Author Topic: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets  (Read 4367 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Jetavan

  • Argumentum ad australopithecum
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,580
  • Barlaam and Josaphat
    • The Mystical Theology
Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« on: March 05, 2010, 01:19:31 PM »
Quote
Critics of the teaching of evolution in the nation’s classrooms are gaining ground in some states by linking the issue to global warming, arguing that dissenting views on both scientific subjects should be taught in public schools.

In Kentucky, a bill recently introduced in the Legislature would encourage teachers to discuss “the advantages and disadvantages of scientific theories,” including “evolution, the origins of life, global warming and human cloning.”

The bill, which has yet to be voted on, is patterned on even more aggressive efforts in other states to fuse such issues. In Louisiana, a law passed in 2008 says the state board of education may assist teachers in promoting “critical thinking” on all of those subjects.
If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.

Offline ytterbiumanalyst

  • Professor Emeritus, CSA
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,790
Re: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« Reply #1 on: March 05, 2010, 01:39:43 PM »
Well, if you're going to be anti-science, at least be consistent.
"It is remarkable that what we call the world...in what professes to be true...will allow in one man no blemishes, and in another no virtue."--Charles Dickens

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 39,559
Re: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« Reply #2 on: March 05, 2010, 02:05:11 PM »
Well, if you're going to be anti-science, at least be consistent.

Critical thinking is anti-science?  Now that's dogmatic.
Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth

Offline ytterbiumanalyst

  • Professor Emeritus, CSA
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,790
Re: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« Reply #3 on: March 05, 2010, 02:11:16 PM »
Well, if you're going to be anti-science, at least be consistent.
Critical thinking is anti-science?  Now that's dogmatic.
It's not critical thinking. In both cases, one side presents evidence before their peers, and the other side says anything they can't understand must be stupid. We already have this side of the issue from the teenagers; why do we need to give it creedence by citing adults who still think this way?
"It is remarkable that what we call the world...in what professes to be true...will allow in one man no blemishes, and in another no virtue."--Charles Dickens

Offline scamandrius

  • Musicians don't dance
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,095
  • Why do I waste my time here?
  • Faith: Greek Orthodox
  • Jurisdiction: DOWAMA of AANA
Re: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« Reply #4 on: March 05, 2010, 03:11:20 PM »
It's not critical thinking. In both cases, one side presents evidence before their peers, and the other side says anything they can't understand must be stupid. We already have this side of the issue from the teenagers; why do we need to give it creedence by citing adults who still think this way?

The globabl warming sketpics have been presenting evidence for as long as the issue has been brought up. They have been labeled anti-science unfairly, by  the media, certain NGOs, and the pro-warming scientists.  They have been demonized and ridiculed rather than engaged and debated.  Every time a skeptic demands to debate Al Gore, he refuses or invents some reason as to why his schedule cannot allow him to do so. 
Hey, I don't hand out 9.5s to just anyone!  ;D

Offline Iconodule

  • Uranopolitan
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,029
  • "My god is greater."
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Ecumenical Patriarchate (ACROD)
Re: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« Reply #5 on: March 05, 2010, 03:21:39 PM »
I don't really understand why people are so adamantly in denial about global warming. Let's suppose global warming is a hoax- to combat global warming, people are trying to reduce air pollution, fossil fuel consumption, and our dependence on the automobile, and are trying to improve energy efficiency and preserve forests. All of these are good things, and, in my opinion, the more aggressively we implement them the better, irrespective of the evidence for global warming. And, while I question Darwinism and much of modern science, it seems to me that "creation science" is often connected with a political ideology that is more interested in preserving corporate power and a wasteful lifestyle than in respecting God's creation.

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 39,559
Re: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« Reply #6 on: March 05, 2010, 03:31:57 PM »
Well, if you're going to be anti-science, at least be consistent.
Critical thinking is anti-science?  Now that's dogmatic.
It's not critical thinking. In both cases, one side presents evidence before their peers, and the other side says anything they can't understand must be stupid. We already have this side of the issue from the teenagers; why do we need to give it creedence by citing adults who still think this way?

I don't know.  Ask them over at East Anglia U.
Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth

Offline ms.hoorah

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 866
Re: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« Reply #7 on: March 05, 2010, 03:34:04 PM »
I hope they teach this weather analysis which comes from the Union of Concerned (Cyclothymic) Scientists: ;)  Global warming is changing the climate in the Northeast.  Across the Laurel Mountains in Pennsylvania, the number of days with snow on the ground will soon be reduced by 50 percent.  

On the page directly preceding this comment it states the exact opposite:  The Northeast region is projected to see an increase in winter precipitation on the order of 20 to 30 percent.   :o
http://www.climatechoices.org/assets/documents/climatechoices/pennsylvania_necia.pdf

I need to go into my backyard to look at the gutter damage caused by the massive ice dams, but the snow drifts are too deep for me to physically walk through them. We had the largest recorded snowfall for Feb. with almost 50 inches.  
« Last Edit: March 05, 2010, 03:35:01 PM by ms.hoorah »

Online PeterTheAleut

  • The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
  • Section Moderator
  • Hypatos
  • *****
  • Posts: 35,375
  • Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« Reply #8 on: March 05, 2010, 04:02:20 PM »
Well, if you're going to be anti-science, at least be consistent.
IF the critics of today's science on global warming can present equally valid, peer-reviewed scientific evidence that calls into question what the mainstream has led us to believe, then I say more power to them.  If this is just a knee-jerk anti-science reaction with no scientific evidence to back it up--"I'm skeptical of this, so it must be stupid,"--then I say they should be kept out of the science classroom.
Not all who wander are lost.

Online Papist

  • Patriarch of Pontification
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,377
  • An Ideal to Strive Towards
Re: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« Reply #9 on: March 05, 2010, 04:50:05 PM »
I thought that there has been no statistically significant warming over the past ten to fifteen years.
My posts no longer forum here.

Offline ytterbiumanalyst

  • Professor Emeritus, CSA
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,790
Re: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« Reply #10 on: March 05, 2010, 04:53:08 PM »
Well, if you're going to be anti-science, at least be consistent.
IF the critics of today's science on global warming can present equally valid, peer-reviewed scientific evidence that calls into question what the mainstream has led us to believe, then I say more power to them.  If this is just a knee-jerk anti-science reaction with no scientific evidence to back it up--"I'm skeptical of this, so it must be stupid,"--then I say they should be kept out of the science classroom.
Absolutely agreed. In fact, I often do bring in peer-reviewed research where it's applicable to the subject matter I teach, and it doesn't really matter to me whether it fits with the "mainstream"--in my mind, if it's been peer-reviewed, it's reliable.
"It is remarkable that what we call the world...in what professes to be true...will allow in one man no blemishes, and in another no virtue."--Charles Dickens

Online Papist

  • Patriarch of Pontification
  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 13,377
  • An Ideal to Strive Towards
Re: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« Reply #11 on: March 05, 2010, 04:57:24 PM »
Well, if you're going to be anti-science, at least be consistent.
IF the critics of today's science on global warming can present equally valid, peer-reviewed scientific evidence that calls into question what the mainstream has led us to believe, then I say more power to them.  If this is just a knee-jerk anti-science reaction with no scientific evidence to back it up--"I'm skeptical of this, so it must be stupid,"--then I say they should be kept out of the science classroom.
Absolutely agreed. In fact, I often do bring in peer-reviewed research where it's applicable to the subject matter I teach, and it doesn't really matter to me whether it fits with the "mainstream"--in my mind, if it's been peer-reviewed, it's reliable.
Are peers always reliable when they review such data?
My posts no longer forum here.

Offline Heorhij

  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,576
    • Mississippi University for Women
Re: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« Reply #12 on: March 05, 2010, 04:58:51 PM »
I don't really understand why people are so adamantly in denial about global warming. Let's suppose global warming is a hoax- to combat global warming, people are trying to reduce air pollution, fossil fuel consumption, and our dependence on the automobile, and are trying to improve energy efficiency and preserve forests. All of these are good things, and, in my opinion, the more aggressively we implement them the better, irrespective of the evidence for global warming. And, while I question Darwinism and much of modern science, it seems to me that "creation science" is often connected with a political ideology that is more interested in preserving corporate power and a wasteful lifestyle than in respecting God's creation.

Hear, hear! Very sensible.
Love never fails.

Offline FormerReformer

  • Convertodox of the convertodox
  • Site Supporter
  • Archon
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,558
    • Music and Orthodoxy
  • Faith: Convertodox
  • Jurisdiction: Netodoxy
Re: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« Reply #13 on: March 05, 2010, 05:25:26 PM »
I don't really understand why people are so adamantly in denial about global warming. Let's suppose global warming is a hoax- to combat global warming, people are trying to reduce air pollution, fossil fuel consumption, and our dependence on the automobile, and are trying to improve energy efficiency and preserve forests. All of these are good things, and, in my opinion, the more aggressively we implement them the better, irrespective of the evidence for global warming. And, while I question Darwinism and much of modern science, it seems to me that "creation science" is often connected with a political ideology that is more interested in preserving corporate power and a wasteful lifestyle than in respecting God's creation.

regardless of whether or not the methods to reduce global warming are in and of themselves admirable, if global warming is a hoax we are using a false claim to spur on these admirable goals, which is in and of itself wrong.

Let's put this in another light- If Jesus Christ did not rise from the dead, then is all the fasting, almsgiving, honesty, chastity, and self control in the world going to do our souls one bit of good?

As for my view- these goals are admirable, and should be advanced as such, not as something that will save our planet, but as our responsibility as stewards of this great domain God has given to us.  As for climate change, well, according to our scientists who tell us the world has been around for billions of years, the earth has undergone MANY radical climate shifts, even before the appearance of man.  The only viewpoint which has ever claimed human action to have an effect on the climate of the past is Genesis 6.
"Funny," said Lancelot, "how the people who can't pray say that prayers are not answered, however much the people who can pray say they are."  TH White

Oh, no: I've succumbed to Hyperdoxy!

Offline bogdan

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,615
Re: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« Reply #14 on: March 05, 2010, 05:50:52 PM »
I don't really understand why people are so adamantly in denial about global warming. Let's suppose global warming is a hoax- to combat global warming, people are trying to reduce air pollution, fossil fuel consumption, and our dependence on the automobile, and are trying to improve energy efficiency and preserve forests. All of these are good things, and, in my opinion, the more aggressively we implement them the better, irrespective of the evidence for global warming. And, while I question Darwinism and much of modern science, it seems to me that "creation science" is often connected with a political ideology that is more interested in preserving corporate power and a wasteful lifestyle than in respecting God's creation.

The problem is that the political ideology opposite is more interested in extending secular government power (which tends to be atheistic) and bringing about a utopian Kingdom of Man through human means in the manner of Babel.

"Come, let us build ourselves a city..."

Offline Iconodule

  • Uranopolitan
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,029
  • "My god is greater."
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Ecumenical Patriarchate (ACROD)
Re: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« Reply #15 on: March 05, 2010, 06:03:46 PM »
I don't really understand why people are so adamantly in denial about global warming. Let's suppose global warming is a hoax- to combat global warming, people are trying to reduce air pollution, fossil fuel consumption, and our dependence on the automobile, and are trying to improve energy efficiency and preserve forests. All of these are good things, and, in my opinion, the more aggressively we implement them the better, irrespective of the evidence for global warming. And, while I question Darwinism and much of modern science, it seems to me that "creation science" is often connected with a political ideology that is more interested in preserving corporate power and a wasteful lifestyle than in respecting God's creation.

The problem is that the political ideology opposite is more interested in extending secular government power (which tends to be atheistic) and bringing about a utopian Kingdom of Man through human means in the manner of Babel.

"Come, let us build ourselves a city..."

Both the left and the right desire this. The right may have Christian pretensions but still carries the same basic assumptions from the Enlightenment.
« Last Edit: March 05, 2010, 06:04:04 PM by Iconodule »

Offline ytterbiumanalyst

  • Professor Emeritus, CSA
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,790
Re: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« Reply #16 on: March 05, 2010, 06:23:11 PM »
I don't really understand why people are so adamantly in denial about global warming. Let's suppose global warming is a hoax- to combat global warming, people are trying to reduce air pollution, fossil fuel consumption, and our dependence on the automobile, and are trying to improve energy efficiency and preserve forests. All of these are good things, and, in my opinion, the more aggressively we implement them the better, irrespective of the evidence for global warming. And, while I question Darwinism and much of modern science, it seems to me that "creation science" is often connected with a political ideology that is more interested in preserving corporate power and a wasteful lifestyle than in respecting God's creation.

regardless of whether or not the methods to reduce global warming are in and of themselves admirable, if global warming is a hoax we are using a false claim to spur on these admirable goals, which is in and of itself wrong.
If it is a hoax, it is wrong; however, if it is misunderstood observations interpreted in good faith, that is a different matter entirely.

Quote
Let's put this in another light- If Jesus Christ did not rise from the dead, then is all the fasting, almsgiving, honesty, chastity, and self control in the world going to do our souls one bit of good?
That's not at all the same thing.

Quote
As for my view- these goals are admirable, and should be advanced as such, not as something that will save our planet, but as our responsibility as stewards of this great domain God has given to us. 
Agreed.

Quote
As for climate change, well, according to our scientists who tell us the world has been around for billions of years, the earth has undergone MANY radical climate shifts, even before the appearance of man.  The only viewpoint which has ever claimed human action to have an effect on the climate of the past is Genesis 6.
You do realize that at the beginning of the 20th century we numbered less than 1 billion and by the end of it, we had exceeded 6? Never before have we seen this sort of population growth; it is reasonable to expect that we also have never affected our planet as profoundly as we are right now.
"It is remarkable that what we call the world...in what professes to be true...will allow in one man no blemishes, and in another no virtue."--Charles Dickens

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 39,559
Re: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« Reply #17 on: March 05, 2010, 06:51:40 PM »
I don't really understand why people are so adamantly in denial about global warming. Let's suppose global warming is a hoax- to combat global warming, people are trying to reduce air pollution, fossil fuel consumption, and our dependence on the automobile, and are trying to improve energy efficiency and preserve forests. All of these are good things, and, in my opinion, the more aggressively we implement them the better, irrespective of the evidence for global warming. And, while I question Darwinism and much of modern science, it seems to me that "creation science" is often connected with a political ideology that is more interested in preserving corporate power and a wasteful lifestyle than in respecting God's creation.

regardless of whether or not the methods to reduce global warming are in and of themselves admirable, if global warming is a hoax we are using a false claim to spur on these admirable goals, which is in and of itself wrong.

Let's put this in another light- If Jesus Christ did not rise from the dead, then is all the fasting, almsgiving, honesty, chastity, and self control in the world going to do our souls one bit of good?

As for my view- these goals are admirable, and should be advanced as such, not as something that will save our planet, but as our responsibility as stewards of this great domain God has given to us.  As for climate change, well, according to our scientists who tell us the world has been around for billions of years, the earth has undergone MANY radical climate shifts, even before the appearance of man.  The only viewpoint which has ever claimed human action to have an effect on the climate of the past is Genesis 6.

Exactly.  I don't see wast and pollution as fulfilling Adam's vocation.

As for the harm of the Global warming hoax, it comes from it purpose: keeping us in crisis mode, where we have to take stupid actions immediately because of some alleged looming disaster. Take a breath and think.  But that exactly what the green shirts do not want us to do.
« Last Edit: March 05, 2010, 06:52:06 PM by ialmisry »
Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 39,559
Re: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« Reply #18 on: March 05, 2010, 06:54:16 PM »
I don't really understand why people are so adamantly in denial about global warming. Let's suppose global warming is a hoax- to combat global warming, people are trying to reduce air pollution, fossil fuel consumption, and our dependence on the automobile, and are trying to improve energy efficiency and preserve forests. All of these are good things, and, in my opinion, the more aggressively we implement them the better, irrespective of the evidence for global warming. And, while I question Darwinism and much of modern science, it seems to me that "creation science" is often connected with a political ideology that is more interested in preserving corporate power and a wasteful lifestyle than in respecting God's creation.

regardless of whether or not the methods to reduce global warming are in and of themselves admirable, if global warming is a hoax we are using a false claim to spur on these admirable goals, which is in and of itself wrong.
If it is a hoax, it is wrong; however, if it is misunderstood observations interpreted in good faith, that is a different matter entirely.

Quote
Let's put this in another light- If Jesus Christ did not rise from the dead, then is all the fasting, almsgiving, honesty, chastity, and self control in the world going to do our souls one bit of good?
That's not at all the same thing.

Quote
As for my view- these goals are admirable, and should be advanced as such, not as something that will save our planet, but as our responsibility as stewards of this great domain God has given to us. 
Agreed.

Quote
As for climate change, well, according to our scientists who tell us the world has been around for billions of years, the earth has undergone MANY radical climate shifts, even before the appearance of man.  The only viewpoint which has ever claimed human action to have an effect on the climate of the past is Genesis 6.
You do realize that at the beginning of the 20th century we numbered less than 1 billion and by the end of it, we had exceeded 6? Never before have we seen this sort of population growth; it is reasonable to expect that we also have never affected our planet as profoundly as we are right now.

It's a big planet.  "Expect," you mean "assUme."  It is your burden to prove.
Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth

Offline ytterbiumanalyst

  • Professor Emeritus, CSA
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,790
Re: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« Reply #19 on: March 05, 2010, 06:58:21 PM »
I don't really understand why people are so adamantly in denial about global warming. Let's suppose global warming is a hoax- to combat global warming, people are trying to reduce air pollution, fossil fuel consumption, and our dependence on the automobile, and are trying to improve energy efficiency and preserve forests. All of these are good things, and, in my opinion, the more aggressively we implement them the better, irrespective of the evidence for global warming. And, while I question Darwinism and much of modern science, it seems to me that "creation science" is often connected with a political ideology that is more interested in preserving corporate power and a wasteful lifestyle than in respecting God's creation.

regardless of whether or not the methods to reduce global warming are in and of themselves admirable, if global warming is a hoax we are using a false claim to spur on these admirable goals, which is in and of itself wrong.

Let's put this in another light- If Jesus Christ did not rise from the dead, then is all the fasting, almsgiving, honesty, chastity, and self control in the world going to do our souls one bit of good?

As for my view- these goals are admirable, and should be advanced as such, not as something that will save our planet, but as our responsibility as stewards of this great domain God has given to us.  As for climate change, well, according to our scientists who tell us the world has been around for billions of years, the earth has undergone MANY radical climate shifts, even before the appearance of man.  The only viewpoint which has ever claimed human action to have an effect on the climate of the past is Genesis 6.

Exactly.  I don't see wast and pollution as fulfilling Adam's vocation.

As for the harm of the Global warming hoax, it comes from it purpose: keeping us in crisis mode, where we have to take stupid actions immediately because of some alleged looming disaster. Take a breath and think.  But that exactly what the green shirts do not want us to do.
I agree with all but the last sentence. Seriously, Isa, is it so hard for you to make a point without labeling and stereotyping?
"It is remarkable that what we call the world...in what professes to be true...will allow in one man no blemishes, and in another no virtue."--Charles Dickens

Offline ozgeorge

  • I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 16,383
  • My plans for retirement.
    • Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia
Re: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« Reply #20 on: March 06, 2010, 07:58:16 AM »
I don't really understand why people are so adamantly in denial about global warming. Let's suppose global warming is a hoax- to combat global warming, people are trying to reduce air pollution, fossil fuel consumption, and our dependence on the automobile, and are trying to improve energy efficiency and preserve forests. All of these are good things, and, in my opinion, the more aggressively we implement them the better, irrespective of the evidence for global warming. And, while I question Darwinism and much of modern science, it seems to me that "creation science" is often connected with a political ideology that is more interested in preserving corporate power and a wasteful lifestyle than in respecting God's creation.
True, and what I don't get is who would stand to gain from a "hoax" about global warming if it seeks to reduce consumption?
If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

Offline Tamara

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,209
  • +Pray for Orthodox Unity+
Re: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« Reply #21 on: March 06, 2010, 11:38:19 AM »
I don't really understand why people are so adamantly in denial about global warming. Let's suppose global warming is a hoax- to combat global warming, people are trying to reduce air pollution, fossil fuel consumption, and our dependence on the automobile, and are trying to improve energy efficiency and preserve forests. All of these are good things, and, in my opinion, the more aggressively we implement them the better, irrespective of the evidence for global warming. And, while I question Darwinism and much of modern science, it seems to me that "creation science" is often connected with a political ideology that is more interested in preserving corporate power and a wasteful lifestyle than in respecting God's creation.
True, and what I don't get is who would stand to gain from a "hoax" about global warming if it seeks to reduce consumption?

According to the NY Times, Al Gore. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/business/energy-environment/03gore.html

His Generation Investment Management private equity fund has taken a 9.5 percent stake in a company that has one of the largest carbon credit portfolios in the world.


Offline ozgeorge

  • I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 16,383
  • My plans for retirement.
    • Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia
Re: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« Reply #22 on: March 06, 2010, 11:48:53 AM »
I don't really understand why people are so adamantly in denial about global warming. Let's suppose global warming is a hoax- to combat global warming, people are trying to reduce air pollution, fossil fuel consumption, and our dependence on the automobile, and are trying to improve energy efficiency and preserve forests. All of these are good things, and, in my opinion, the more aggressively we implement them the better, irrespective of the evidence for global warming. And, while I question Darwinism and much of modern science, it seems to me that "creation science" is often connected with a political ideology that is more interested in preserving corporate power and a wasteful lifestyle than in respecting God's creation.
True, and what I don't get is who would stand to gain from a "hoax" about global warming if it seeks to reduce consumption?

According to the NY Times, Al Gore. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/business/energy-environment/03gore.html

His Generation Investment Management private equity fund has taken a 9.5 percent stake in a company that has one of the largest carbon credit portfolios in the world.


Thanks! I really find it hard to understand though. I went to hear Lord Monkton (a famous climate skeptic from the UK) when he came out here to speak recently, and he claimed the same thing (that Gore's company had a vested interest in reducing carbon use). But when I asked Lord Monkton in Q&A time: "how can any company possibly benefit from a strategy that could bankrupt entire nations and plunge the world into recession?" He had no answer.
« Last Edit: March 06, 2010, 11:49:48 AM by ozgeorge »
If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

Offline Tamara

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,209
  • +Pray for Orthodox Unity+
Re: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« Reply #23 on: March 06, 2010, 12:58:22 PM »
I don't really understand why people are so adamantly in denial about global warming. Let's suppose global warming is a hoax- to combat global warming, people are trying to reduce air pollution, fossil fuel consumption, and our dependence on the automobile, and are trying to improve energy efficiency and preserve forests. All of these are good things, and, in my opinion, the more aggressively we implement them the better, irrespective of the evidence for global warming. And, while I question Darwinism and much of modern science, it seems to me that "creation science" is often connected with a political ideology that is more interested in preserving corporate power and a wasteful lifestyle than in respecting God's creation.
True, and what I don't get is who would stand to gain from a "hoax" about global warming if it seeks to reduce consumption?

According to the NY Times, Al Gore. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/business/energy-environment/03gore.html

His Generation Investment Management private equity fund has taken a 9.5 percent stake in a company that has one of the largest carbon credit portfolios in the world.


Thanks! I really find it hard to understand though. I went to hear Lord Monkton (a famous climate skeptic from the UK) when he came out here to speak recently, and he claimed the same thing (that Gore's company had a vested interest in reducing carbon use). But when I asked Lord Monkton in Q&A time: "how can any company possibly benefit from a strategy that could bankrupt entire nations and plunge the world into recession?" He had no answer.

Maybe the company doesn't believe that is what will happen. I live in California and we are bankrupt due to the belief that government can keep giving unlimited entitlements because the money would keep flowing. The liberals in our state are still in denial that businesses are fleeing our state due to excessive taxes and regulation.

Offline ozgeorge

  • I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 16,383
  • My plans for retirement.
    • Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia
Re: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« Reply #24 on: March 06, 2010, 01:30:01 PM »
I don't really understand why people are so adamantly in denial about global warming. Let's suppose global warming is a hoax- to combat global warming, people are trying to reduce air pollution, fossil fuel consumption, and our dependence on the automobile, and are trying to improve energy efficiency and preserve forests. All of these are good things, and, in my opinion, the more aggressively we implement them the better, irrespective of the evidence for global warming. And, while I question Darwinism and much of modern science, it seems to me that "creation science" is often connected with a political ideology that is more interested in preserving corporate power and a wasteful lifestyle than in respecting God's creation.
True, and what I don't get is who would stand to gain from a "hoax" about global warming if it seeks to reduce consumption?

According to the NY Times, Al Gore. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/business/energy-environment/03gore.html

His Generation Investment Management private equity fund has taken a 9.5 percent stake in a company that has one of the largest carbon credit portfolios in the world.


Thanks! I really find it hard to understand though. I went to hear Lord Monkton (a famous climate skeptic from the UK) when he came out here to speak recently, and he claimed the same thing (that Gore's company had a vested interest in reducing carbon use). But when I asked Lord Monkton in Q&A time: "how can any company possibly benefit from a strategy that could bankrupt entire nations and plunge the world into recession?" He had no answer.

Maybe the company doesn't believe that is what will happen.
I have to say, I find that a bit hard to swallow. The idea that a company has the nous to engineer a worldwide scientific hoax in an effort to reduce carbon emissions and consumption generally in industrialized nations, yet doesn't have the nous to see that this will inevitably lead to economic downturn seems a bit far fetched to me.
If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

Offline Tamara

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,209
  • +Pray for Orthodox Unity+
Re: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« Reply #25 on: March 06, 2010, 01:36:30 PM »
I don't really understand why people are so adamantly in denial about global warming. Let's suppose global warming is a hoax- to combat global warming, people are trying to reduce air pollution, fossil fuel consumption, and our dependence on the automobile, and are trying to improve energy efficiency and preserve forests. All of these are good things, and, in my opinion, the more aggressively we implement them the better, irrespective of the evidence for global warming. And, while I question Darwinism and much of modern science, it seems to me that "creation science" is often connected with a political ideology that is more interested in preserving corporate power and a wasteful lifestyle than in respecting God's creation.
True, and what I don't get is who would stand to gain from a "hoax" about global warming if it seeks to reduce consumption?

According to the NY Times, Al Gore. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/business/energy-environment/03gore.html

His Generation Investment Management private equity fund has taken a 9.5 percent stake in a company that has one of the largest carbon credit portfolios in the world.


Thanks! I really find it hard to understand though. I went to hear Lord Monkton (a famous climate skeptic from the UK) when he came out here to speak recently, and he claimed the same thing (that Gore's company had a vested interest in reducing carbon use). But when I asked Lord Monkton in Q&A time: "how can any company possibly benefit from a strategy that could bankrupt entire nations and plunge the world into recession?" He had no answer.

Maybe the company doesn't believe that is what will happen.
I have to say, I find that a bit hard to swallow. The idea that a company has the nous to engineer a worldwide scientific hoax in an effort to reduce carbon emissions and consumption generally in industrialized nations, yet doesn't have the nous to see that this will inevitably lead to economic downturn seems a bit far fetched to me.

But the company who sells carbon credits didn't engineer the idea of global warming. They saw a way to profit it from it. And most companies only think in their own best interests, no matter how short-sighted those interests may be.
« Last Edit: March 06, 2010, 01:38:25 PM by Tamara »

Offline ozgeorge

  • I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 16,383
  • My plans for retirement.
    • Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia
Re: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« Reply #26 on: March 06, 2010, 02:01:26 PM »
I don't really understand why people are so adamantly in denial about global warming. Let's suppose global warming is a hoax- to combat global warming, people are trying to reduce air pollution, fossil fuel consumption, and our dependence on the automobile, and are trying to improve energy efficiency and preserve forests. All of these are good things, and, in my opinion, the more aggressively we implement them the better, irrespective of the evidence for global warming. And, while I question Darwinism and much of modern science, it seems to me that "creation science" is often connected with a political ideology that is more interested in preserving corporate power and a wasteful lifestyle than in respecting God's creation.
True, and what I don't get is who would stand to gain from a "hoax" about global warming if it seeks to reduce consumption?

According to the NY Times, Al Gore. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/business/energy-environment/03gore.html

His Generation Investment Management private equity fund has taken a 9.5 percent stake in a company that has one of the largest carbon credit portfolios in the world.


Thanks! I really find it hard to understand though. I went to hear Lord Monkton (a famous climate skeptic from the UK) when he came out here to speak recently, and he claimed the same thing (that Gore's company had a vested interest in reducing carbon use). But when I asked Lord Monkton in Q&A time: "how can any company possibly benefit from a strategy that could bankrupt entire nations and plunge the world into recession?" He had no answer.

Maybe the company doesn't believe that is what will happen.
I have to say, I find that a bit hard to swallow. The idea that a company has the nous to engineer a worldwide scientific hoax in an effort to reduce carbon emissions and consumption generally in industrialized nations, yet doesn't have the nous to see that this will inevitably lead to economic downturn seems a bit far fetched to me.

But the company who sells carbon credits didn't engineer the idea of global warming. They saw a way to profit it from it. And most companies only think in their own best interests, no matter how short-sighted those interests may be.
I guess they'll be able to buy an extra horse and cart then. :D
If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 39,559
Re: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« Reply #27 on: March 06, 2010, 05:32:30 PM »
I don't really understand why people are so adamantly in denial about global warming. Let's suppose global warming is a hoax- to combat global warming, people are trying to reduce air pollution, fossil fuel consumption, and our dependence on the automobile, and are trying to improve energy efficiency and preserve forests. All of these are good things, and, in my opinion, the more aggressively we implement them the better, irrespective of the evidence for global warming. And, while I question Darwinism and much of modern science, it seems to me that "creation science" is often connected with a political ideology that is more interested in preserving corporate power and a wasteful lifestyle than in respecting God's creation.
True, and what I don't get is who would stand to gain from a "hoax" about global warming if it seeks to reduce consumption?

According to the NY Times, Al Gore. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/business/energy-environment/03gore.html

His Generation Investment Management private equity fund has taken a 9.5 percent stake in a company that has one of the largest carbon credit portfolios in the world.


Thanks! I really find it hard to understand though. I went to hear Lord Monkton (a famous climate skeptic from the UK) when he came out here to speak recently, and he claimed the same thing (that Gore's company had a vested interest in reducing carbon use). But when I asked Lord Monkton in Q&A time: "how can any company possibly benefit from a strategy that could bankrupt entire nations and plunge the world into recession?" He had no answer.

Maybe the company doesn't believe that is what will happen.
I have to say, I find that a bit hard to swallow. The idea that a company has the nous to engineer a worldwide scientific hoax in an effort to reduce carbon emissions and consumption generally in industrialized nations, yet doesn't have the nous to see that this will inevitably lead to economic downturn seems a bit far fetched to me.
Liberalism has been known to cause severe myopia.

For your friend Lord Monkton
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_Emission_Trading_Scheme#Criticisms
Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth

Offline ozgeorge

  • I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 16,383
  • My plans for retirement.
    • Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia
Re: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« Reply #28 on: March 07, 2010, 12:24:57 PM »
Liberalism has been known to cause severe myopia.
Fascinating.
 ::)
If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

Offline Tamara

  • Archon
  • ********
  • Posts: 2,209
  • +Pray for Orthodox Unity+
Re: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« Reply #29 on: March 07, 2010, 06:02:27 PM »
I don't really understand why people are so adamantly in denial about global warming. Let's suppose global warming is a hoax- to combat global warming, people are trying to reduce air pollution, fossil fuel consumption, and our dependence on the automobile, and are trying to improve energy efficiency and preserve forests. All of these are good things, and, in my opinion, the more aggressively we implement them the better, irrespective of the evidence for global warming. And, while I question Darwinism and much of modern science, it seems to me that "creation science" is often connected with a political ideology that is more interested in preserving corporate power and a wasteful lifestyle than in respecting God's creation.
True, and what I don't get is who would stand to gain from a "hoax" about global warming if it seeks to reduce consumption?

According to the NY Times, Al Gore. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/business/energy-environment/03gore.html

His Generation Investment Management private equity fund has taken a 9.5 percent stake in a company that has one of the largest carbon credit portfolios in the world.


Thanks! I really find it hard to understand though. I went to hear Lord Monkton (a famous climate skeptic from the UK) when he came out here to speak recently, and he claimed the same thing (that Gore's company had a vested interest in reducing carbon use). But when I asked Lord Monkton in Q&A time: "how can any company possibly benefit from a strategy that could bankrupt entire nations and plunge the world into recession?" He had no answer.

Maybe the company doesn't believe that is what will happen.
I have to say, I find that a bit hard to swallow. The idea that a company has the nous to engineer a worldwide scientific hoax in an effort to reduce carbon emissions and consumption generally in industrialized nations, yet doesn't have the nous to see that this will inevitably lead to economic downturn seems a bit far fetched to me.
Liberalism has been known to cause severe myopia.

For your friend Lord Monkton
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_Emission_Trading_Scheme#Criticisms

Interesting link. Thanks Isa.  :)
I agree. We, in California, are living that myopic nightmare today.

Offline jckstraw72

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,174
Re: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« Reply #30 on: March 14, 2010, 03:26:33 PM »
in my experience, no one really denies global warming, the question is rather over what is causing global warming. my meteorologist friend has spoken to me about a whole lot of scientific evidence that refutes the prevailing notions. going against the mainstream doesnt have to be smeared as anti-science.

Offline Rufus

  • OC.net guru
  • *******
  • Posts: 1,337
  • Nafpliotis with sunglasses and a cigar.
Re: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« Reply #31 on: March 25, 2010, 11:00:40 PM »
Pollution is a real problem that must be dealt with. "Global Warming" is a fetish. Yes, there is climate change, and it can lead to natural disasters. Maybe it's caused by humans. Maybe it's not. As long as Global Warmingism is a liberal fetish and anti-Global Warmingism and Creationism are conservative fetishes, we'll never be able to discuss this civilly.

According to satellite data, the earth's temperature has dropped every year since 1998, whereas data from ground-based weather stations indicate that the earth's temperature is going up. Go figure.

Online PeterTheAleut

  • The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
  • Section Moderator
  • Hypatos
  • *****
  • Posts: 35,375
  • Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« Reply #32 on: March 25, 2010, 11:18:17 PM »
According to satellite data, the earth's temperature has dropped every year since 1998, whereas data from ground-based weather stations indicate that the earth's temperature is going up. Go figure.
That makes sense, though.  I imagine satellite data are based on what heat energy is reflected from the earth back through the upper atmosphere and out into space, whereas ground-based weather stations register heat energy that remains in the lower atmosphere.  If an increase in the greenhouse effect in our atmosphere keeps more heat energy in the lower atmosphere and allows less heat to be reflected back into space, we should see exactly what you claim we're seeing.
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline zoarthegleaner

  • Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 398
Re: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« Reply #33 on: March 26, 2010, 01:27:49 PM »
It's not critical thinking. In both cases, one side presents evidence before their peers, and the other side says anything they can't understand must be stupid. We already have this side of the issue from the teenagers; why do we need to give it creedence by citing adults who still think this way?

The globabl warming sketpics have been presenting evidence for as long as the issue has been brought up. They have been labeled anti-science unfairly, by  the media, certain NGOs, and the pro-warming scientists.  They have been demonized and ridiculed rather than engaged and debated.  Every time a skeptic demands to debate Al Gore, he refuses or invents some reason as to why his schedule cannot allow him to do so. 


Al Gore invented the Day Timer...my favorite climate change bumper sticker neolism:  "You can stop Climate Change"

john
Courteous is my name,
and I have always aimed to live up to it.
Grace is also my name,
but when things go wrong
its Courteous whom I blame;
but its Grace who sees me through it.

Offline Jetavan

  • Argumentum ad australopithecum
  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 6,580
  • Barlaam and Josaphat
    • The Mystical Theology
Re: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« Reply #34 on: March 11, 2012, 04:21:14 PM »
Quote
Senator James Inhofe (R-OK) appeared on Voice of Christian Youth America’s radio program Crosstalk with Vic Eliason yesterday to promote his new book The Greatest Hoax: How the Global Warming Conspiracy Threatens Your Future, where he repeated his frequent claim that human influenced climate change is impossible because “God’s still up there.” Inhofe cited Genesis 8:22 to claim that it is “outrageous” and arrogant for people to believe human beings are “able to change what He is doing in the climate.”
....
Caller: Senator, do you quote any Scripture in your book?

Inhofe: Yeah, as a matter of fact I do. My favorite is Genesis 8:22 which is ‘as long as the earth remains there will be seed time and harvest, cold and heat, winter and summer, day and night,’ you know, God’s still up there. There’s another piece of Scripture I’ll mention which I should’ve mentioned, no one seems to remember this, the smartest thing the activists did in trying to put their program through is try to get the evangelicals on their side, so they hired a guy named Cizik, and he had his picture in front of Vanity magazine dressed like Jesus walking on water. He has been exposed since then to be the liberal that he is. I would say that the other Scripture that I use quite frequently on this subject is Romans 1:25, ‘They give up the truth about God for a lie and they worship God’s creation instead of God, who will be praised forever.’ In other words, they are trying to say we should worship the creation. We were reminded back in Romans that this was going to happen and sure enough it’s happening.
::)
« Last Edit: March 11, 2012, 04:29:08 PM by Jetavan »
If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.

Offline Ortho_cat

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 5,392
Re: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« Reply #35 on: March 11, 2012, 05:38:37 PM »
not fair to lump evolution theory in with global warming theory...  :-\

Offline Iconodule

  • Uranopolitan
  • Merarches
  • ***********
  • Posts: 8,029
  • "My god is greater."
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Ecumenical Patriarchate (ACROD)
Re: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« Reply #36 on: March 11, 2012, 06:31:22 PM »
It makes plenty of sense if your "spiritual" outlook is ultimately determined by your political and economic allegiances.

Offline Jonathan Gress

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 5,552
Re: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« Reply #37 on: March 11, 2012, 07:12:12 PM »
Depends on which conservatives or liberals you're talking about. Case in point: "evolutionism" is questioned by many conservatives, but accepted by many other conservatives, not only because they feel compelled to accept the scientific consensus, but because it actually supports conservative ideology in key respects (just check out Steve Sailer's blog, for one). For example, most liberals and leftists still assume the "Standard Social Science Model" when formulating public policy. This model treats human nature as a "blank slate", i.e. all our supposedly "natural" tendencies and predilections, such as "gender roles", are supposedly the product of our environment alone, and therefore completely dependent on arbitrary cultural differences. Evolutionary psychologists, on the other hand, recognize that there are universal tendencies in cultural gender roles, which they attribute to a common biological inheritance, which can be explained in terms of Darwinian natural selection. It's ironic that so many liberals use evolution to bash conservatives, when in fact many of the conclusions of evolutionary biology contradict the anthropological assumptions of leftist ideology.

I would venture that the same might hold of the global warming "debate". As far as I know, climatology is akin to biology, in that the actual professional consensus has acknowledged a significant man-made cause of current global warming for some time now. Political ideology has kept the scientific opposition alive, but this is scientifically speaking hardly more important than the political backing given to "dissenters" from Darwinism. Without this political backing, would there even be a scientific opposition at all?

If you want a third example, just consider the scientists that the tobacco industry has recruited over the decades to dispute the findings that show the harm caused by smoking. Are they a credible scientific "alternative" to the consensus of the medical establishment concerning the harm of tobacco smoke?

Offline ironchapman

  • A bull of truth in a china shop of falsehoods.
  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 802
  • I see you.
  • Faith: Serious inquirer.
Re: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« Reply #38 on: March 12, 2012, 02:54:46 AM »
As someone involved in academia, "peer-reviewed" can sometimes mean "censoring and quashing views we don't agree with", particularly in a field as fraught with controversy as climate science. Peer review can be a sign of quality, but it is not the be-all, end-all

According to satellite data, the earth's temperature has dropped every year since 1998, whereas data from ground-based weather stations indicate that the earth's temperature is going up. Go figure.
That makes sense, though.  I imagine satellite data are based on what heat energy is reflected from the earth back through the upper atmosphere and out into space, whereas ground-based weather stations register heat energy that remains in the lower atmosphere.  If an increase in the greenhouse effect in our atmosphere keeps more heat energy in the lower atmosphere and allows less heat to be reflected back into space, we should see exactly what you claim we're seeing.
Or, it could be that many of the sensors that show temperature increases are located in rather dumb locations, particularly in spots where the urban heat island effect is strong. Other factors include being located near air conditioners, barrels used to burn trash, parts of an airport near where planes' engines are running often. See here for some examples.

Quote
“The temperature records cannot be relied on as indicators of global change,” said John Christy, professor of atmospheric science at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, a former lead author on the IPCC.

The doubts of Christy and a number of other researchers focus on the thousands of weather stations around the world, which have been used to collect temperature data over the past 150 years.

These stations, they believe, have been seriously compromised by factors such as urbanisation, changes in land use and, in many cases, being moved from site to site.

Christy has published research papers looking at these effects in three different regions: east Africa, and the American states of California and Alabama.

“The story is the same for each one,” he said. “The popular data sets show a lot of warming but the apparent temperature rise was actually caused by local factors affecting the weather stations, such as land development.”

-----------

Anyways, the entire science of climate change is full of errors, falsehoods, and various other problems. I don't have the time to discuss all of these issues in detail (that would take, quite literally, a book), but here some relevant links:


And I could go on and on and on, but I have other things to. This will have to suffice. There's evidence out there, if you're willing to search for it.
« Last Edit: March 12, 2012, 03:07:20 AM by ironchapman »
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts." --Bertrand Russell

Offline Ortho_cat

  • Protokentarchos
  • *********
  • Posts: 5,392
Re: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« Reply #39 on: March 12, 2012, 03:30:45 AM »
It makes plenty of sense if your "spiritual" outlook is ultimately determined by your political and economic allegiances.

truer words...

Offline orthonorm

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,363
Re: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« Reply #40 on: March 12, 2012, 03:32:27 AM »
Kentucky, people. Kentucky . . .

[/thread]
If you have PMed me, the mods have taken my ability to PM away. Please see my email if you wish to contact me during my time of trial.

Online PeterTheAleut

  • The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
  • Section Moderator
  • Hypatos
  • *****
  • Posts: 35,375
  • Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« Reply #41 on: March 12, 2012, 08:45:03 AM »
Kentucky, people. Kentucky . . .

[/thread]
What about Kentucky?
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline orthonorm

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,363
Re: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« Reply #42 on: March 12, 2012, 08:49:14 AM »
If you have PMed me, the mods have taken my ability to PM away. Please see my email if you wish to contact me during my time of trial.

Online PeterTheAleut

  • The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
  • Section Moderator
  • Hypatos
  • *****
  • Posts: 35,375
  • Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: Darwin Foes Add Warming to Targets
« Reply #43 on: March 12, 2012, 08:55:13 AM »
Kentucky, people. Kentucky . . .

[/thread]
What about Kentucky?

You sure you ain't Eliza?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELIZA
Can you please just answer the question? What about Kentucky?
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline orthonorm

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 17,363
If you have PMed me, the mods have taken my ability to PM away. Please see my email if you wish to contact me during my time of trial.