Global Warming = Anti-Testosterone?

Off Topic
61

[quote]pushharder wrote:
gotaknife wrote:
… All the eminent scientists who have studied this issue are in agreement that global warming is a serious issue and that it is being caused by humans…

Thank you, gotaknife, for posting this right after my post. THIS is exactly what I was talking about. Spreading out-and-out lies is A-OK because to you and those like you, the ends justify the means.

All of the eminent scientists who have studied this issue are NOT in agreement that global warming is a serious issue.

All of the eminent scientists who have studied this issue are NOT in agreement that global warming is being caused by humans.

You’re either a sucker or a liar; you’re either making the Kool Aid or drinking it but either way, you’re simply wrong.

Stop it, my friend. Stop it. [/quote]

The World Meteorological Organization, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, James Hansen and NASA’s Goddard Institute, who are considered the foremost experts on climate change, are all in agreement that that global warming is being caused by humans. Others such as Nobel price winners Graedel and Crutzen (German researchers who won their Nobel Prize for their work on CFCs) are in agreement that that global warming is being caused by humans and it is a serious issue. If I remember correctly these guys began looking at the ?global warming? problem because they doubted the science.

Another is German climatologist Hans von Storch, who is a critic of the Goddard Institute?s assessments of the consequences of climate change and recently showed that the methodology that led to the ?hockey stick curve? was flawed (which is that damn global warming graph you always see that is shaped like an ice hockey stick). But he still says that climate change is being caused by humans and that it is a serious problem.

Even researchers like Patrick Michaels (who I would not regard as eminent), who receives funding from fossil fuel groups, admits that global warming will occur, but that it will be at the low end of the IPCC estimates.

So where is the debate among eminent scientists??? I made the previous statements because in my studies I have yet to hear about a single eminent scientist in the field of climatology that says that human CO2 production is NOT going to cause long term global warming. So I ask you who are the eminent scientists that disagree? As I said before there is much debate about the extent of the consequences of climate change but not about the human causes.

62

[quote]mr_slick wrote:
MikeTheBear wrote:
And this is one of the reason why I’ve become a flaming, diehard, dyed-in-the-wool Independent. Screw both parties.

We are a rare breed,brother.[/quote]

I’m what I like to call a “High School Republican”. Basically, The Man better stay the fuck out my way, and it’s hands off my money.

63

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
…
The fact that so many guys actually equate manhood to the size of their SUV bothers me.[/quote]

I agree with you, but does it really surpise you all that much? We’re a consumeristic, material-driven (hope I’m not being redundant here) society for the most part, no? Pair that with the lack of critical and rational thought, and there you have it unfortunately.

64

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
As far as I know most of Europe has not met their commitments.

Their politicans talk the talk but they do not walk the walk.

At least America and Australia are not pretending to do something they are not.[/quote]

It’s true that Europe/EU is certainly not on track to meet its requirements per Kyoto, but I’m actually pretty sure they’ve made progress nonetheless. Germany, I believe, actually is on track. IMHO, Europe certainly seems to have a better handle on the environmental issues than we do.

65

It is no coincidence that global warming showed up with peak oil. The powers that be are attempting to change the mindset of the west. A global tax on energy will be their windfall that allows for more biased studies designed to influence our understanding of the world on other levels.

If peak oil is real, it will be better fo those running the system to get the people to voluntarily change their habits than to coerce them through more brutal methods.

Al Gore is an idiot-but he serves his handlers well. Check out the sweetheart deal his Senator father got from Armand Hammer and subsequently sold to young Al in another sweetheart deal-the kind that truly wealthy people bestow upon their children.

Check out the tobacco speaking fees that Al received while his sister was dying of lung cancer… Hillary’s trading… Obama’s land deals…Kennedy’s liquor running…republicans are just as guilty if less obvious.

Get rid of them all. Except Ron Paul.

66

[quote]wqp3 wrote:
Check out the sweetheart deal his Senator father got from Armand Hammer and subsequently sold to young Al in another sweetheart deal-the kind that truly wealthy people bestow upon their children.[/quote]

Second: Prohibit inheritance.

No more Paris Hiltons.

Bill Gates’ kids aren’t inheriting shit, and neither should anyone else.

67

[quote]Kritikos wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
As far as I know most of Europe has not met their commitments.

Their politicans talk the talk but they do not walk the walk.

At least America and Australia are not pretending to do something they are not.

It’s true that Europe/EU is certainly not on track to meet its requirements per Kyoto, but I’m actually pretty sure they’ve made progress nonetheless. Germany, I believe, actually is on track. IMHO, Europe certainly seems to have a better handle on the environmental issues than we do.

[/quote]

European emissions have risen since Kyoto. Why do you say they have a better handle on the issues?

The only thing they seem to agree on is to blame the Americans.

68

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Kritikos wrote:
…

By the way, I’d like to say that the original article that started this thread really sucked.

It was kind of funny but obviously had nothing to add to the subject.

The fact that so many guys actually equate manhood to the size of their SUV bothers me.[/quote]

It’s not the size of the SUV, it’s your grouping at 100 yards and how many pins you can clean form a table at 7 yards with a 45 and a shotgun.

Mine is 1/2 " at 100 yards from a rest and 5 pins from the table in 2 seconds with a pump 12 guage. Nothing else matters.

69

[quote]ElbowStrike wrote:
wqp3 wrote:
Check out the sweetheart deal his Senator father got from Armand Hammer and subsequently sold to young Al in another sweetheart deal-the kind that truly wealthy people bestow upon their children.

Second: Prohibit inheritance.

No more Paris Hiltons.

Bill Gates’ kids aren’t inheriting shit, and neither should anyone else.[/quote]

My kids are certainly going to get what I have have and I will fight anyone that tries to make it otherwise.

70

[quote]tom63 wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Kritikos wrote:
…

By the way, I’d like to say that the original article that started this thread really sucked.

It was kind of funny but obviously had nothing to add to the subject.

The fact that so many guys actually equate manhood to the size of their SUV bothers me.

It’s not the size of the SUV, it’s your grouping at 100 yards and how many pins you can clean form a table at 7 yards with a 45 and a shotgun.

Mine is 1/2 " at 100 yards from a rest and 5 pins from the table in 2 seconds with a pump 12 guage. Nothing else matters.

[/quote]

Stop shooting from a rest unless you are sighting in. When it comes time to make it count you won’t have that luxury. I suggest practicing a number of positions.

I have never shot pins with a shotgun. At my club the pins are in the handgun only range.

72

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
My kids are certainly going to get what I have have and I will fight anyone that tries to make it otherwise.[/quote]

Of course they’d have right of first refusal at High Chancellor of Capitalismland ElbowStrike’s State auction, so long as they can match the winning bid. :smiley: