Why we should listen to the 97%

[PMZ]

The so called 97% at this point can not even agree on a climate sensitivity to CO2....that, in case you were wondering, is the bottom line. So much for a consensus.

The wheels are falling off the crazy train. The CO2 hypothesis has failed miserably and now we can turn our attention to natural variability which is where it should have been all along.

I think that you could experience more reality with your head out of your ass. Just saying.

 

[PMZ]

the toddster is so worried about car safety that he thinks everyone should drive tanks.

"I'm going to protect myself by killing you" is regarded by sane, moral human beings as the ideology of the sociopath.

Oddly, many American conservatives believe themselves deserving of praise because they think like sociopaths, and snarl at anyone who doesn't think like a sociopath.

"I'm going to protect myself by killing you" is regarded by sane, moral human beings as the ideology of the sociopath.

I know, that's why pushing dangerous cars, to protect myself from "global warming dangers" is really disgusting. Typical, liberal sociopaths.

The dangerous cars are the oversized ones. They're real killers. In every sense of the word. Driving one is like carrying a loaded assault rifle in public for personal protection.

 

[bripat9643]

Democracy is about the inmates running the asylum. Liberals are trying to turn us all into inmates in an asylum. Under democracy the bottom 51% decide how everyone will live their lives.

Why do you use the term "bottom"?

And, for that matter, why do you use 51%? Though the balance between the two parties has grown tighter and tighter over the years (evidence for an evolutionary process I'd say) support for, or opposition to, specific government policies is rarely so close. For instance, support for laws against murder is nearly unanimous.

Laws against murder have been on the books for 300 years. 99% of the laws have nothing to do with protecting basic rights. They are mostly about bestowing privileges on one group or another.

I use the 51% figure because that is what it takes to guarantee a win. It's generally the dumbest most ignorant section of the country that hasn't made it's mind up come election time. That's where all the advertising dollars are directed. Idiots determine the outcome of elections - the kind who think Obama is going to pay all their bills.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

"I'm going to protect myself by killing you" is regarded by sane, moral human beings as the ideology of the sociopath.

Oddly, many American conservatives believe themselves deserving of praise because they think like sociopaths, and snarl at anyone who doesn't think like a sociopath.

"I'm going to protect myself by killing you" is regarded by sane, moral human beings as the ideology of the sociopath.

I know, that's why pushing dangerous cars, to protect myself from "global warming dangers" is really disgusting. Typical, liberal sociopaths.

The dangerous cars are the oversized ones. They're real killers. In every sense of the word. Driving one is like carrying a loaded assault rifle in public for personal protection.

The dangerous ones are the lighter ones.
More dangerous in single car collisions, more dangerous in collisions with trucks.
More dangerous. Measurably more dangerous.

If Obama gets his wish and standards rise to 54.5 MPG, how many thousands more will die?

At least you'll be protecting Gaia, no matter how many little people pay the price.

 

[PMZ]

Democracy is about the inmates running the asylum. Liberals are trying to turn us all into inmates in an asylum. Under democracy the bottom 51% decide how everyone will live their lives.

Why do you use the term "bottom"?

And, for that matter, why do you use 51%? Though the balance between the two parties has grown tighter and tighter over the years (evidence for an evolutionary process I'd say) support for, or opposition to, specific government policies is rarely so close. For instance, support for laws against murder is nearly unanimous.

Laws against murder have been on the books for 300 years. 99% of the laws have nothing to do with protecting basic rights. They are mostly about bestowing privileges on one group or another.

I use the 51% figure because that is what it takes to guarantee a win. It's generally the dumbest most ignorant section of the country that hasn't made it's mind up come election time. That's where all the advertising dollars are directed. Idiots determine the outcome of elections - the kind who think Obama is going to pay all their bills.

All laws set the standards that define what is not acceptable for one person to impose on another.

I don't care whether it's speeding or dumping garbage, or murder or not paying taxes, or carrying an unregistered gun, all laws define the details of what we all want to be free of from others.

 

[PMZ]

Democracy is about the inmates running the asylum. Liberals are trying to turn us all into inmates in an asylum. Under democracy the bottom 51% decide how everyone will live their lives.

Why do you use the term "bottom"?

And, for that matter, why do you use 51%? Though the balance between the two parties has grown tighter and tighter over the years (evidence for an evolutionary process I'd say) support for, or opposition to, specific government policies is rarely so close. For instance, support for laws against murder is nearly unanimous.

Laws against murder have been on the books for 300 years. 99% of the laws have nothing to do with protecting basic rights. They are mostly about bestowing privileges on one group or another.

I use the 51% figure because that is what it takes to guarantee a win. It's generally the dumbest most ignorant section of the country that hasn't made it's mind up come election time. That's where all the advertising dollars are directed. Idiots determine the outcome of elections - the kind who think Obama is going to pay all their bills.

''It's generally the dumbest most ignorant section of the country that hasn't made it's mind up come election time.''

This is why democracy is wasted on conservatives. They are taught that rule by a small minority, defined as a plutocracy, is best because that would allow them to impose their definition of best on others. Of course that's also defined as tyranny.

Democracy is rule by all of us. Tyranny is rule by some of us. Dictatorships are rule by one of us.

 

[PMZ]

"I'm going to protect myself by killing you" is regarded by sane, moral human beings as the ideology of the sociopath.

I know, that's why pushing dangerous cars, to protect myself from "global warming dangers" is really disgusting. Typical, liberal sociopaths.

The dangerous cars are the oversized ones. They're real killers. In every sense of the word. Driving one is like carrying a loaded assault rifle in public for personal protection.

The dangerous ones are the lighter ones.
More dangerous in single car collisions, more dangerous in collisions with trucks.
More dangerous. Measurably more dangerous.

If Obama gets his wish and standards rise to 54.5 MPG, how many thousands more will die?

At least you'll be protecting Gaia, no matter how many little people pay the price.

If conservatives get their wish of ignoring peak energy and AGW all of us will return to the caves and your problem will be solved.

 

[PMZ]

Democracy is about the inmates running the asylum. Liberals are trying to turn us all into inmates in an asylum. Under democracy the bottom 51% decide how everyone will live their lives.

Why do you use the term "bottom"?

And, for that matter, why do you use 51%? Though the balance between the two parties has grown tighter and tighter over the years (evidence for an evolutionary process I'd say) support for, or opposition to, specific government policies is rarely so close. For instance, support for laws against murder is nearly unanimous.

Laws against murder have been on the books for 300 years. 99% of the laws have nothing to do with protecting basic rights. They are mostly about bestowing privileges on one group or another.

I use the 51% figure because that is what it takes to guarantee a win. It's generally the dumbest most ignorant section of the country that hasn't made it's mind up come election time. That's where all the advertising dollars are directed. Idiots determine the outcome of elections - the kind who think Obama is going to pay all their bills.

''the kind who think Obama is going to pay all their bills.''

I don't know any people that believe that.

I do know lots of people who are angry about the Bushman not paying the bills that his policies rang up.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The dangerous cars are the oversized ones. They're real killers. In every sense of the word. Driving one is like carrying a loaded assault rifle in public for personal protection.

The dangerous ones are the lighter ones.
More dangerous in single car collisions, more dangerous in collisions with trucks.
More dangerous. Measurably more dangerous.

If Obama gets his wish and standards rise to 54.5 MPG, how many thousands more will die?

At least you'll be protecting Gaia, no matter how many little people pay the price.

If conservatives get their wish of ignoring peak energy and AGW all of us will return to the caves and your problem will be solved.

What happened to the extra hurricanes you doomers promised us over the last 5 years?

You can return to a cave, I'll stay in the modern world, we have fossil fuels.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Why do you use the term "bottom"?

And, for that matter, why do you use 51%? Though the balance between the two parties has grown tighter and tighter over the years (evidence for an evolutionary process I'd say) support for, or opposition to, specific government policies is rarely so close. For instance, support for laws against murder is nearly unanimous.

Laws against murder have been on the books for 300 years. 99% of the laws have nothing to do with protecting basic rights. They are mostly about bestowing privileges on one group or another.

I use the 51% figure because that is what it takes to guarantee a win. It's generally the dumbest most ignorant section of the country that hasn't made it's mind up come election time. That's where all the advertising dollars are directed. Idiots determine the outcome of elections - the kind who think Obama is going to pay all their bills.

''the kind who think Obama is going to pay all their bills.''

I don't know any people that believe that.

I do know lots of people who are angry about the Bushman not paying the bills that his policies rang up.

Bush's spending was awful. Obama rang up more unpaid bills in his first 4.5 years than Bush did in 8.

 

[Abraham3]

What happened to the extra hurricanes you doomers promised us over the last 5 years?

Have you watched any of the weather reports from the Pacific far east? And, at least here in Florida, we have been drowned in a ridiculous amount of rain. The increase in intensity is something seen in the averages. It does not require that you see a monster storm every season. But the averages are rising and will continue to rise.
[/QUOTE]

 

[PMZ]

Laws against murder have been on the books for 300 years. 99% of the laws have nothing to do with protecting basic rights. They are mostly about bestowing privileges on one group or another.

I use the 51% figure because that is what it takes to guarantee a win. It's generally the dumbest most ignorant section of the country that hasn't made it's mind up come election time. That's where all the advertising dollars are directed. Idiots determine the outcome of elections - the kind who think Obama is going to pay all their bills.

''the kind who think Obama is going to pay all their bills.''

I don't know any people that believe that.

I do know lots of people who are angry about the Bushman not paying the bills that his policies rang up.

Bush's spending was awful. Obama rang up more unpaid bills in his first 4.5 years than Bush did in 8.

Bush's policies continue racking up debt to this day. Afghanistan for instance. Our entire debt stems from Bush policies. Made worse by the fact that the CBO told Bush that if he continued Clinton's economic policies the US could be debt free by 2006 and have a $2.5T surplus by 2011.

 

[PMZ]

The dangerous ones are the lighter ones.
More dangerous in single car collisions, more dangerous in collisions with trucks.
More dangerous. Measurably more dangerous.

If Obama gets his wish and standards rise to 54.5 MPG, how many thousands more will die?

At least you'll be protecting Gaia, no matter how many little people pay the price.

If conservatives get their wish of ignoring peak energy and AGW all of us will return to the caves and your problem will be solved.

What happened to the extra hurricanes you doomers promised us over the last 5 years?

You can return to a cave, I'll stay in the modern world, we have fossil fuels.

I agree that today we have fossil fuels and a tolerable if growingly expensive level of climate change.

I know that's where your thinking stops.

Fortunately we have science that allows us to see into the future, not perfectly but adequately clearly. That tells us that doing nothing is unaffordable and unconscionable.

Fortunately, we are used to people like you who choose to be part of the problem rather than part of the solution. We're not counting on you for anything.

Of lead, follow, or get out of the way you have decided not to lead or follow.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

''the kind who think Obama is going to pay all their bills.''

I don't know any people that believe that.

I do know lots of people who are angry about the Bushman not paying the bills that his policies rang up.

Bush's spending was awful. Obama rang up more unpaid bills in his first 4.5 years than Bush did in 8.

Bush's policies continue racking up debt to this day. Afghanistan for instance. Our entire debt stems from Bush policies. Made worse by the fact that the CBO told Bush that if he continued Clinton's economic policies the US could be debt free by 2006 and have a $2.5T surplus by 2011.

Our entire debt stems from Bush policies.

I didn't realize Obama had so little power.

 

[bripat9643]

''the kind who think Obama is going to pay all their bills.''

I don't know any people that believe that.

I do know lots of people who are angry about the Bushman not paying the bills that his policies rang up.

Bush's spending was awful. Obama rang up more unpaid bills in his first 4.5 years than Bush did in 8.

Bush's policies continue racking up debt to this day. Afghanistan for instance. Our entire debt stems from Bush policies. Made worse by the fact that the CBO told Bush that if he continued Clinton's economic policies the US could be debt free by 2006 and have a $2.5T surplus by 2011.

When have CBO forecasts ever been accurate, or even honest, for that matter?

 

[bripat9643]

If conservatives get their wish of ignoring peak energy and AGW all of us will return to the caves and your problem will be solved.

What happened to the extra hurricanes you doomers promised us over the last 5 years?

You can return to a cave, I'll stay in the modern world, we have fossil fuels.

I agree that today we have fossil fuels and a tolerable if growingly expensive level of climate change.

I know that's where your thinking stops.

What "expenses" has climate changed caused us to incur?

Fortunately we have science that allows us to see into the future, not perfectly but adequately clearly. That tells us that doing nothing is unaffordable and unconscionable.

So far, the record of "science" at seeing into the future of our climate is a big fat zero. It hasn't managed to get a single forecast correct. Even if their predictions were accurate, it still doesn't follow that the costs would be "unaffordable" or "unconscionable."

Fortunately, we are used to people like you who choose to be part of the problem rather than part of the solution. We're not counting on you for anything.

Of lead, follow, or get out of the way you have decided not to lead or follow.

You can count on me to do everything I can to get in your way and put a stop to your AGW cult.

 

[Abraham3]

What happened to the extra hurricanes you doomers promised us over the last 5 years?

You can return to a cave, I'll stay in the modern world, we have fossil fuels.

I agree that today we have fossil fuels and a tolerable if growingly expensive level of climate change.

I know that's where your thinking stops.

What "expenses" has climate changed caused us to incur?

Fortunately we have science that allows us to see into the future, not perfectly but adequately clearly. That tells us that doing nothing is unaffordable and unconscionable.

So far, the record of "science" at seeing into the future of our climate is a big fat zero. It hasn't managed to get a single forecast correct. Even if their predictions were accurate, it still doesn't follow that the costs would be "unaffordable" or "unconscionable."

Fortunately, we are used to people like you who choose to be part of the problem rather than part of the solution. We're not counting on you for anything.

Of lead, follow, or get out of the way you have decided not to lead or follow.

You can count on me to do everything I can to get in your way and put a stop to your AGW cult.

That's gonna be tough to do when Mother Nature steps on your head.

 

[PMZ]

Bush's spending was awful. Obama rang up more unpaid bills in his first 4.5 years than Bush did in 8.

Bush's policies continue racking up debt to this day. Afghanistan for instance. Our entire debt stems from Bush policies. Made worse by the fact that the CBO told Bush that if he continued Clinton's economic policies the US could be debt free by 2006 and have a $2.5T surplus by 2011.

Our entire debt stems from Bush policies.

I didn't realize Obama had so little power.

He has the power to have ended those unaffordable policies despite the Republican shut down of Congress.

 

[PMZ]

Bush's spending was awful. Obama rang up more unpaid bills in his first 4.5 years than Bush did in 8.

Bush's policies continue racking up debt to this day. Afghanistan for instance. Our entire debt stems from Bush policies. Made worse by the fact that the CBO told Bush that if he continued Clinton's economic policies the US could be debt free by 2006 and have a $2.5T surplus by 2011.

When have CBO forecasts ever been accurate, or even honest, for that matter?

As compared to FOX News analysis. You've got to be kidding!

You are a textbook example as why Republicans have no place in government.

 

[PMZ]

What happened to the extra hurricanes you doomers promised us over the last 5 years?

You can return to a cave, I'll stay in the modern world, we have fossil fuels.

I agree that today we have fossil fuels and a tolerable if growingly expensive level of climate change.

I know that's where your thinking stops.

What "expenses" has climate changed caused us to incur?

Fortunately we have science that allows us to see into the future, not perfectly but adequately clearly. That tells us that doing nothing is unaffordable and unconscionable.

So far, the record of "science" at seeing into the future of our climate is a big fat zero. It hasn't managed to get a single forecast correct. Even if their predictions were accurate, it still doesn't follow that the costs would be "unaffordable" or "unconscionable."

Fortunately, we are used to people like you who choose to be part of the problem rather than part of the solution. We're not counting on you for anything.

Of lead, follow, or get out of the way you have decided not to lead or follow.

You can count on me to do everything I can to get in your way and put a stop to your AGW cult.

We would expect nothing else from a Fox puppet. You're one of the 'bot army they have been well paid to create.