, american hating dumbass that reads this, there are an untold number of God fearing, American loving, we’ll mine & log the other planets later, realists out there that just eat this stuff up.
Go Lefties, Go. I never knew abject hatred could be so much fun.
This column is a great endorsement of her!
In addition to his frightening lack of qualification to be President (much less Messiah) of the United States, Obama is a crack-smoking, baby-killing, gun-grabbing, socialist homosexual who wants government schools to completely take over child rearing.
Ohhh, aaahhh...the Latte Liberals are shaking in their Birkenstocks now...
The Seattle paper is losing $$$$$ but need to push Marxism, especially when thousands are set for life with Microsoft stock...
Did Stalin hand out that stock or was it Bill Gates?
They hate the system that makes them safe, full and full of opportunity. The sickness of Seattle stinks all the way to Oregon.
I agree that Conservatives are good stewards of the environment because they are the ones who are most likely to actually spend time enjoying it. They have an appreciation and love for all of God’s creation and realized the obligation we have to take care of the beautiful world He made for us. At the same time, they realize that “Mother Nature” is much more powerful than anything mere man can do to her. I say this in NC while we are waiting for Hanna to come ashore and wondering what Ike and Josephine have in store for us next week. There is absolutely nothing that man can do to alter the course of these hurricanes. It really gives you a different prospective on who is really in charge!!
>>On her watch, regulation and government oversight of Alaska oil facilities is terribly lacking, and she has declined to establish a citizens’ advisory council to provide more effective public oversight of the expanding oil and gas operations in Arctic Alaska.<<
Note that these lefties always say drilling has to have “strict environmental oversight” (which sounds reasonable), but they never want government “alternative energy programs” to have “strict PORK oversight.”
evangelical, anti-choice, pro-gun, right-wing conservative who wants creationism taught in schools.
Reminds me of a t shirt I once had:
“evangelical, heterosexual, right wing conservative white male, any questions?”
She’s the real deal, the left is going to go absolutely berserk.
I went to the site ok - pretty interesting, but, I can’t seem to find where one can pull up any 2 days of ones’ choice. I can only find the default (Aug. 2007 vs. Aug. 2008).
???
Good. I'm tired of the neo-paganism/druidism being peddled everywhere. We are called to be good stewards of God's creation but we are not to worship trees, spotted owls or polar bears.
“Maybe because it’s a lie. The ice caps are significantly BIGGER this year. A must-visit site, to pass around to everyone you know : http://icecap.us/ (sorry, I’m having trouble making that a hot link). Shows the satellite photos of the ice caps on any two days of your choice, side by side; by default, it shows today and a year ago today.
WE ARE BEING LIED TO, AND WE HAVE TO FIGHT BACK!!!!!!!!”
Another lie is this silly notion that IF it does get warmer, it will get drier.
For one thing, the icecap.us site mentions this:
“Arable land will turn into desert”: “It will do no such thing. By the Clausius-Clapeyron relation, of which the Brookings Institute has perhaps not yet heard, in warmer weather the space occupied by the atmosphere is capable of carrying near-exponentially more water vapor than in colder weather. This relation establishes scientifically what has long been observed: that, in general, warmer weather is wetter weather.”
This can be confirmed in those climate records I posted earlier: When it gets COLD on a planetary scale, it generally gets dry / dusty. That’s what almost killed off humankind, not so far back. When it gets warm, the Earth usually / generally gets wetter. (Think dinosaurs tromping around in steamy swamps — for the most part, that is. There can and have been exceptions.)
Sounds pretty good to me... just what Trajan88 likes.
Serious question... is Rick Steiner a pussy or does he play one in the news room?
So only those who are in self-advancing organizations who are not neutral to the facts but only want the success of the world view they see as valid to be represented? It is not possible for Sarah Palin to have the best interest of her state in mind? She is the one who has been fighting for her state and her constituents and their jobs. I guess the writer thinks conservative, evangelicals want their children to grow up in a smutty Alaska?
VP Cheney once said that back in Wyoming, they used to call it "summer." And, BTW, I read a report that solar flares are diminishing. If solar flares end, we're headed for a little ice age, so let's all enjoy this global warming while it lasts because we're going to starve to death when it ends.
Hmmm... I should be careful about exactly WHAT I agree is a lie. I studied that picture of the icecaps and then did some more research:
1) That magenta line in the graphs represents the mean (of the ice coverage in the Artic) over the period 1979-2007 (only.) So... As of August 2008, 2008 is a little “better” in terms of ice coverage in the Artic than was 2007. But, it is still the 2nd lowest amount of coverage on record.
2) The ice doing the covering is thinner, now, than past years’ average, and the rate of melting through August suggests that the end result sometime later in Sept. (after which the ice begins to reform) may be close to the end result in Sept. 2007.
3) Year to year variations don’t mean much, anyway. So that means that an increase from 2007 to 2008 doesn’t mean much, and, actually, a change from the 1979-2007 mean, to either or both 2007 and 2008 is not very meaningful either. (Yes, I’m saying this cuts BOTH ways: Most of the GW argument based on readily observable / recent data is nearly irrelevant, but so is most of the anti-GW recent data & argument.).)
4) What IS more relevant is that the icecaps started melting (on average) 10,000 years ago.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.