[valis]

Originally Posted by wacor

Having your wife move out gives one a different perspective.

caught that too...........hope all works out, bill.........

[wacor]

thanks

working on it.

still have hope

[Knotbored]

This isn't global warming but is polution related. News last night says San Francisco is aiming to get 100% recling of everything in a couple years and eliminate landfills. They already claim 75% recycling and claim that is best in the nation.
I see very little in California to envy but my hat is off to them, this is a model all cities should try to compete for.

[wacor]

we have a lot of recycling going on. It is never gonna eliminate the waste. Kind of an odd quirk but on the radio this morning there was a comment about how much less paper this is now going to dumps and recycling with online news editions and people not buying newspapers like they used to.

[LANMaster]

Originally Posted by Stoner

I'll bet no scientist worth his salt agrees with Gore, either.
http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasc...9/gen99256.htm

Unfortunately there simply are way too many accredited scientists sharing the stage with him at key events around the globe.

Meanwhile .....

Al "PhotoShop" Gore Tries Lies to Sell Books


Apparently, the 30-year low in hurricane activity was about to make some trouble for sales of Al Gore's new book, "Our Choice; A Plan To Solve The Climate Crisis." Therefore, he settled on a little PhotoShopping instead:

Shortly after the devastation of Katrina, Al Gore was busy making a correlation between hurricanes and global warming in an effort to drive home his claim that higher global CO2 emissions cause an increase in extreme weather events. The cover art for Gore’s movie, An Inconvenient Truth, features an image of a hurricane rising out of a smoke stack.
Seemingly underwhelmed that there have been no major hurricanes since Katrina, along with the fact that global hurricane activity is now at a thirty year low, Gore came up with an ingenious method of solving the problem of the lack of scary depictions of frightening hurricanes to display on his book – simply airbrush them in!

Paul Joseph Watson, author of the above-linked post, quotes Univ. of Florida hurricane expert Ryan Maue, who made an interesting observation about Algore's new tome:

The cover opens and closes half and half — so you only see one hurricane…as in the press release photo or the one on Amazon.

But this is the real picture sequence from the book which I looked at Borders today and took cell-phone pictures, original (before the retouching by some “artist”) Note all of the Arctic ice and the size of the Florida Peninsula… And the final product:

A midget Southern Hemisphere cyclone is off the coast of Florida, another hurricane is sitting on the equator off the coast of Peru — and the Arctic Ice is gone (perhaps it is summer) and the Florida Peninsula is half gone
There are other differences I am sure you can find — but the hurricanes are just nonsense…

Editorial license, you say? Creative adjustment of an image, something that's done all the time in marketing campaigns, just to make a point of a future that could be?

How about: desperate act by a lying enviro-moonbat who is doing anything and everything possible to promote as reality what has been and continues to be confirmed as a hoax. The trouble for Gore (and potential book sales) is that the public are finally catching on.



So where are the scientists appearing on the news to denounce this fraud? Maybe they are all afraid of being labeled "deniers" or fired from their jobs for not towing the line?

[Stoner]

OMG!

!

Alex Jones was just used to out Gore!


LOL!

[Stoner]

Originally Posted by LANMaster

Unfortunately there simply are way too many accredited scientists sharing the stage with him[/URL] at key events around the globe.
..........................

There are often scientists promoting political ideologies, Lan.........you've posted many in support of your non scientific claims.
You and Gore are much alike in that both present distortions in an attempt to gain support for your ideologies.
You both inject politics into scientific reasoning for political gain.

[LANMaster]

Should Gore's obvious fraud on the subject not be exposed?

Where are the "scientists" demanding his head on a block?

[Stoner]

Originally Posted by wacor

we have a lot of recycling going on. It is never gonna eliminate the waste. Kind of an odd quirk but on the radio this morning there was a comment about how much less paper this is now going to dumps and recycling with online news editions and people not buying newspapers like they used to.

That has made a difference for me.
We're now down to the Sunday edition and it's not being read enough to consider keeping up the subscription for much longer.
Even my Mom ( 96 years old ) is using online news and even checking out the list of urls I hunted up for her to see what the local supermarkets are offering in coupons.

I've noticed a decrease of advertising in the mail except for specialty catalogs....they seem on the rise. Maybe it's just the Christmas season.....but we seem to be getting more of them than usual.


Anyone notice how thin magazines like Newsweek have gotten?
I don't see that lasting for long.

[Stoner]

Originally Posted by LANMaster

Should Gore's obvious fraud on the subject not be exposed?

Where are the "scientists" demanding his head on a block?

But Alex Jones? .....
Surely you could have found a better source

Where are the "scientists" demanding his head on a block?

Most likely at work.
Doing their jobs rather than hanging out at debate forums or calling press conferences.

Want to know what a scientist thinks?
Go read their scientific articles for a change rather than visiting wacko web sites and neocon bloggers _

[Wino]

Originally Posted by Stoner

That has made a difference for me.
We're now down to the Sunday edition and it's not being read enough to consider keeping up the subscription for much longer.
Even my Mom ( 96 years old ) is using online news and even checking out the list of urls I hunted up for her to see what the local supermarkets are offering in coupons.

I've noticed a decrease of advertising in the mail except for specialty catalogs....they seem on the rise. Maybe it's just the Christmas season.....but we seem to be getting more of them than usual.


Anyone notice how thin magazines like Newsweek have gotten?
I don't see that lasting for long.

Our local dropped a couple of inches in size, Monday is only two sections, & Tuesday is only 3 sections (business added), Wed. is full paper with added Food section, Thursday on same as always. They are actually in the process of adding back some of the features they had dropped or decreased. Their ad insert level seems to be on the rise and has been for several months.

I had several issues of Newsweek laying around and they averaged about 60 pages, Time was about 64 page average with one that was 116 pages (Ft. Hood & Muslim). Texas Monthly is still about 1/2" thick and still mostly ads. Playboy has cut back on articles but not pictorials (thank the gods for small favors). PC World is about a 1/3rd fewer pages than last year.

One thing that has gone to almost zero is credit card offers. I may get 1-2 month now versus 5-6 a week in the past. Catalogs from Cabela's, LL Bean, WearGuard, Crutchfield, RadioShack, Cyberguys and TigerDirect all seem the same except less frequent.

We have gone to once a week garbage and recycling pick ups with 4 or so cubic foot rolling bins. I fill the recycle almost to the brim weekly and, if not for the odor, would only put the real trash out about once every three-four weeks, but it goes weekly regardless of the volume.

I for one will miss the daily paper when it finally disappears. Say what you will, it just doesn't cut the mustard reading crap on line. not to mention the crick I get in my neck.

[Stoner]

News print size was also decreased along with page size wrt the Datyton Daily News.
The same content is online and easier to read.
I suspect a subscription model is going to spring up in many of the major news outlets as Internet become the major delivery mechanism and newsprint subscriptions dwindle.

Yeah....I do kinda miss the morning paper....but it just got too hard to read through my bifocals .........

[LANMaster]

Originally Posted by Stoner

But Alex Jones? .....
Surely you could have found a better source

Why should the source make any difference if the data (in this case, Al Gore's blatant fraud) is exposed for the lie that it is?
It took a blogger to expose Dan Rather's nemo fraud, which was blown off by all of the major news outlets until after the election.

Most likely at work.
Doing their jobs rather than hanging out at debate forums or calling press conferences.

Want to know what a scientist thinks?
Go read their scientific articles for a change rather than visiting wacko web sites and neocon bloggers _

There you go again .... attacking the source instead of the substance.

Did it ever occur to you that the mainstream media (with the possible exception of Fox News) refuses to cover the scientific truth of the issue?

For instance;

Climate Skeptics See 'Smoking Gun' in Researchers' Leaked E-Mails

Hackers broke into the servers at a prominent British climate research center and leaked years worth of e-mail messages onto the Web, including one with a mysterious reference to a plan to "hide the decline" in data about temperatures.

The Internet is abuzz about the leaked data from the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit (commonly called Hadley CRU), which has acknowledged the leak of 61MB of confidential data.

Climate change skeptics describe the leaked data as a "smoking gun," evidence of collusion among climatologists and manipulation of data to support the widely held view that climate change is caused by the actions of mankind. The files were reportedly released on a Russian file-serve by an anonymous poster calling himself "FOIA."

<snip>

The Telegraph has posted some of the more scathing excerpts from these emails, which the newspaper suggests points to manipulation of evidence and private doubts about the reality of global warming, though the much of the scientific language in the e-mails is esoteric and hard to interpret.

More at the top link.


It sure looks like British Climate-SCIENTISTS were deliberately under-reporting the data that did not support their pre-conceived assertions.

I don't often use the Telegraph as a source, but here they go exposing fraud in the science community.

Any guesses how many mainstream news organizations will pick up this story and report it to the general public?

[Stoner]

Originally Posted by LANMaster

Why should the source make any difference if the data (in this case, Al Gore's blatant fraud) is exposed for the lie that it is?
It took a blogger to expose Dan Rather's nemo fraud, which was blown off by all of the major news outlets until after the election.



There you go again .... attacking the source instead of the substance.

Did it ever occur to you that the mainstream media (with the possible exception of Fox News) refuses to cover the scientific truth of the issue?

For instance;

Climate Skeptics See 'Smoking Gun' in Researchers' Leaked E-Mails



More at the top link.


It sure looks like British Climate-SCIENTISTS were deliberately under-reporting the data that did not support their pre-conceived assertions.

I don't often use the Telegraph as a source, but here they go exposing fraud in the science community.

Any guesses how many mainstream news organizations will pick up this story and report it to the general public?

Why should the source make any difference if the data (in this case, Al Gore's blatant fraud) is exposed for the lie that it is?

Because it is Alex Jones
Credibility is the issue.

It took a blogger to expose Dan Rather's nemo fraud,

He was feed the info and it wasn't science.

which was blown off by all of the major news outlets until after the election.

No.
****************

There you go again .... attacking the source instead of the substance.

Please, a little intellectual honesty.
Here was your question:
"Where are the "scientists" demanding his head on a block? "
I didn't blow any one off with the remark:

Most likely at work.
Doing their jobs rather than hanging out at debate forums or calling press conferences.

Scientists are like most workers responsible to their employers for generating scientific results, not political statements.

Did it ever occur to you that the mainstream media (with the possible exception of Fox News) refuses to cover the scientific truth of the issue?

I seldom use articles from mainstream media.
My rebuttals usually relate directly to the data and what scientists present, not like the op ed pieces you post.
You frequent neocon blog sites and right wing news out lets and post their non/un scientific articles as it they were scientific fact. They are distortions and opinions.
Many of my posts in the last several years have gone to exposing the lies....yes, lies....in the political articles you copy and paste into this thread, while pretending they are genuine scientific articles. Mostly cherry picking and distortion.....which is why your arguments keep coming off as weak.

For instance;

[SIZE="5"]Climate Skeptics See 'Smoking Gun' in Researchers' Leaked E-Mails

I'll watch to see how that progresses.
No proof there, but looks suspicious.

I don't often use the Telegraph as a source, but here they go exposing fraud in the science community.

You have used it recently.
And if you look at what was posted there:
excerpt>

So far, we can only refer to them as alleged emails because – though Hadley CRU’s director Phil Jones has confirmed the break-in to Ian Wishart at the Briefing Room – he has yet to fess up to any specific contents.

Did you read that article?
It's all speculation at this time.

and the insinuation of fantasy violence:

Fantasies of violence against prominent Climate Sceptic scientists:

Next
time I see Pat Michaels at a scientific meeting, I’ll be tempted to beat
the crap out of him. Very tempted.

Hell....I kick your arse all the time in this thread

The Telegraph article was written by James Delingpole
Not exactly an unbiased reporter
Not studied in science, either.

Any guesses how many mainstream news organizations will pick up this story and report it to the general public?

Probably none unless/until the 'alleged' emails are verified.

How many times has Watts or moonbattery been outed in the mainstream media for their obvious distortions?

And how many time have you kept using them as authoritative sources since I first showed you their distortions?

[Stoner]

Come to think about it, most of my comments to you in this thread for the last several years .....about actual scientific claims....are to demonstrate that the articles you've been posting as 'science' have been fraudulent.