Quote:

Climate change belief given same legal status as religion
An executive has won the right to sue his employer on the basis that he was unfairly dismissed for his green views after a judge ruled that environmentalism had the same weight in law as religious and philosophical beliefs.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthne...s-religion.html

The same as religion?

I guess global warming IS a scam!

Quote:
All the UK court did was recognize the faith for what it is...

No problem here!

"Global warming is as real as Jesus" is fine by me!

We're still waiting for Ted Denney to come up with convincing global warming data. The latest excuse is that global warming is causing water shortages, thus preventing him from producing waterfall graphs.

Yes, the vanishing glaciers, etc...are just messing around.

Global warming is a longstanding phenomenon. Occurs in big cycles - probably too big a cycle for you 6,000 year old Universe types, but none the less...

I could see wondering about the impact humans have, but the actual event itself isn't controversial, except for the nut job teabaggers, I guess.

I like how the teabag birfers get riled up over global warming purely on an economic basis. Yeah, that's good science! "Global warming is a sham because addressing it could have an economic impact!"

JIMV, you should be rooting for global warming, it will make your post-apocalytpic vision come to fruition so much sooner.

Quote:

I could see wondering about the impact humans have, but the actual event itself isn't controversial, except for the nut job teabaggers, I guess.

Well, don't forget that the last US President, as a matter of actual, exercised policy, cut out the parts of the governmental science establishment that wouldn't sign on to the idea of "no global warming". The mistreatment of people at NCAR, etc, and the way they were managed into either leaving or pay cuts via demotions speaks for itself. The message was clear, and that was "agree with the administration or we'll destroy your career and your life".

And most of those managers are still in place, pumping out who knows what "data"?

Quote:
Just as with religion, I do not doubt the idea of climate change...I just do not believe anyone has a clue about the why or what to do about it...

I'm halfway there with you on that, we certainly have a very incomplete understanding.

However, cutting off funding and hurting the careers of those who objected to that is NOT how to understand more.

Just as it is with religion, nobody has any proof either way. If the scientific community (er, at least that PART of it that is trying to suck off of grants funding the research...hey! This research costs MONEY, dammit) wants to remain claiming itself to be "scientific," on the one hand, and capable of definitively proving that global warming is a scientific truth, then the scientific community better get crackin.' After all, nobody believes them yet.

Which DOES make them, collectively, much more akin to a religious cult than they might comfortably want to consider themselves

Okay, "scientists." Somebody PROVE something, with a unified voice (among the scientific community) BEHIND that proof.

As long as the scientists keep arguing among themselves, they might as well be so many Catholics arguing for the immediate hanging of those who slipped out of the net. IF they can be caught. That is the problem with universal belief systems in the 21st century -- everybody forgets by tomorrow morning.

Umm. What were we arguing about, anyway? Shit. I forgot.

Quote:
on the one hand, and capable of definitively proving that global warming is a scientific truth, then the scientific community better get crackin.'

It's done, the evidence is hard and conclusive.

What kind of creationism are you babbling about here?

Yes, the climate is warming. The "nobody" who believes them is the same people who sucked down the dumb idea that Iraq had "weapons of mass destruction", that we needed "homeland security", and that we should give up our civil rights in order to protect ourselves.

He who gives up liberty for security deserves neither.

j_j, you are a believer. You believe science that is beyond your ken, as though it were within your ken. "Scientifically," you wouldn't know a glacial from a facial.

Fact is, there are no facts. There are vague pseudo-scientific assertions, politically driven, on both sides of the question.

Hey. Live to be around 800 years old, and you MIGHT (or might not) see for yourself. Otherwise, it is all politics. The "warms" and the "normals" are lined up across some mythical thermal line in the water. If either side had a valid scientifically verifiable argument, such an argument would have been posted by now. Neither side does. And it hasn't.

If you live in Miami, you feel warmer. If you live in Fargo, you feel colder. Otherwise, believe your guru and throw a few Shekels to your favored political cause. Believe me, THEY will know what to do with your Shekels...

There are no proofs. There are merely campaign contributions. If you believe otherwise, well, you are just a believer. Hey. Spend it wherever it makes you feel good...

Quote:
As an aside, the Brits just took a survey and found less than a majority buy into the man made global warming faith...

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6916648.ece

The new faith has not succeeded in buying a majority even in the world center of political correctness..

Closer to home:

Quote:
Nearly half the nation

Voters "favored" Obama. Past tense. The election was a year ago. Your logic is subjective. It was only good for one day. That being objective.

Quote:
Voters "favored" Obama. Past tense. The election was a year ago. Your logic is subjective. It was only good for one day. That being objective.

Good for four years, buddy!

If we're lucky, the reds will run Sarah and we're talking eight years.

Geez, you tea baggers just can't get over it.

What, 60-40 in the Senate isn't enough? Ya want 65-35?

What babies.

"Only one day at the polls...merely a flesh wound!"

"Yeah, we lost the Super Bowl, but that was just that one day; we are the rightful Lombardi Trophy holders..."

Not even Orwell could have made up this teabag mentality.

Next comes Americans burning their own leaders in effigy.

Congrats, your side is reaching bottom.

Teabagging, birthers...you've been successfully handled by an Australian who owns the London Sun.

Huh uh, I can see that in the polls today. Most Americans favor Obama. Right. Your logic is that JIMV should have voted for Obama because on election day most people voted for Obama? I wonder how many people who voted for Obama are now having "buyer's remorse". Turns out his bill-of-goods was not free. We used to tar and feather than run people like him out of town on a rail. Obama is a tonic salesman of the year. All you have to do is believe it will cure everything. At least until he has himself well out of town soon. The guy is as slippery as a tin man.

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
Voters "favored" Obama. Past tense. The election was a year ago. Your logic is subjective. It was only good for one day. That being objective.

Good for four years, buddy!

We all saw how well that theory worked after the 2004 Bush win...by 2005 his numbers were crashing and the left was working 24/7 to reverse that win...in under 2 years they had reversed that 'voter mandate' and destroyed Bush's ability to govern...Obama is going down the toilet even faster.

Buddha is a cocksucking hypocrite. I'm sure the day after Bush was elected he was blathering shit like, "damn! I should have voted for him instead. He won".

Buddha is not only a hypocrite, but a "cocksucking" hypocrite.

Well, I guess that seals it. Hey, proof is proof...

Ummm -- you DO have proof, right Lamont (or whatever your name is)???

And your "science" is definitive. And your "science" is based on the most recent vote in... in WHAT?

Lamont, Lamont. You are embarrassing yourself. Your logic has the validity of your plastic face. Yakity yak. Who controls the puppet strings?

Hey. If you really need a good blow job THAT much, Buddha and I will chip in and find you a needy sheepherder just west of Zzyzx. Hey. It's a recession, for cryin' out loud. Even sheepherders need the extra cash, and the lambs won't mind. A tit is a tit.

Buddha, what say? Couldn't cost more than 5 bucks apiece, for a nice gummy-mouthed kid out on the southwest forty.

Lamont, Lamont. Trust me. You'll love it. But we AIN'T payin' your air fare to Baker...

Hey. I'm in. Lamont needs some love. Maybe it'll help, er, "jolt" him back to reality.

Clifton Clifton....

We now have confirmation of what's really going on.

The Universe was actually created by God on January 20, 2009 and was brought into existence in this sorry state with this sorry President.

Any notion that there were already two pre-existing fucked up wars and a great economic decline in place on Jan. 20 are the work of Satan trying to take your attention off the events of Jan. 20 onward.

The birther teabagger effigy burning gun fetishists are God's Malitia, trying to remind us every fifteen minutes that before 1/20/09, the Universe was in a blissful state of pre-existence.

Try saying the word, "Bush," and all you will get is, "Blasphemy! This is all the work of Obama! This Bush you speak of did not exist."

(It's like trying to have a conversation with Geoff or May about Hi Fi.)

The only problem that the birthers faced was that this would eliminate Reagan's existence, so they have arrived at a quantum theory where they believe that somehow Reagan existed while simultaneously Bush did not.

It gets complicated...I'm sure President Palin will fix it all in 2012.

Sorry, Gore did not exist before January 20, 2009, so I can't imagine what you are talking about. This is really about how Obama took a newly formed perfect world and ruined it.

No, you said JIMV was wrong because most of America voted for Obama. Based on that premise you were wrong about Bush. You see, you little fucking pussies don't like taking your own brand of medicine. It was okay to bitch, moan, and complain when Bush was in office. Call Bush a Nazi, Fascist, and a pig. But now that Obama is in office a lot of people are now calling him a Nazi, Fascist, and a Socialist. I wouldn't call him a pig. Pigs have more integrity sitting in the meat section of the grocery store. Buddha isn't wrong on the issues. He knows those "tea-baggers" can cause a lot of shit.

Quote:
No, you said JIMV was wrong because most of America voted for Obama. Based on that premise you were wrong about Bush. You see, you little fucking pussies don't like taking your own brand of medicine. It was okay to bitch, moan, and complain when Bush was in office. Call Bush a Nazi, Fascist, and a pig. But now that Obama is in office a lot of people are now calling him a Nazi, Fascist, and a Socialist. I wouldn't call him a pig. Pigs have more integrity sitting in the meat section of the grocery store. Buddha isn't wrong on the issues. He knows those "tea-baggers" can cause a lot of shit.

Lamont, pull your head out of Jim's ass.

I pointed out that if he wanted to start validating his opinions with poll results, then he should abide by the electoral "poll," as well. Something he and you seem incapable of doing in your tantrumized states.

I never called Shrub any of those names you mention - you are just being a sore loser baby now.

So, don't you have a figure of Obama or Pelosi to go and light on fire while you try to think of even 'stupider' ways to act up?

Birthers, teabaggers, gun parades...lordy. You're worse than those pot protestors lighting up at rallies to show what big men they are.

What you say bounces of me and sticks to you!