published Sunday, July 8th, 2012


about Clay Bennett...

The son of a career army officer, Bennett led a nomadic life, attending ten different schools before graduating in 1980 from the University of North Alabama with degrees in Art and History. After brief stints as a staff artist at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Fayetteville (NC) Times, he went on to serve as the editorial cartoonist for the St. Petersburg Times (1981-1994) and The Christian Science Monitor (1997-2007), before joining the staff of the ...

Comments do not represent the opinions of the Chattanooga Times Free Press, nor does it review every comment. Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited. For more information you can view our Terms & Conditions and/or Ethics policy.
nucanuck said...

Could there be any connection between the falling education standards in the US and the concentration of AGW deniers in the US?

July 8, 2012 at 1:18 a.m.

Nah, that's just a happy coincidence for the corporations profiteering on the whole business.

But don't worry, next bit of cold weather, some denialist while cackle about how there's no such thing as global warming. And never remember another moment.

July 8, 2012 at 1:54 a.m.
wrdrennan said...

Shades of Dr. Suess "Goes to War", his political cartoon referring to America's isolationist response to the Nazis prior to Pearl Harbor. Have you seen that cartoon? Global warming is a completely different kind of foe though. We can't just shoot it down and hence it is more than a little frightening.

July 8, 2012 at 3:09 a.m.
TOES02800 said...

"Dr. John Christy, professor of Atmospheric Science at the University of Alabama at Huntsville said: "I remember as a college student at the first Earth Day being told it was a certainty that by the year 2000, the world would be starving and out of energy. Such doomsday prophecies grabbed headlines, but have proven to be completely false." "Similar pronouncements today about catastrophes due to human-induced climate change," he continued, "sound all too familiar and all too exaggerated to me as someone who actually produces and analyzes climate information."

July 8, 2012 at 4:10 a.m.
TOES02800 said...

TNA: Al Gore also says that the UN’s IPCC has spoken, and the debate is over, because there is a consensus. What do you say to that?

Dr. Robinson: Right now the UN claims that they have about 2,500 people involved in this and about 600 scientists seriously involved. This is what Al Gore would point to today.

We have more than 22,000 scientist signers of our global-warming petition who’ve looked at the issue and concluded essentially the opposite of these United Nations people. This says nothing about the science. Science does not depend on polling. Just because we have 22,000, and the UN may have 600, does not matter. The only thing our petition demonstrates is that there is no consensus among scientists in support of the UN claims.

Scientific questions are never settled in this way. Science is about natural truth. The truth doesn’t require any advocate. It stands by itself.

In science, a scientist may discover the truth about something. Then he develops a hypothesis, and the hypothesis is tested by various means. So long as the hypothesis passes experimental tests, it becomes stronger and is further relied upon — unless it fails an experimental test. If it is a very fine hypothesis with wide utility, it may spread throughout the entire scientific community and become part of the basis of scientific knowledge. The process by which this is done is not what is important. The truth is important. Scientific truth is not determined by polling or by convening meetings.

July 8, 2012 at 5:18 a.m.
Easy123 said...


Many of your links are outdated and a few others have been debunked. Keep grasping at straws, Toes. You fall right in line with your daddy Rush. I'm surprised you even have the time to post on here with as much time as you spend hanging on Rush's testicles and all. You're bathing in ignorance.

July 8, 2012 at 5:52 a.m.
jesse said...

See the previous cartoon!!applies to more than just politics!

July 8, 2012 at 5:59 a.m.
anniebelle said...

It's comforting to know we have so many climate 'experts' that contribute on this board. I won't worry anymore about what's going on with the heat, the violent storms, the rising water levels, wildfires, melting glaciers, etc. I'll leave it to the 'experts' and go on about my life of watching Nascar and reality t.v.

July 8, 2012 at 6:18 a.m.
EaTn said...

What bothers me most about these record temperatures, fires and drought consuming half the area of our country is that we are still pouring our food grain into making ethanol to dilute gasoline while at the same time we are exporting oil.

July 8, 2012 at 6:44 a.m.
degage said...

anniebelle, so you watch nascar? I'm suprised, All those cars using so much gas. Seems you and the other GW advocates would be screaming bloody murder. Terrible end to last nights race.

July 8, 2012 at 6:44 a.m.
dougmusn said...


I appreciate your one paragraph summary of the scientific method in your post (5:18 am). It's been followed to a 'T' by Darwin's natural selection hypothesis, right?...

July 8, 2012 at 6:45 a.m.
raygunz said...

EaTn said... "we are still pouring our food grain into making ethanol to dilute gasoline while at the same time we are exporting oil."

Wait,wait, HOW can we be exporting oil when Obama has shut down drilling in the U.S.A.??? ( At least,that's what the Right Wing Noise Machine has been saying.)lol

July 8, 2012 at 7:57 a.m.
joepulitzer said...

All-time record high temperatures were tied at Chattanooga and the Tri-Cities airports on Friday.

And record June high temperatures were tied in Knoxville and Oak Ridge.

At the Chattanooga airport, the temperature hit to 106 Friday, tying the all-time record for Chattanooga set on July 28, 1952, the National Weather Service reported.


July 8, 2012 at 8:05 a.m.
MTJohn said...

EaTn said..."What bothers me most about these record temperatures, fires and drought consuming half the area of our country is that we are still pouring our food grain into making ethanol to dilute gasoline while at the same time we are exporting oil."

For the love of money is the root of all evil and greed is the engine of free-market economics. Greed expresses itself in all sorts of peculiar ways, not the least of which is the way that our government really works only for the benefit of the wealthy few. The promoters of the K Street Project are succeeding in their endeavor and the consumers of right-wing spin think that is a good thing.

July 8, 2012 at 8:11 a.m.
conservative said...

Let's have some fun :

This gem, one of many from Earth Day kooks in 1970 :

“The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years. If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.” • Kenneth Watt, Ecologist

July 8, 2012 at 8:25 a.m.
hambone said...

DENIAL! Is what the power companies do when they don't want to spend their investers hard earned dividend to clean up the polution!

July 8, 2012 at 8:46 a.m.
MTJohn said...

JonRoss said..."Toes please stop giving us facts. It will make the Obamists here get their socialist panties in a wad."

JonRoss - you might note that Toes links are not the only source of the relevant "facts".

To check out the other facts, you might check out And, please note, that Dr. Christy doesn't really challenge most of the facts on which the climate change models are based. Rather, he challenges some of the predictions that some people make based on the models (and, note that there is a difference between facts and models).

July 8, 2012 at 8:58 a.m.
LibDem said...

"Global Warming" is politics. Clean air and water are life.

July 8, 2012 at 9:03 a.m.
mymy said...

Worrying about climate control when we should be more worried about Obama Control.

July 8, 2012 at 9:14 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Any argument will do. Just deflect attention from BarryO's despicable record.

July 8, 2012 at 9:21 a.m.
rick1 said...

easy said Toes,

"Many of your links are outdated and a few others have been debunked."

Funny, yesterday you posted a link on an editorial piece that was over three years old. Maybe you should concern yourself with the links you provide.

July 8, 2012 at 9:27 a.m.

And when next summer is below average what will that mean? Fear and panic is at the core of the leftist MO.

July 8, 2012 at 9:58 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

mymy: Nice executive order, Herr Obama.

July 8, 2012 at 9:58 a.m.
dude_abides said...

able fister said... "Fear and panic is at the core of the leftist MO." Please don't remind me of the Bush administration today.

July 8, 2012 at 10:23 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

You're quite right, Dude. You've got plenty to worry about right now. BTW, you called anyone a Nazi or Klansman yet today?

July 8, 2012 at 10:28 a.m.
dude_abides said...

jackjackjackjackjack... Watch how many names the President is called around here without you ever making the first statement about respecting the office, and then pull your hood back and look in the mirror. Oops.

July 8, 2012 at 10:41 a.m.
Easy123 said...

Jack and Mymy,

291 Executive Orders from your daddy G. W. Bush. Now you can call him Führer! LMAO!

July 8, 2012 at 10:44 a.m.
mymy said...

Easy: This is about more government control not the number issued!

Obama’s Sneaky Treaties

Here’s one:

Small-arms control — Clinton is about to negotiate on a global ban on export of small arms. It would only apply to private citizens but, of course, most small-arms deals come not from individuals or private firms but from governments, specifically those of the United States, Russia, China and Israel. The treaty would require each nation to adopt measures to stop exportation of small arms. It is easy to see how this could be a backdoor way to require national registration of all guns and to assert federal regulation over firearms. It would also require the registration of all ammunition to track its source once a gun is fired. The Second Amendment be damned!


July 8, 2012 at 11:09 a.m.
tderng said...

A better cartoon would be chicken little running around screaming "the sky is falling,the sky is falling",when he sees it raining.

July 8, 2012 at 11:16 a.m.
Easy123 said...


From your daddy G.W.:

No. 1:Gutting the Presidential Records Act Executive Order 13233 (PDF) Nov. 1, 2001

What the order says: With Executive Order 13233, the Bush administration tried to gut the Presidential Records Act, passed in 1978 to make sure that the internal documents of the executive branch are public and generally will become part of the historical record. The 1978 law itself was a compromise in favor of privacy in some respects: Presidential records aren't disclosed for up to 12 years after an administration leaves office, and requests for them are subject to the limits imposed by the Freedom of Information Act, which means that classified documents stay secret. But the Bush order essentially threw out the law's bid for transparency altogether. After stonewalling for months over access to documents from the Reagan era, former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales drafted an order that gives a sitting president, or the president whose records are being requested, the power to review a documents request, with no time limit. If either president says no, you have to sue to get the records.

No. 2:Blocking Stem-Cell Research Executive Order 13435 (PDF) June 20, 2007

What the order says: In August 2001, Bush issued a rule limiting federal funding for embryonic-stem-cell research to existing colonies of such cells. Five years later, he expended the first veto of his presidency to reject legislation served up by a Republican Congress to ease those restrictions. This subsequent executive order a year later, issued the same day he vetoed the legislation a second time, encourages research into alternative measures of creating pluripotent stem cells. The order directs the Department of Health and Human Services and the National Institutes of Health to prioritize research consistent with Bush's previous directives and devote resources to finding other means of creating human stem cells.

July 8, 2012 at 11:25 a.m.
mymy said...

Easy: Keep trying idiot! I'm talking about control of us!

July 8, 2012 at 11:34 a.m.
Easy123 said...


Also, this quote is complete speculation:

"It is easy to see how this could be a backdoor way to require national registration of all guns and to assert federal regulation over firearms. It would also require the registration of all ammunition to track its source once a gun is fired. The Second Amendment be damned!"

This hasn't and will not happen. It is a Republican talking point. Just ask Darrell Issa. There is no merit to this claim whatsoever. It's just Republicans apply their infamous slippery slope argument. All you conservatives ever do is REEAACCHHHHH!

Keep trying idiot. Your whole argument is based on speculation. We haven't been controlled. The 2nd amendment is still intact. None of your gun rights have been taken away. It's baffling that you don't understand that.

July 8, 2012 at 11:36 a.m.
mymy said...


President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton are entering negotiations over — or seeking ratification of — five treaties that could radically limit our national sovereignty and the reach of our democratic institutions. Particularly scary is that the treaties, once signed and ratified, have the same status as constitutional law and cannot be altered or eclipsed by Congress or state legislatures. And their provisions must be enforced by U.S. courts.

Those who wish to preserve our sovereignty and democratic control over our future must rally to block these treaties, either by pressing Obama and Clinton not to sign them or by blocking their ratification.

July 8, 2012 at 11:42 a.m.
mymy said...

Easy: Just keep that head in the dark, stinky hole.

The cartoon could be labeled: Liberal Democrats Denial!

July 8, 2012 at 11:44 a.m.
blackwater48 said...


Conservative wrote,

"This gem, one of many from Earth Day kooks in 1970 :

“The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years. If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.” • Kenneth Watt, Ecologist"

What Kenneth Watt said in 1970 was true. Scientists found evidence that the world was, indeed, chilling at an alarming rate. The winter of 1976-77 was especially bad, which I experienced first hand. We lost electricity, driving in the City was banned, the National Guard was called in to patrolled the streets, and bodies were still being dug out months later. Scientists said it was proof that the world was cooling and we were headed for another ice age.

But that's what makes the current climatic conditions even more disturbing. If the world were instead in an cyclical WARMING trend the current weather related events would be more catastrophic. That's what scientist say, but they keep studying and publishing the evidence regardless of whether it supports their earlier findings.

Stop looking to science to prove your case. While you might find data to make your point you're better off going on faith.

Just say, "I don't believe in GCC because that idea might lead to the accelerated development of alternative energy sources, tighter safety regulations on oil drilling operations in the Gulf of Mexico, and a general decline in revenue from fossil fuel."

July 8, 2012 at 11:47 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Don't confuse Easy with facts.

July 8, 2012 at 11:48 a.m.
Easy123 said...


Every "consequence" mentioned in your article by Dick Morris is complete speculation or a lie. Seriously, WAKE UP.

July 8, 2012 at 11:51 a.m.
Easy123 said...


You're the one buying in to lies and speculation. It would seem as if your cranium knows all too well the feeling of being in a rectum. You can't be in denial of something that hasn't happened.


No facts have been presented. You would know that if you weren't so busy playing with your microphallus.

July 8, 2012 at 11:55 a.m.
Easy123 said...


That link goes against your claim. You're a conspiracy theorist. Lies! It's all lies! LOL! Thank you for showing us all your true colors. You fall right in line with the Fox News propaganda machine.

July 8, 2012 at 12:32 p.m.
mymy said...

I've said before: It is not what Obama says, but what he does. I don't believe this is a tready we should engage in along with others!

Obama Lies!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Do we have to go through all the lies again. Think not! Many know and some don't get it!

July 8, 2012 at 12:42 p.m.
Humphrey said...

I think it is a great thing to be skeptical. We should all think critically and evaluate information carefully. A part of that is considering the source of information, being skeptical of both "sides,' and considering our own personal biases.

Consider this thought experiment.

Imagine for a second that none of us had ever heard of global climate change; the idea didn't exist.

Then one day you read this announcement:

"Today President Obama announced a new program to generate revenue to pay for slavery reparation, union pensions for police, firefighters and public school teachers, spanish-language and muslim history programs in public schools, ACORN voter registration efforts, and public health care, including abortions, for low-income immigrant women. The initiative will be funded by a daily release of 14,961,682 metric tons of carbon each day. A scientific study, published in Mother Jones, funded by the ACLU and, and conducted by top sociology and women's study professors at Berkeley, demonstrated that the release of only 14 million tons of carbon each day will have no impact on the environment. According to researchers "the earth is really big, man, and people have been on it a long time. There's no way we can have any impact on it - it isn't like it just magically popped in to being in a week a few thousand years ago or something. Besides, if we mess it up evolution will take care of everything in a few hundred million years anyway. No worries."

Would climate change deniers feel the same way? Would they take it for granted that releasing 14 million tons of carbon each day would have no impact whatsoever? Or would such an idea seem like a preposterous, stupid notion?

July 8, 2012 at 12:45 p.m.
Easy123 said...


Did you say same thing about Baby Bush? Or is it just Obama that lies?

July 8, 2012 at 12:57 p.m.
conservative said...

They think that it is OK to lie :

"It doesn't matter what is true, it only matters what people believe is true." - Paul Watson, co-founder of Greenpeace

July 8, 2012 at 1:34 p.m.
mymy said...

Had my fun for the day=got easy riled!

July 8, 2012 at 1:35 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

mymy: Easy is easy picking. (only about 16, I think)

July 8, 2012 at 1:55 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

I find it funny, odd, baffling that you GW deniers so readily believe every utterance of the pseudo-scientists and PR people being paid by the industry groups to push their propaganda, while you disbelieve every single solitary finding of the true climate scientists who have devoted years - decades, actually - of intensive research into the link between greenhouse gas emissions and global warming. It would be one thing if you at least gave the findings of the actual climate scientists some serious thought, all the while recognizing that there just might actually be valid reasons of self-interest for the industry groups to be lying and spreading false information. But instead you claim that EVERY climate scientist is lying, while every "scientist" bought and paid for by the think tanks and various industry groups is telling the truth and nothing but the truth. You lap up their lies like hungry vultures devouring a carcass and then you inisist empatically and without question that, " warming is NOT being caused by humans and it's all just chicken-little nonsense."

It's amazing that you can come to your conclusions with such certainty and yet without having to exert the effort to weigh the evidence and actually think about it. There's a term for that - it's called brain-dead.

July 8, 2012 at 2:02 p.m.
miraweb said...

The problem is while the oil industry (peace be upon them) continues to use its marketing strength to keep the argument going we aren't doing the things we have to do to live with higher temps.

1) Predictions of fewer hurricanes, but stronger storms and more northern landfalls.

Last year was a pretty good indication we are far from ready.

2) More energetic and severe storms and more risk to the electrical grid.

Got your generator yet? Do your kids and grandkids know what to do when tornadoes are in the forecast? Which cities should put critical-need power lines (like hospitals) underground?

3) Plant life changes as microclimates adapt.

Canada already has a tree migration project where they are seeding southern species along northern corridors to help the forests maintain their viability.

4) Animal life changes as microclimates adapt.

The hardest hit here could be insect life. In the Northeast we are experiencing a nearly mosquito-free summer because the little buggers came out during the March warm up and got slaughtered by the April frosts.

While I don't miss the mosquitoes much at all, I do wonder if there were other important species (like pollinators) that got hit in the same cycle and what the effects will be with bats and birds who dine on them.

It is really, really important that we answer questions like these.

The question isn't if there is global warming. It is what we need to do to be prepared for the results. The oil industry has enough power and connections to be a real leader here but so far they themselves look more and more like the cartoon at the top of this page.

July 8, 2012 at 2:10 p.m.
conservative said...

"The only way to get our society to truly change is to frighten people with the possibility of a catastrophe." - emeritus professor Daniel Botkin

July 8, 2012 at 2:15 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

Testicles easy, really? Have yours even dropped yet? Law student easy? really? You're a worthless nobody that sits and posts comments all day. From what I gather, You're a immature little child that still lives at mommy's house. Here's a clue. Get a job, get a life and get off of PMSNBC for a while. Your true colors shine through with every word. Or, you can continue to masturbate to your poster of Chris Matthews. Either way, You'll always be a little punk.

July 8, 2012 at 2:19 p.m.
fairmon said...

Why do the greenies not attack clear cutting and vegetation destruction for construction and road projects? Osmosis is critical for carbon dioxide removal. The reduction in forestry around the world has a major climate impact. The rain forest is being destroyed.

July 8, 2012 at 2:46 p.m.
miraweb said...

Funny how all those sites are sponsored by the same source - with the exception of which seems to be registered in China.

<p> is registered to the American Family Association.

<p> is Chris Ruddy in West Palm Beach, FL. He is funded by the Mellon-Scaife political arm.

<p> is run by Dick Cheney's (of Halliburton fame) aide Neil Patel.

The rest have similar roots. Thanks for putting the list together. It's hard to find so many industry initiatives in just one post.

I don't mind that people use the internet to represent their industries' interests.

I am more worried when they work so hard to mask who they are to get there. And I really hate when they just start making stuff up to make some sort of case.

So TOES - who pays your bills?

July 8, 2012 at 2:51 p.m.
conservative said...

Did you ever notice that the Liberal kooks who comment here never say what they are personally doing to save the planet?

July 8, 2012 at 2:57 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

Harp: Because there's no political motive for that. Liberals won't be voted in because of some dead trees in Brazil. Liberals can't force fossil fuel developers and companies out of business because of rain forest destruction. If "greenies" were genuinely concerned about the planet, they would expend more of their resources in that direction.

Your post is a perfect example of the lefts' hypocrisy on "saving the planet". It's all about controlling the purse strings.

July 8, 2012 at 2:59 p.m.
anniebelle said...

Evidence supporting the existence of climate change is pummeling the United States this summer, from the mountain wildfires of Colorado to the recent “derecho” storm that left at least 23 dead and 1.4 million people without power from Illinois to Virginia. The phrase “extreme weather” flashes across television screens from coast to coast, but its connection to climate change is consistently ignored, if not outright mocked. If our news media, including—or especially—the meteorologists, continue to ignore the essential link between extreme weather and climate change, then we as a nation, the greatest per capita polluters on the planet, may not act in time to avert even greater catastrophe.

More than 2,000 heat records were broken last week around the U.S. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the government agency that tracks the data, reported that the spring of 2012 “marked the largest temperature departure from average of any season on record for the contiguous United States.” These record temperatures in May, NOAA says, “have been so dramatically different that they establish a new ‘neighborhood’ apart from the historical year-to-date temperatures.”

In Colorado, at least seven major wildfires are burning at the time of this writing. The Waldo Canyon fire in Colorado Springs destroyed 347 homes and killed at least two people. The High Park fire farther north burned 259 homes and killed one. While officially “contained” now, that fire won’t go out, according to Colorado’s Office of Emergency Management, until an “act of nature such as prolonged rain or snowfall.” The “derecho” storm system is another example. “Derecho” is Spanish for “straight ahead,” and that is what the storm did, forming near Chicago and blasting east, leaving a trail of death, destruction and downed power lines.

July 8, 2012 at 2:59 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

Remember the intense and prolonged debate, spanning three decades, between the tobacco industry and the scientists who were finding direct links between cancer and smoking? It was obvious to anyone who was even remotely objective on the issue at the time that the tobacco industry was biased and therefore the findings of their own "scientists" were neither scientific nor true. Eventually, with more and more indisputable evidence coming to the forefront, linking cancer and smoking, the real science won out and today we all know that the tobacco industry was not the least bit concerned with actual science but merely pushing their propaganda in order to protect their business interests.

The tactics of the industry groups who want us to discredit the science of global warming are almost identical to those used by the tobacco industry. In fact, the very same Marshall Institute that was so much involved with the tobacco industry in helping them to push their propaganda, is still around and doing their nefarious work today in abetting the industry groups that do not want the truth to be known. History is simply repeating itself before our very noses. Only this time prolonged denial will have even farther reaching, more disastrous results.

What's that saying? - "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." You GW deniers have your heads buried so deep in the sand, as noted in the 'toon above, that you don't see it now, but you are being played for a fool...again. And you really are making it way too easy for the shysters. Shame on you.

July 8, 2012 at 3:08 p.m.
conservative said...

I noticed that the first comment was by the Liberal Socialist ( yes, I know that the two are the same ) in Canada. Could he be more out touch? Kids are taught in public education the lie that global warming is caused by mankind. The Liberal teachers unions control the curriculum and they are not about to allow otherwise.

July 8, 2012 at 3:11 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

I work 60 to 70 hours a week to pay my bills. I've NEVER been on food stamps OR welfare! If there's no work where I'm at, I GO FIND IT!!

Your "global warming" hoax is just that, a hoax. There is absolutely no hard evidence to prove that "global warming" caused by humans is real. There are over 22,000 scientists now on board with claiming "global warming" as nothing more than political scare mongering by the left. That's a fact.

And as time goes by, the "global warming" crowd (a shrinking crowd at that) are more and more looking like the lefty loons they really are.

July 8, 2012 at 3:11 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Texas will challenge justice dept. block on their voter id law. Here's to Texas!

July 8, 2012 at 3:12 p.m.
miraweb said...

TOES - here are three links to add to your list.

Pentagon Oil Bill Rises $3.6 Billion

Navy Pilot Project for Flexible Fuel Sourcing

And the military's other reason:

"The Marine Corps estimates that a solider is killed or wounded on one out of every 50 fuel supply convoys in Afghanistan."

July 8, 2012 at 3:15 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

Anniebelle: Lets get something straight. The wildfires were caused by arsonists! And the environmental wackos such as yourself protested the forest service for decades because they wanted to go in and clear out the deadwood and brush. The "greenies" protested this move and won. So now these forests are littered with this debris and now the real world must deal with it. Most of these problems we face today can be linked back to unabated liberalism.

Now, back to the barn with you.

July 8, 2012 at 3:18 p.m.
miraweb said...

You aren't too familiar with Colorado Springs, are you. That isn't managed by the forest service. It's an urban area. Largely a major military base.

And the forest service gave up the "let it burn" policy more than 30 years ago after the Yellowstone fires.

July 8, 2012 at 3:23 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

Funny. The oil bill for the navy is high because they're trying to use bio-fuel that costs $26.00 a gallon opposed to their regular fuel which is $3.00 a gallon. HAHA..So by saving the planet, the greenies are bankrupting the navy. WAY TO GO GREENIES!!

July 8, 2012 at 3:30 p.m.
miraweb said...

Building the entire refinery is $426 million. Just the increase in the oil bill from 2011 to 2012 would fully pay the costs to build 7 new refineries with change left over.

CORRECTION: I checked the math - that's 8 refineries paid for in full.

The Oklahoma senators (Inhofe and Coburn) are the ones who came up with the "$26 per gallon"

Last time I checked $426 million is way less than $3.6 billion - and at least they get something for their money.

I suspect they lost a lot of good will with the military with this spring's price-spike game.

It's a tough balance trying to slow economic growth in time for the election without forcing people away from your product. They may have pushed one step too far, this round.

July 8, 2012 at 3:36 p.m.
conservative said...

Global warming is Socialist tax scheme :

"Global Carbon Tax Urged at UN Climate Conference December 13, 2007"

"A panel of UN participants on Thursday urged the adoption of a TAX that would represent “a global burden sharing system, fair, with solidarity, and legally binding to all nations.” "

and "The U.S. and other wealthy nations need to “contribute significantly more to this global fund,” Schwank explained. He also added, “It is very essential to TAX COAL.” "

July 8, 2012 at 3:38 p.m.
miraweb said...

Sorry - I have to go laugh now.

Extra points for getting "socialist" and "tax" in the same sentence.

Have a beer!

July 8, 2012 at 3:42 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

Laugh all you want to. It's too bad conservative is exactly right.

July 8, 2012 at 3:44 p.m.
conservative said...

Man made global warming is killing hundreds of thousands and it's mostly the white man's fault! Who knew?

The Congressional Black Caucus is not kidding :

"Whites more to blame for 'global warming'? New study claims blacks at greater risk, but less responsible for climate change"

July 8, 2012 at 4 p.m.
miraweb said...

In social media training classes this is called "going nuclear" - or attempting to troll your way to a flame war if your argument isn't getting you where you want to be.

Flame war commences in 3 - 2 - 1 -

July 8, 2012 at 4:15 p.m.
conservative said...

It's the words from the mouths of your people. Won't you stand with your people?

July 8, 2012 at 4:21 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

TOES, you and your fellow head-in-the-sand deniers like to refer to that petition of 22000 names but it is entirely bogus. Actually there were 31000 signatures finally compiled but the vast majority of people who signed it were no more "scientists" than the Three Stooges were.

It was originally mailed out to anyone who had a degree in any science related field and eventually it made its way on to the internet where anyone could sign it. It was found that there were in fact only 2,100 people who signed who had any kind of science degree, which was anything from botany to chemistry to meteorology to geology to you-name-it. And it was further found that many of those did not actually have degrees but simply worked in some loosely related scientific field, or had done so in the past. The end result of actual signers who were certifiable climate scientists was less than ONE PERCENT. Even if everyone who signed that petition were an actual scientist, but not a climate scientist, asking their opinion on the matter of human induced global warming would be a waste of time. They could offer an opinion but that is all it would be - an OPINION. A botanist or a chemist or a biologist might be brilliant in his/her field but they are no more qualified to speak with any scientific certainty on climate change than, well, again...the Three Stooges. So you can wave that silly petition all you want to and say..."Look here! 22000 'scientists' say global warming is just political scare mongering!" But you might as well be waving your tightie whities on a stick.

It's pretty clear that the ones who know the least about global warming are screaming the loudest in refuting it. And you choose to listen to the noise of the charlatans and the dingbats and block out the hard cold truth of the ones who have studied it longest and most diligently. Sometimes I envy you people who don't need logic or reason to live by. It must be nice to live in your own fairy land where you're right all the time, just because you're "right."

July 8, 2012 at 4:27 p.m.
jesse said...

would someone tell me what kinda bird that is w/its head in the sand! i at first thought it was an ostrich or emu but w/all the squabble,squabble i'm hearin i'm inclined now to think it's a TURKEY!!

July 8, 2012 at 4:41 p.m.
hambone said...

Rand Paul says burning fossil fuel is good for your health!

July 8, 2012 at 6:20 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

No Scientific Consensus of Warming

"That there is no scientific consensus of a global-warming threat is indicated by surveys of active scientists. A November 1991 Gallup poll of 400 members of the American Meteorological Society and the American Geophysical Union found that only 19 percent of those polled believed that human-induced global warming has occurred.

That same year, Greenpeace International surveyed 400 scientists who had worked on the 1990 report of the influential U.N. Intergovernment Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) or had published related articles. Asked whether current policies might instigate a runaway greenhouse effect, only 13 percent of the 113 respondents said it was “probable” and 32 percent “possible.” But 47 percent said “probably not”—far from a consensus.

In recent years, research on global climate change has led even more scientists to doubt that global warming is upon us or that it would soon bring disaster (Science, May 16, 1997). Yet these doubts are characteristically downplayed in IPCC reports. While the body of the IPCC’s 800-page, 1996 report, The Science of Climate Change, mentioned some doubts (albeit cryptically), the report’s much-publicized, politically approved Summary for Policymakers did not. This gave the false impression that all 2000-plus scientists who contributed to (or had their work cited in) the report alsosupported the view that man-made global warming was occurring or posed a credible threat. The IPCC report even indicated that the scientists who reviewed and commented on earlier drafts endorsed the report—whether their comments on the drafts were positive or negative".

July 8, 2012 at 6:47 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

It's very strange how the left just assumes that the "scientists" that agree that "global warming" is real are the absolute truth givers automatically. But yet the thousands of scientists that believe it's a hoax are somehow disingenuous.

Maybe they can tell us how they know that their scientists are the tellers of truth and any other scientists are not.

July 8, 2012 at 6:59 p.m.
alprova said...

hambone wrote: "Rand Paul says burning fossil fuel is good for your health!"

As much as I do not care for Rand Paul, I can find no evidence that he has made such an utterance.

Rand Paul is absolutely pro-coal, for his home State of Kentucky generates 90% of its electricity from coal. Kentucky also enjoys about the cheapest electricity rates in the nation.

Thus, he has made it clear that he is adamantly opposed to the President's agenda, calling for the beginning of a conversion to renewable sources of energy, which we all know that come at a higher price, but are clearly more Earth friendly.

Rand Paul, like a great many Conservatives, looks at every issue in terms of dollars and cents. He and they may well know that the burning of fossil fuels is indeed unhealthy, but any concern that they may have about the long-term effects on health, ends the second that a proposed, healthier alternative would cost them a penny more.

July 8, 2012 at 7:06 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

Unemployment rate dropped in every state that elected a republican governor in 2010.

Off topic..But a bit of undeniable truth for the left.

July 8, 2012 at 7:21 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

TOES: The left goes by "feel", not facts.

July 8, 2012 at 7:22 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

Michael Mann. He's another blazing liberal out of academia with an axe to grind. Nothing new here. Berkely alumni says it all.

July 8, 2012 at 8:09 p.m.
hambone said...

Al, On the floor of congress Rand Paul tried to say that there was no connection between air polution and asthma.

July 8, 2012 at 8:56 p.m.

Tq, I guess you don't get the concept, huh? Here's a hint, nobody serious is attributing the hot weather as a primary indicator that demonstrates global warming. The reference is a bit of levity, not actual argument or belief.

OTOH, it is quite clear to me that the denialists do genuinely believe that the one snow absolutely does disprove any global warming.

That is where the levity comes from, noting the discrepancy. Then again, I'm surprised you aren't ranting that ostriches don't really stick their heads in the sand.

TOES, now prove the causation for your correlation. No wait, actual analysis like that isn't necessary, you can go with your superficial beliefs.

Harp3339, deforestation is a significant concern among many environmental groups. You must be sticking your head in the sand if you don't know about it.

July 8, 2012 at 9:03 p.m.
mymy said...

How many of you D A's watched Out of Work-Lou Dobbs special on Fox. It is on again tonight and will be repeated at 12 Midnight.

Easy should watch if he has the time and can stay up that late!

July 8, 2012 at 9:42 p.m.
alprova said...

hambone wrote: "Al, On the floor of congress Rand Paul tried to say that there was no connection between air polution and asthma."

That he did do, in November of last year, and poorly I might add.

July 8, 2012 at 9:43 p.m.
miraweb said...

TOES is excited that, "Unemployment rate dropped in every state that elected a republican governor in 2010."

Well done! An actual fact.

Also a fact that unemployment dropped in every state that elected an Independent governor (1) and every state that elected a Democratic governor (20).

Good news for everyone looking for jobs.

Were you going somewhere with this?

July 8, 2012 at 10:04 p.m.
alprova said...

TOES 02800 wrote: "Michael Mann. He's another blazing liberal out of academia with an axe to grind. Nothing new here. Berkely alumni says it all."

All that tells me is that you didn't read one word of that interview. You're discounting everything he says because of where he was educated? Priceless.

Yes, he majored in physics and math at Berkeley. He then attended Yale, where he earned a Master of Philosophy, Master of Science, a Doctorate degree in Philosophy, and then finally a Doctorate degree in Geology and Geophysics.

He has worked alongside several Seismologists and climate Scientists, and has published several works over the years, authoring more than 140 peer-reviewed and edited publications, and has published two books.

Berkeley is only a small part of his educational background.

He was an associate professor at the University of Virginia, and is now a tenured Professor at the University of Pennsylvania.

Oh, did I forget to mention...he was jointly awarded the Nobel Peace in 2007?

You're free to discount the man all you want, but you do so at the peril of looking totally ignorant in doing so, because the man is a fully accredited climate scientist, which I'm sure is more than you can boast of being.

Currently, I'm liberal when it comes to politics. But that does not mean that I don't keep myself up to speed with what conservatives are up to, what they believe, and what criteria they use to base their opinions upon.

Go ahead and post some more pointless links to sites that offer no credible or documented arguments to deny the existence of climate change. It doesn't take a very smart man or woman very long to see the reason they are up there, and it only takes a little digging to discover what or who is behind them.

July 8, 2012 at 10:18 p.m.
miraweb said...

EaTN writes:

What bothers me most about these record temperatures, fires and drought consuming half the area of our country is that we are still pouring our food grain into making ethanol to dilute gasoline while at the same time we are exporting oil.

I agree this is a legitimate concern. The Navy addressed it in their pilot project by excluding food sources (like corn) from their process.

July 8, 2012 at 10:33 p.m.

Ahh, yes, the Bush years. The good old days when we had adults in the White House. I predict Mr. Obama will lose. My grandfather, who is now 98, has predicted the winner of every single presidential election since he was old enough to have an opinion, probably since the 1920's. Smart guy and the first in his family to graduate from college. Still smart as whip. He predicted Obama in '08. He's predicting Romney in November. That's the poll i'm going by.

July 8, 2012 at 11:18 p.m.
dude_abides said...

tu quoque secretes...

"It was a delightful time to watch you Libtards thrash around on your backs like overturned turtles creating tiny little individual dust devils with your flailing limbs."

You can then imagine the joy with which I watch you conservative guineafowl dragging your wings around in a circle and screeching about our African American (GASP!) President. Anyhow, how would we create dust angels (dust devils are whirlwinds) when our flailing limbs couldn't possibly reach the ground from our inverted positions? You're worse at turtle anatomy than you are at Supreme Court prognostication. Please don't claim that flailing limbs wouldn't destroy their own slipstream, thereby making it impossible to produce 'dust devils.'

The fear and panic, by the way, was employed by the charlatans you idiots elected TWICE.

July 8, 2012 at 11:41 p.m.
Oz said...

Clay...Where is the cartoon supporting the unionization of the Times Free Press? I'm sure you support your co-workers and the union.

July 9, 2012 at 12:48 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Yeah, Clay. Exhibit some nads, man.

July 9, 2012 at 1:09 a.m.
fairmon said...

Prize winner Al Gore said "Emissions aren't the problem it is our dirty air and polluted water sources".....say what?

July 9, 2012 at 1:35 a.m.
alprova said...

Harp3339 wrote: "Prize winner Al Gore said "Emissions aren't the problem it is our dirty air and polluted water sources".....say what?"

I'm not rushing to defend Al Gore, but that quote has been attributed to more than one person for more than 20 years.

An almost identical quote circled the web during the 2004 Presidential race, claiming that both John Kerry and George W. Bush were guilty of relating it in campaign speeches. It was never uttered by either one of them.

The origin of the quote appears to be a creation of Mad Magazine, going all the way back to 1991. It was part of a list of things that sounded like something that Former Vice-President Dan Quayle might say.

July 9, 2012 at 2:36 a.m.
anniebelle said...

I forgot, you can't use sarcasm on the mentally challenged, they just don't have the capacity to understand. No, I've never watched cars go round and round and round in a mindless circle nor have I ever watched these redneck so-called reality shows. Get a grip and join the thinking class.

July 9, 2012 at 5:24 a.m.
conservative said...

Oh goody!! Another day to rub the words of Liberal kooks into the faces of their willing sheep. ( sheep are dumb and easily led ).

The UN held another earth summit in June in Rio. It was the 20th year anniversary in which the first one was led by the prominent Canadian Socialist Maurice Strong. They use fears of gloom and doom global warming to promote Socialism and world governance and readily admit it :

"The aim is create political momentum for a green economy around the world — an economy that does not destroy the environment, but also alleviates poverty and inequality."

July 9, 2012 at 7:30 a.m.
Easy123 said...


Can you honestly act like "an economy that does not destroy the environment, but also alleviates poverty and inequality" is a bad idea or negative in some way? Unbelievable.

You obviously like pollution, smog, dirty water, poverty and inequality.

July 9, 2012 at 7:48 a.m.
degage said...

anniebelle, you think I'm mindless because I don't believe the way you do. News alert! I know you are mindless because you can't think for yourself,you have to rely on the MSM. As a conservative I do still have the right to an opinion, right? Or as a liberal you believe you are the only ones that have any rights? Get a Life!

July 9, 2012 at 7:55 a.m.
Easy123 said...


You need to work on your reading comprehension. No one called you mindless.

"No, I've never watched cars go round and round and round in a mindless circle"

Anniebelle labeled NASCAR "mindless", not you. She called you mentally challenged. Get your insults right.

July 9, 2012 at 8:01 a.m.
degage said...

Easy, she did say to get a grip and join the thinking class. I take that to mean just what I said. She did not actually say I was mentally challenged, that was your take on the exchange. You and anniebelle both need to get a life.

July 9, 2012 at 8:19 a.m.
Easy123 said...


You REALLY need to work on your reading comprehension.

July 9, 2012 at 8:26 a.m.
conservative said...

More from kooks at the UN Climate Conference held at Bali Indonesia in 2007 revealing their Socialist agenda :

"The environmental group Friends of the Earth, in attendance in Bali, also advocated the transfer of money from rich to poor nations on Wednesday."

" “A climate change response must have at its heart a redistribution of wealth and resources,” said Emma Brindal, a climate justice campaigner coordinator for Friends of the Earth."

July 9, 2012 at 9:24 a.m.
degage said...

yupp easy anniebelle did mention mentally challenged, same thing as saying a person is mindless. Takes one to know one. You and anniebelle still need to get a life

July 9, 2012 at 9:25 a.m.
degage said...

Easy, did you know the communist party of the US endorsed Obama on June 30, 2011. So you have somthing in common with them. Sam Webb,the leader of the party did this and also endorsed the DemocRats. It also dosen't mean they agree on everything but they think Dems come closer to their beliefs. I know off message but I just had to push your buttons.

July 9, 2012 at 9:34 a.m.
Easy123 said...


LOL! You keep making yourself look less and less intelligent.

July 9, 2012 at 10:08 a.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

I thought they were having a terribly cold, wet summer in England. How is that possible? Whenever we have a local warm snap the global warming idiots can be counted on to start singing again.

Bennett is one of those idiots. Warm weather equals a cartoon about global warming. I suppose he is off trying to buy heavy winter clothing in preparation for the sudden cooling that is supposed to happen when the global warming causes the oceanic heat pumps to shut down. “Ignorance is curable. Stupidity is not”.

July 9, 2012 at 10:44 a.m.
alprova said...

"Easy, did you know the communist party of the US endorsed Obama on June 30, 2011."

Not that it makes much difference, this rumor most certainly made its way around the blogosphere, however there is no evidence whatsoever that such an "endorsement" actually took place.

If you feel that I am incorrect, then please point to the press release that proves that any Communist Party member, much less the Party as a whole, has endorsed President Obama.

July 9, 2012 at 10:47 a.m.
Easy123 said...


"I thought they were having a terribly cold, wet summer in England. How is that possible?"

That statement alone shows that you have no clue what global warming is. No one ever said it couldn't ever be cold in some places. But it is very hot in other places e.g. the US.

You have a case of a terrible case of the dumbass. I think you can throw it in the incurable category.

July 9, 2012 at 10:52 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Easy and Anniebelle: Sooo enlightened. Envious.

July 9, 2012 at 10:59 a.m.
timbo said...

There is no such thing as humans causing climate change. There is no evidence that is not tainted and it goes against common sense.

I guess it was "global warming" in 1952 when all the previous records were set too. The fact that you use this year as the "proof" that global warming exists denotes a huge ignorance of the rules of data and the scientific method.

By the way, if it is happening as you imbeciles say it is and the snow ball is rolling down the hill, do you think your pitiful efforts to stop carbon dioxide emissions will stop this huge ecosystem called Earth from deteriorating further. Especially when China and the third world countries are thumbing their noses on making any changes. You might as well buy some ocean front property in Ashville, NC.

You liberal imbeciles have proven time after time that common sense is not your strong suit. This is just another example.

July 9, 2012 at 10:59 a.m.
dude_abides said...

mimicry mockery Mumzell Dockery. Figured out John Roberts yet, tu_?

July 9, 2012 at 11 a.m.
TOES02800 said...

Queasy says: "No one ever said it couldn't ever be cold in some places. But it is very hot in other places e.g. the US".

Well if it's cold in some places and hot in other places, where the hell is the GLOBAL warming?? Have ye gadiated da terd graid yet?

July 9, 2012 at 11:12 a.m.
Easy123 said...


There is such thing as man-made climate change. There is evidence and it makes common sense.

It was "global warming" in 1952 when all the previous records were set too. The fact that you use this year as the "proof" that global warming exists adds to the existing data and employs the scientific method.

By the way, since it is happening and the snow ball is rolling down the hill, we need to concentrate our efforts to stop carbon dioxide emissions will stop this huge ecosystem called Earth from deteriorating further. Especially when China and the third world countries are thumbing their noses on making any changes. We need to act now before we really can buy ocean front property in Asheville, NC.

You conservative imbeciles have proven time after time that common sense is not your strong suit. Your adamant denial of global warming is just another example.

July 9, 2012 at 11:14 a.m.
TOES02800 said...

Yeah. John Roberts. The man who has PROVEN Obama to be a liar of gargantuan proportions. "read my lips" "not one single dime...."!

July 9, 2012 at 11:17 a.m.
Easy123 said...


I really didn't know people could be as stupid as you. Global warming is still occurring. But you still won't understand it and your denial/complete ignorance will continue.

July 9, 2012 at 11:19 a.m.
TOES02800 said...

AWWWWW!! Poor baby boy Sleazy resorts to mocking. Good little boy. So precious the little children.

July 9, 2012 at 11:19 a.m.
Easy123 said...


That wasn't mocking. That was the non-denial version. I guess you didn't learn much vocabulary in your metallurgy classes.

July 9, 2012 at 11:23 a.m.
TOES02800 said...


I really didn't know people could be as stupid as you. Global warming is still not occurring. But you still won't understand it and your denial/complete ignorance will continue.

July 9, 2012 at 11:29 a.m.
timbo said...

Easy123....just as ignorant an answer as usual.

July 9, 2012 at 11:35 a.m.
TOES02800 said...


That was mocking(11:14 post to timbo) that was your idiot version. I guess you didn't learn much vocabulary at law school. (law school...yeah, right).

July 9, 2012 at 11:37 a.m.
Easy123 said...


These are the credentials of the author:

"Andrew Marshall is a 19 year old political science student at Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, British Columbia (BC)."

Doesn't seem like a climate expert.

I present information from the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research and the National Center for Atmospheric Research. You present LMAO!

Keep reaching, grasping, and digging. You're still an idiot and completely wrong.

July 9, 2012 at 11:40 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Easy: Are you even old enough to vote?

July 9, 2012 at 11:42 a.m.
Easy123 said...


It wasn't an answer. It was the truth.


It wasn't mocking. There was no ridicule, sport or derision. It's kindof pitiful that you don't understand that. But I wouldn't expect you to know much.

July 9, 2012 at 11:44 a.m.
Easy123 said...


Have you bought your casket yet?

July 9, 2012 at 11:45 a.m.
TOES02800 said...

How about 50 NASA scientists? Come on fat boy! bring it!

Your fat ass probably has it's own gravitational pull. Maybe that's wrong with you.

July 9, 2012 at 11:48 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Sorry, Ease. But you didn't answer the question.

July 9, 2012 at 11:49 a.m.
Easy123 said...


That doesn't sound like an endorsement at all.

July 9, 2012 at 11:49 a.m.
Easy123 said...


How about every major scientific organization, body, and society? It's already been brought.

Why do you feel the need to make characterizations? Why do you think I'm fat? I'd love to know.


Sorry, but neither did you.

July 9, 2012 at 11:53 a.m.
alprova said...

BRP, Timbo, & TOES02800, Global warming or global climatic change is not about brief periods of warmth or coolness. It isn't about pockets of both extremes in differing parts of the world either.

It's about an average rise in the collective measurements of temperatures over long periods of time. It's about an increase in the frequency and the severity of extreme weather events.

Think about the increase in tornadic activity over the past couple of years, especially in this area. Think of all the recent flooding rains that have struck certain areas. Think of the extreme and sudden drought conditions that are plaguing two-thirds to three-quarters of the nation at the moment.

Not all of these events, by themselves, are proof positive of global warming, but collectively, the do hint at something going on that most rational people can't ignore.

I've often wondered if the dinosaurs were wiped out because they were just to big for the planet to sustain them. God may have done this himself, for all we know.

We're endowed with brains that provide us the ability to think and to reason. One factory, spewing pollution isn't going to affect the CO2 levels in the upper atmosphere, but how about a million?

One car isn't going to spew very much into the atmosphere either, but how about 1 billion of them worldwide?

Even if you discount global warming, why not take steps to save on energy consumption, if for no other reason than to save you money?

Any engine in an automobile with more than 4 cylinders is a complete waste of gasoline. I cut my electricity bills in half by turning off my central heat and air and installing small window units throughout my home. My home stays cool as a cucumber too. I replaced every lightbulb in my home with CFL's five years ago.

July 9, 2012 at 11:53 a.m.
TOES02800 said...

Damn easy, I think the Twinkies and internet porn are clouding your already undeveloped "brain".

July 9, 2012 at 11:54 a.m.
Easy123 said...


LOL! I guess since you don't have an argument anymore, you'll just try to name call. I'll join in the ridicule.

Have fun working metal for the rest of your life. And please make sure to tell us all how many hours you worked this week and all the overtime you put in. Keep thumping your chest sweetheart.

July 9, 2012 at 11:58 a.m.
TOES02800 said...

So tell us alpo, what evil oil baron caused the last major ice age in which glaciers a mile thick covered as far south as Ohio?

What careless human population caused the once lush tropical forest of northern Africa to become the Sahara desert?

What great unknown people caused the once vast inland sea of the American west to dry up?

(all thousands to millions of years ago) And if you can believe it, Halliburton wasn't even around back then.

July 9, 2012 at 12:03 p.m.
alprova said...

tu_quoque, I'm well aware of Sam Webb's letter written on People's World, but I fail to see one sentence written in that entire article that can be interpreted to be an endorsement of the President.

At best, the man stated that he is against "right-wing extremism." But throughout the letter, he is equally critical of the Democrats as he is the Republicans. At no time does he categorically state that he endorses the President or any other Democratic candidate.

Maybe it's a right-wing thing. I suppose some of you feel that unless someone is with you, they are against you, and that constitutes an endorsement of President Obama. Because it sure isn't anything the man has written in that letter that can be cited as proof of an endorsement of a soul.

July 9, 2012 at 12:05 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

I think your fat because nobody sits on their ass as much as you do and stays skinny for long. And if you're outside on your "smartphone" still obsessed with trying to prove everybody wrong, then you are truly a poster child for LOSER!! So long lard ass.

July 9, 2012 at 12:07 p.m.
Easy123 said...


You still don't get it.

And, if you'll notice, you're likely seated as well. By your logic, you are fat. And you don't have to be seated to post on this site. Smartphones have internet capabilities. But I wouldn't expect you to know that either. But thank you for your childish posts. LOL! "lard ass".

What was it you said? Oh yeah, "so precious the little children.". By the way, THAT was mocking. :)

I guess you're the poster child for moron or charlatan since you're obsessed with spreading lies and misinformation on here and expect to get away with it.

Don't pout and run away! But have fun casting and extruding!

July 9, 2012 at 12:08 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

See, the problem with you logic is that while your fat ass was slobbering in your fat pillow last night, I was working for a living. And very much unwillingly paying taxes to feed your fat face with your fat Twinkies. And like I said!! If your FAT ass can't even stop posting on this site while out and about, then your A fat ass loser. Normal people don't go around town posting comments on newspaper websites if they have a life!! Now, haul your fat pathetic self to your room before your mommy catches your fat ass!!

July 9, 2012 at 12:20 p.m.
Easy123 said...


'Laughing out loud'.

I work also, sweetheart. You post comments on this same site.

Thank you. Bask in your ignorance and childish name-calling!!!!

ARE YOU MAD??? :-)

By the way, your fat insults don't resonate with me. I'm not fat. Sorry to burst bubble.

July 9, 2012 at 12:28 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

Lies? NEWSFLASH!! Cheasy has the grapes to talk about lies!!HAHAHA!!! Time for another Twinkie fat boy!!

July 9, 2012 at 12:29 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

Is your job posting on comment pages all day and night? Not buying it. Now go play fat ass!

July 9, 2012 at 12:33 p.m.
Easy123 said...


Yes, that is my job. One of them at least. I get paid to post on here. 50 cent/post.

Why are you so mad?

July 9, 2012 at 12:37 p.m.
degage said...

Alpo, Sam Webb said , better to vote democratic than GOP. He would like a third party but realized it wasn't possible before 2012, so democrats should get your vote. I believe that is an endorsment for dems in general. If something comes up you don't like you say its rumor or just can't believe it.

July 9, 2012 at 12:37 p.m.
Easy123 said...


"so democrats should get your vote"

That was never said. And an "endorsement for dems in general" isn't an endorsement of Obama as you claimed.

Keep grasping at straws.

July 9, 2012 at 12:39 p.m.
conservative said...

More calls for Socialism by the phony global warming crowd :

In 2000, French President Jacques Chirac said the UN’s Kyoto Protocol represented "the first component of an authentic global governance."

Former EU Environment Minister Margot Wallstrom said "Kyoto is about the economy, about leveling the playing field for big businesses worldwide."

July 9, 2012 at 12:42 p.m.
TOES02800 said...

"Two-thirds of likely voters say President Obama has kept his 2008 campaign promise to change America — but it’s changed for the worse, according to a sizable majority.

A new poll for The Hill found 56 percent of likely voters believe Obama’s first term has transformed the nation in a negative way, compared to 35 percent who believe the country has changed for the better under his leadership".

July 9, 2012 at 12:45 p.m.
alprova said...

degage wrote: "Alpo, Sam Webb said , better to vote democratic than GOP. He would like a third party but realized it wasn't possible before 2012, so democrats should get your vote. I believe that is an endorsment for dems in general. If something comes up you don't like you say its rumor or just can't believe it."

It's a very weak determination, based on all that was written by the man, to say that he endorses Barack Obama. An endorsement of a candidate will include the name of that candidate. He never names a soul.

But...the blogosphere can believe whatever it wants. No one is remotely concerned with what anyone from the Communist Party USA says or does.

It's just more blah, blah, blah....Obama is a blah, blah, blah...the Communist Party endorses...blah, blah, blah.

Joseph McCarthy is smiling in his casket, but the voters of this nation are not giving it the time of day. It is so controversial, that it took more than a year for anyone to post the claim of an endorsement in here.

July 9, 2012 at 12:58 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Easy123 said... "No one ever said it couldn't ever be cold in some places. But it is very hot in other places"

Thank you for confirming my point! It is OK for you climate alarmists to cherry pick your hot data but it is forbidden for me to cherry pick some contradictory data! Hypocrites!

After you are done hyperventilating about the current local heat wave, I suggest that you come back to this site, say mid-August, and see just how horrible the average global temperature really was.

I remember back in the 70’s when climate clowns were saying man was causing global cooling, then when the chart turned up they started talking about global warming, then when the steam was going out of the temperature increases they morphed to climate change. You armchair climate scientists should focus your energies on something you have a clue about.

July 9, 2012 at 1 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Easy: No, I will not require one. Your turn.

July 9, 2012 at 1:05 p.m.
Easy123 said...


It's not speculation or conjecture. I provided two links that explain how it works.


This is your problem. It's not all about hot and cold data. Your cold data isn't contradictory. That is the part you don't understand. Just because it is cold sometimes, doesn't mean global warming isn't happening.

You armchair climate scientists should focus your energies on something you have a clue about.

July 9, 2012 at 1:06 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Easy123 said... "And Obama is STILL more favorable than Romney"

That is the scariest fact you could possibly post on this forum. Romney is no prize, but Obama is absolutely dangerous and destructive. The notion that he can continue to exert influence over so many is a brilliant testimony to the public education system.

Mission accomplished! The mindless, easy to control dependent class has been created and is or will soon be the majority. Marx would be so proud!

July 9, 2012 at 1:08 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Allen West: True Racism Lies Among White Liberals Who Think Black Conservatives Need Approval From Their ‘Masters’ So true, Col West. They want to keep minorities ON the plantation. (as registered dems, of course)

July 9, 2012 at 1:08 p.m.
Easy123 said...


I invoke my right under the Fifth Amendment not to answer. Troll.

July 9, 2012 at 1:08 p.m.
degage said...

Alpo. Webb noted " millions who have to be at the core of this party still operate under the umbrella of the democratic party. Abiet increasingly in an independent fashion."

Patriot, Easy wasn't born in the 70s so he wouldn't have a clue what you are talking about.

July 9, 2012 at 1:09 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Easy: Coward

July 9, 2012 at 1:11 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Easy123 said... "Your cold data isn't contradictory"

Hello Easy123! The only data I presented was the global average. It will go up and it will go down. The climate dorks will take whatever observation there is to be made and attempt to blame it on human activity.

If you are correct, please give us some compelling evidence so the sane can get on with fixing "the problem".

July 9, 2012 at 1:12 p.m.
Easy123 said...


Are you mad?

July 9, 2012 at 1:14 p.m.
alprova said...

degage wrote: "If something comes up you don't like you say its rumor or just can't believe it."

Personally, I couldn't care less whether or not the Communist Party USA endorses a soul. The fact that he did or didn't does not change a doggone thing. People quit experiencing full body shudders at the mention of the word "Communist" many years ago.

Some people have nothing better to do than to analyze words spoken or written to find a deeper meaning to them, rather than to take them at face value, and this is an exact example of just that.

A political endorsement of a candidate is quite simple. Someone will say, "I intend to vote for this candidate and I urge others to do so too."

Now nothing that Sam Webb wrote comes close to that at all. Therefore, it is a complete rumor to claim that he offered his political endorsement of a blooming soul.

July 9, 2012 at 1:18 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Easy. Furious.

July 9, 2012 at 1:23 p.m.
Sandyvajayjay said...

I can't wait to see the cartoon the day after Obama gets reelected. Collective idiot head explosion.

July 9, 2012 at 1:26 p.m.
mymy said...

The Hill Poll: Majority of voters believe Obama has changed country for worse:

Two- thirds of likely voters say President Obama has kept his 2008 campaign promise to change America — but it’s changed for the worse, according to a sizable majority.

A new poll for The Hill found 56 percent of likely voters believe Obama’s first term has transformed the nation in a negative way, compared to 35 percent who believe the country has changed for the better under his leadership.

The results signal broad voter unease with the direction the nation has taken under Obama’s leadership and present a major challenge for the incumbent Democrat as he seeks reelection this fall.

Conducted for The Hill by Pulse Opinion Research, the poll comes in the wake of last month’s Supreme Court decision that upheld the primary elements of Obama’s signature healthcare legislation.

It found 68 percent of likely voters — regardless of whether they approve or disapprove of Obama — believe the president has substantially transformed the country since his 2009 inauguration. The feeling that Obama has changed the country for the worse is strongest among Republicans, at 91 percent, compared to 71 percent of Democrats who support Obama’s brand of change.

Strikingly, 1-in-5 Democrats say they feel Obama has changed the United States for the worse.

July 9, 2012 at 1:40 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

mymy:"Strikingly, 1-in-5 Democrats say they feel Obama has changed the United States for the worse." One in five dems can think for themselves? Amazing

July 9, 2012 at 1:46 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Easy123 said... "I can keep going if you want"

I have probably seen all of this a dozen times, none of which held any water. Do you have the definitive work that finally made man made global warming credible? All of the significant recent work points in the other direction.

Focus! I am not going to (re)read a half dozen pages of crap. If you climate nuts would demand quality over quantity you would have seen the light years ago.

July 9, 2012 at 1:49 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

It figures. The type of mind that supports our miserable failure of a president also believes hopelessly flawed climate science.

July 9, 2012 at 1:54 p.m.
Easy123 said...


Refute them. Show all the significant work that points in the other direction. I have provided evidence. Where is yours?

In science, quantity is quality.

Now, put your money where your mouth is and refute the information I've given.

July 9, 2012 at 1:56 p.m.
Easy123 said...

The type of mind that voted the most miserable failure of a president in twice also adamantly denies the extensive evidence in support of global warming.

I can play that game too.

July 9, 2012 at 1:59 p.m.
Easy123 said...


You know all about being on your knees. But you're lips aren't pursed.

July 9, 2012 at 2:23 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

It is really, really hard to refrain from using the "idiot" word here, where such flagrant idiocy abounds among you GW deniers. But I will bite my lip and try to be calm and civil.

There IS a consensus, to the tune of better than 97%, among climate scientists world-wide that anthropogenic global warming IS happening. They are not even debating among themselves any more as to WHETHER it is happening - they came to that definitive conclusion a long time ago. They are doing research now on when they think the point-of-no-return will be reached and how devastating the consequences will be the longer we delay taking action.

Of all the "significant other recent work" that you, BRP, say points "in the other direction," it is almost entirely coming from pseudo-scientists and scientists in non-related fields who are not even qualified to speak on the science of climate change. There is an incredibly small number - less than 3%- of actual CLIMATE SCIENTISTS who even question the veracity of the research already done.

Now, if you choose to believe the disinformation of pure propagandists bought and paid for by the various industry groups who obviously have it in their best interests to discredit the actual science and research, then that is your prerogative. But if you turn a blind eye to the preponderance of evidence coming from the serious climate scientists and you choose to believe the know-nothing dingbats instead, well, you're...damn, it really is hard to refrain from using that "idiot" word here...especially when it fits so well.

July 9, 2012 at 2:25 p.m.
conservative said...

Obama excels at stand up comedy during 6 July campaign rally :

"I was telling you stories about my family — my family didn’t believe in handouts. They didn’t get to where they were because they were always relying on some government program. They understood you got to work hard to make it in America, and you can’t always help somebody who is not willing to help themselves. (Applause.)"

Now this is a keeper.

July 9, 2012 at 2:34 p.m.
alprova said...

Tu_quoque, I've read the same thing you have, several times, and the fact of the matter is that while he seems to favor Democrats over Republicans, he stops short of offering an actual endorsement of so much as one candidate.

You do know what an endorsement is, don't you? Sure you do. You've heard about as many of them as I have.

While you are free to see his words any way you wish, just as others have done the same, I suppose we're just going to have to agree to disagree on this one.

We're miles apart on the definition surrounding the endorsing of a candidate. You feel that any...and I do mean any, vague reference to supporting Democrats over Republicans translates into a definite endorsement of Obama, and I say that in the absense of him coming right out and stating that he is voting for the man and urges others to do so too, is no endorsement at all.

It's very much like what many Republicans are planning to do this fall. They are going to hold their noses with one hand, and will vote for the man with the other.

July 9, 2012 at 2:41 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Easy123 said... "I have provided evidence. Where is yours"

Anyone can cut and paste web articles. I can find lots of articles too, and we could both try to waste each other's time.

Let me put the question another way, why do you believe in man made global warming Mr. Easy?

July 9, 2012 at 2:44 p.m.
Easy123 said...


Because of the evidence and it makes logical sense.

Why don't you believe?

July 9, 2012 at 2:49 p.m.
Easy123 said...


There isn't a competition despite your efforts to make it one. It wasn't meant to be witty. It was an observation. But please keep trying.

July 9, 2012 at 2:53 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

You guys need to cut Easy some slack. His naivety can be blamed on his yoot.

July 9, 2012 at 3:17 p.m.
Easy123 said...



July 9, 2012 at 3:23 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Easy123 said... "Because of the evidence and it makes logical sense."

Well, it does not make logical sense, how does it make sense to you Mr. Easy?

I have noticed that climate nuts do not like to talk specifics, because they are then vulnerable to the lapses in the "science".

BTW, you had better get on alprova for submitting regional data, presumably as evidence of global warming. Or do you only attack regional statistics when they are counter to your paradigm?

July 9, 2012 at 3:44 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Oh, and by the way, I do not believe because ice core data oft used by climate nuts as indisputable evidence that elevated atmospheric CO2 levels cause global warming in fact prove that CO2 does not cause global warming but is controlled by global warming.

July 9, 2012 at 3:49 p.m.
Easy123 said...


It makes logical sense. Just because you can't grasp it or you don't like the answer doesn't mean that it doesn't make sense.

I gave you specifics and you rejected them. I could give 100 more links if you would like.

I didn't say anything about regional data. I explained how cold weather does not contradict global warming.

What evidence would you believe? It's psychotic thinking on your part. You reject the scientific evidence and replace it with what? You have presented nothing but your opinion on the matter. You haven't even given a single citation or reference to all the "work" that points in the other direction.

You're the one not talking specifics.

July 9, 2012 at 3:56 p.m.
Easy123 said...


Are you saying the scientific method is Marxist? Alhazen, Galileo, and Kepler might disagree with you.

Keep reaching. :-)

July 9, 2012 at 4:49 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

OK Easy,

You cannot talk specifics so you resort to trying to discredit with no substance. thinkprogress? plantsave? I get it, I get the same bull every time I try to have an honest discussion on this topic with a devote climate loon who cannot speak for himself, who can only post the rambling writing of more nut jobs.

Have a great day!

July 9, 2012 at 4:56 p.m.
Easy123 said...


I've been presenting a whole bunch of "specifics". And you have discredited none of my sources.

I, however, have discredited the single source you presented.

I get the same bull every time I try to have an honest discussion on this topic with a global warming denier who cannot speak for himself or present anything supporting their claims.

Neither of us can speak for ourselves on these issues. Neither of us are climate scientist. We can only go by the information, data, and evidence that we are privy to. If you cannot support your beliefs/claims with evidence, then your opinion means nothing to me.

I have simply asked for you to present a source or information with substance and you have yet to do that. And now you have run away from the argument.

May all the blessings of Zeus be upon you.

July 9, 2012 at 5:03 p.m.
Leaf said...

Big Ridge Patriot asks for irrefutable scientific proof in thirty words or less. Hmm.

BRP, You know, off the top of my head I don't think I could actually prove that the Earth travels around the Sun and not the other way around. But since all the experts have been telling me so all my life I believe them. Even the Catholic church came around to that way of thinking eventually.

So why don't you believe what the scientists tell you? They're smarter than you. They've studied the issue for years. It's not because you have some vested interest in protecting the established energy players is it? Of course not. That would be so cynical of me to think that.

July 9, 2012 at 5:06 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

tu_: Easy not a lawyer yet, but has applied to the Sale Creek YMCA night law school. First he has to complete that pesky GED.

July 9, 2012 at 5:09 p.m.
Easy123 said...


I thoroughly enjoy watching you attempt to wriggle your way out of a faulty or stupid argument. It's amusing.


July 9, 2012 at 5:12 p.m.
Easy123 said...


Are you implying something about Sale Creek? The Sale Creekians might be offended.

July 9, 2012 at 5:14 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

No. Sale Creek is fine. Their law school, not so much.

July 9, 2012 at 5:17 p.m.
acerigger said...

EZ,AL, if you over-feed the trolls and they become obese,you'll really feel bad! Can a troll be obese???? How could you tell??? Maybe when they "stroke out"& explode?LOL

July 9, 2012 at 5:46 p.m.
dude_abides said...

tu_ says... "Everyday modern science becomes more and more unattractive and like that 40 year old prostitute it’s all about what it takes to turn the trick."

LOL! So science is losing it's luster to you? Like fashion? Science just isn't what it used to be? LOL! Science en masse! Not certain sciences, but science as a whole! LOL! I guess everything worth learning is already learned, huh?

You, madam, are a unit.

July 9, 2012 at 6 p.m.
tderng said...

GWers... an interesting article by discovery education. Note that in this article scientists called a temperature 1 to 2 degrees CELSIUS high than current temps."THE CLIMATE OPTIMUM".Hmmmmm and this is a sixth grade instruction tutorial.

July 9, 2012 at 6:11 p.m.
acerigger said...

The Repub. Party in Texas,as a plank in their "Official Platform", disapproves teaching "critical thinking".!!

I suspect that's already been happening 'round here for a while..LOL

July 9, 2012 at 6:29 p.m.
tderng said...

The arctic ice cap was completely melted until about 4,000 years ago when the climate optimum began to cool and REBUILD the polar ice cap. Apparently this poor old planet has seen much warmer temperatures than we currently have and guess what? Life survived! How can this be? Could it be that this planet has its own way to cool itself when things get too heated? THE WORLD IS DOOMED????

July 9, 2012 at 6:33 p.m.
alprova said...

tderng wrote: "The arctic ice cap was completely melted until about 4,000 years ago when the climate optimum began to cool and REBUILD the polar ice cap."

With all due respect, there is not one person alive in the year 2012 who can begin to say with any certainty what happened on this earth 4,000 years ago.

1.) There are absolutely no records to back up such a claim, and;

2.) There is no clear-cut scientific evidence that justifies such a conclusion either. Theories and hypothesis are all over the place on that one.

If it were remotely true, than what is the explanation for all the ice melting way back then? Then, what led to a 4,000 year freeze?

July 9, 2012 at 6:47 p.m.
alprova said...

tu_quoque wrote: "And seems to not have much faith in findings that are a result of same … OMG he’s not talking about … No !! It couldn’t be … could it ??"

Could you please be a bit more clear in what exactly your challenge is?

Climate change science encompasses the happenings within the last 100 years, which are more than documented, and people are alive who have researched the facts and have witnessed such events firsthand.

I don't recall any climate science that bases any conclusions on the condition of the Earth 4,000 years ago.

No one can testify to there not being any ice at the North Pole 4,000 years ago, and then it suddenly reappearing.

For that matter, no one can testify to the origin of the Bible or anything contained within it either. Anything that extends beyond a few hundred years ago is a guessing game all the way around.

July 9, 2012 at 7:18 p.m.

Are there usually this many comments on here. Wow!

July 9, 2012 at 7:31 p.m.
miraweb said...

TQQ Chimes in:

Better news for those in the Republican column as their unemployment rate dropped 50% greater than the LIbtard states. I think that is where he was going with this.

I stand corrected on New York. The other 49 states (and D.C.) have all improved.

I am not quite sure what a "Libtard" state is (or even a Republican state, other than Utah, perhaps).

The unemployment rates are a pretty mixed bag based on political leanings. If anything, they seem to map much more closely to the number of bad mortgages that got through.

The states whose Attorneys General stopped foreclosures early and the states that didn't have many foreclosures to begin with are doing the best (maps at the link below).

12 Worst Unemployment Rates

Nevada 11.6

Rhode Island 11.0

California 10.8

North Carolina 9.4

DC 9.3

New Jersey 9.2

South Carolina 9.1

Georgia 8.9

Mississippi 8.7

New York 8.6

Illinois 8.6

Florida 8.7

12 Best Unemployment Rates

North Dakota 3.0

Nebraska 3.9

South Dakota 4.3

Vermont 4.6

Oklahoma 4.8

New Hampshire 4.8

Iowa 5.1

Wyoming 5.2

Minnesota 5.6

Virginia 5.6

Massachusetts 6.0

Utah 6.0

Foreclosure Trend Maps

July 9, 2012 at 8:15 p.m.
tderng said...

Crap,I can't remember where I found that report al. The point,is that the polar caps have shrank and grown many times over the past several millennia.The earth heats and cools. It has done so for millions of years.There are even reports that we are currently in a cooling cycle.That the heating trend ended in 1996. I personally have given about as much credence to the climate doom and gloomers as I have to the Jesus is returning next week crowd.

July 9, 2012 at 8:16 p.m.
fairmon said...

It appears to be time the experts here buried their head in the sand again.....oh! I apolegize, you have been in the position the whole time. I should have recognized that fact from the opinions expressed.

July 9, 2012 at 8:43 p.m.
mymy said...

With a few changes this speech could be given today. He would be broken hearted if he were alive today watching this country going down the wrong road.

July 9, 2012 at 9:52 p.m.
dude_abides said...

Waiting for tu_ to spew some more Ayn Kampf.

July 9, 2012 at 9:53 p.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

Why would Obama, Dems & media want to extend something they've been critical of for years? Bush tax cuts are now good?

July 9, 2012 at 11:03 p.m.
Easy123 said...


Obama already extended the Bush tax cuts once. And he will do it again but only on households making less that $250,000. Your daddy Mitt doesn't like that idea.

July 9, 2012 at 11:10 p.m.
acerigger said...

acerigger said...

The Repub. Party in Texas,as a plank in their "Official Platform", disapproves teaching "critical thinking".!!

I suspect that's already been happening 'round here for a while..LOL

Did you miss the point tu? That point would be,,there's no need to outlaw "critical thinking skills" 'round this chat room,as they obviously are not a threat to the trolls and wingers who lurk here.

are you saying you don't get snark?/?HAHAHA

July 9, 2012 at 11:34 p.m.
anniebelle said...

Hottest year on record

Scorching temperatures in June's second half helped the continental United States break its record for the hottest first six months in a calendar year, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said on Monday, July 9, topping off the hottest 12 months since modern records began.

July 10, 2012 at 5:56 a.m.
anniebelle said...

It's one thing to be anti-government, another to be pro-stupid. From the Guardian.
Scientists attribute extreme weather to man-made climate change Last year's record warm November in the UK – the second hottest since records began in 1659 – was at least 60 times more likely to happen because of climate change than owing to natural variations in the earth's weather systems, according to the peer-reviewed studies by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in the US, and the Met Office in the UK. The devastating heatwave that blighted farmers in Texas in the US last year, destroying crop yields in another record "extreme weather event", was about 20 times more likely to have happened owing to climate change than to natural variation. Attributing individual weather events, such as floods, droughts and heatwaves, to human-induced climate change – rather than natural variation in the planet's complex weather systems – has long been a goal of climate change scientists. But the difficulty of separating the causation of events from the background "noise" of the variability in the earth's climate systems has until now made such attribution an elusive goal. To attribute recent extreme weather events – rather than events 10 years ago or more – to human-caused climate change is a big advance, and will help researchers to provide better warnings of the likely effects of climate change in the near future. This is likely to have major repercussions on climate change policy and the ongoing efforts to adapt to the probable effects of global warming.

July 11, 2012 at 7:43 a.m.
Lilmountain said...

I love how everytime it's hot that proves global warming, but everytime it's cold that doesn't count. Guess what, climate change is real, but man made climate change is a bunch of alarmist bs. It widely accepted in archeological/historical circles that the earth went through a mild weather cycle for about the past 10,000 years that allowed civilization to thrive, but in the larger scheme Antarctica is a jungle going through a cool period. So until scientist can actual prove CAUSATION between what humans do and climate and maybe even get a prediction ten years or more down the line correct or until Antarctica goes beyond being a jungle and is a full on desert, I refuse to accept this is anything out of the ordinary

July 20, 2012 at 2:44 a.m.
please login to post a comment

videos »         

photos »         

e-edition »


Find a Business

400 East 11th St., Chattanooga, TN 37403
General Information (423) 756-6900
Copyright, Permissions, Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy, Ethics policy - Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.