Buy Text-Link-Ads here
Recent Comments

    follow OlbyWatch on Twitter

    In

    John Gibson Welcomes Back the Infamous, Deplorable Keith Olbermann

    tonyome wrote: <a href="http://twitchy.com/2014/07/28/voxs-laughable-praise-of-keith-olber... [more](11)

    In

    Welcome Back, Olby!

    syvyn11 wrote: <a href="http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/keith-olbermann-reviving-worst... [more](9)

    In

    Former Obama Support/Donor Releases Song Supporting Romney/Ryan: "We'll Take It Back Again" by Kyle Tucker

    syvyn11 wrote: @philly I don't see that happening. ESPN has turned hyper left in recent... [more](64)

    In

    Blue-Blog-a-Palooza: Ann Romney Edition!

    djthereplay wrote: By mkdawuss on August 29, 2012 6:17 PM Will John Gibson be having a "Red-B... [more](4)

    In

    No Joy in Kosville...Mighty Olby Has Struck Out

    djwolf76 wrote: "But the FOX-GOP relationship (which is far more distinguished and prevalen... [more](23)

    KO Mini Blog



    What's in the Olbermann Flood Feed?
    Subscribe to Olbermann Flood Feed:
    RSS/XML

    KO Countdown Clock


    Warning: mktime() [function.mktime]: It is not safe to rely on the system's timezone settings. You are *required* to use the date.timezone setting or the date_default_timezone_set() function. In case you used any of those methods and you are still getting this warning, you most likely misspelled the timezone identifier. We selected 'America/New_York' for 'EDT/-4.0/DST' instead in /home/owatch/www/www.olbermannwatch.com/docs/countdown.php on line 5
    KO's new contract with MSNBC ends in...
    0 days 0 hours 0 minutes

    OlbermannWatch.com "My Faves" Set

    OlbermannWatch.com Favorited Photos from other Flickr Users

    Got OlbyPhotos? See some on Flickr? DO NOT email us. Send us a FlickrMail instead. Include a link to the photo. If we like the photo you will see it displayed in the Olby Flickr Flood above.

    New to Flickr? Sign up for a FREE Flickr account!


    Got some OlbyVideo? See some on YouTube? DO NOT email us. Send us a YouTube Messages instead. Include a link to the video. If we like the video you will see it displayed in our favorites list in our YouTube page.

    New to YouTube? Sign up for a FREE YouTube account!

    Red Meat Blog
    Keith Olbermann Quotes
    Countdown Staff Writers

    If they're not on Keith's payroll...

    ...they should be...

    Crooks & Liars
    Daily Kos
    Eschaton
    Huffington Post
    Media Matters for America
    MyDD
    News Corpse
    No Quarter
    Raw Story
    Talking Points Memo
    Think Progress
    TVNewser
    Keith Lovers

    MSNBC's Countdown
    Bloggerman
    MSNBC Transcripts
    MSNBC Group at MSN

    Drinking with Keith Olbermann
    Either Relevant or True
    KeithOlbermann.org
    Keith Olbermann is Evil
    Olbermann Nation
    Olbermann.org
    Thank You, Keith Olbermann

    Don't Be Such A Douche
    Eyes on Fox
    Liberal Talk Radio
    Oliver Willis
    Sweet Jesus I Hate Bill O'Reilly

    Anonymous Rat
    For This Relief Much Thanks
    Watching Olbermann Watch

    Keith Olbermann Fanlisting Site I
    Keith Olbermann Fanlisting Site II
    Keith Olbermann Links
    Olberfans
    Sports Center Altar
    Nothing for Everyone

    Democratic Underground KO Forum
    Television Without Pity KO Forum
    Loony KO Forum (old)
    Loony KO Forum (new)
    Olberfans Forum (old)
    Olberfans Forum (new)
    Keith Watchers

    186k per second
    Ace of Spades HQ
    Cable Gamer
    Dean's World
    Doug Ross@Journal
    Extreme Mortman
    Fire Keith Olbermann
    Hot Air
    Inside Cable News
    Instapundit
    Jawa Report
    Johnny Dollar's Place
    Just One Minute
    Little Green Footballs
    Mark Levin
    Media Research Center
    Moonbattery.com
    Moorelies
    National Review Media Blog
    Narcissistic Views
    Newsbusters
    Pat Campbell Show
    Radio Equalizer
    Rathergate
    Riehl World View
    Sister Toldjah
    Toys in the Attic
    Webloggin
    The Dark Side of Keith Olbermann
    World According to Carl

    Thanks for the blogroll link!

    Age of Treason
    Bane Rants
    The Blue Site
    Cabal of Doom-De Oppresso Libre
    Chuckoblog
    Conservative Blog Therapy
    Conservathink
    Country Store
    Does Anyone Agree?
    The Drunkablog!
    Eclipse Ramblings
    If I were President of USA
    I'll Lay Down My Glasses
    Instrumental Rationality
    JasonPye.com
    Kevin Dayhoff
    Last Train Out Of Hell
    Leaning Straight Up
    Limestone Roof
    Mein BlogoVault
    NostraBlogAss
    Peacerose Journal
    The Politics of CP
    Public Secrets: from the files of the Irishspy
    Rat Chat
    Return of the Conservatives
    The Right Place
    Rhymes with Right
    seanrobins.com
    Six Meat Buffet
    Sports and Stuff
    Stout Republican
    Stuck On Stupid
    Things I H8
    TruthGuys
    Verum Serum
    WildWeasel

    Friends of OlbyWatch

    Aaron Barnhart
    Eric Deggans
    Jason Clarke
    Ron Coleman
    Victria Zdrok
    Keith Resources

    Google News: Keith Olbermann
    Feedster: Keith Olbermann
    Technorati: Keith Olbermann
    Wikipedia: Keith Olbermann
    Wikipedia: Countdown
    Wikiality: Keith Olbermann
    Keith Olbermann Quotes on Jossip
    Keith Olbermann Photos
    NNDB Olbermann Page
    IMDB Olbermann Page
    Countdown Guest Listing & Transcripts
    Olbermann Watch FAQ
    List of Politics on Countdown (by party)
    Mark Levin's Keith Overbite Page
    Keith Olbermann's Diary at Daily Kos
    Olbermann Watch in the News

    Houston Chronicle
    Playboy
    The Journal News
    National Review
    San Antonio Express
    The Hollywood Reporter
    The Journal News
    Los Angeles Times
    American Journalism Review
    Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
    St. Petersburg Times
    Kansas City Star
    New York Post/Page Six
    Washington Post
    Associated Press
    PBS
    New York Daily News
    Online Journalism Review
    The Washingon Post
    Hartford Courant
    WTWP-AM
    The New York Observer
    The Washington Post


    Countdown with Keith Olbermann
    Great Moments in Broadcast Journalism
    Great Thanks Hall of Fame
    Keith Olbermann
    MSM KO Bandwagon
    Olbermann
    Olbermann Watch Channel on You Tube
    Olbermann Watch Debate
    Olbermann Watch Image Gallery
    Olbermann Watch Polling Service
    OlbermannWatch
    OlbyWatch Link Roundup
    TVNewser "Journalism"

    July 2013
    September 2012
    August 2012
    April 2012
    March 2012
    February 2012
    January 2012
    December 2011
    November 2011
    October 2011
    September 2011
    August 2011
    July 2011
    June 2011
    May 2011
    April 2011
    March 2011
    February 2011
    January 2011
    December 2010
    November 2010
    October 2010
    September 2010
    August 2010
    July 2010
    June 2010
    May 2010
    April 2010
    March 2010
    February 2010
    January 2010
    December 2009
    November 2009
    October 2009
    September 2009
    August 2009
    July 2009
    June 2009
    May 2009
    April 2009
    March 2009
    February 2009
    January 2009
    December 2008
    November 2008
    October 2008
    September 2008
    August 2008
    July 2008
    June 2008
    May 2008
    April 2008
    March 2008
    February 2008
    January 2008
    December 2007
    November 2007
    October 2007
    September 2007
    August 2007
    July 2007
    June 2007
    May 2007
    April 2007
    March 2007
    February 2007
    January 2007
    December 2006
    November 2006
    October 2006
    September 2006
    August 2006
    July 2006
    June 2006
    May 2006
    April 2006
    March 2006
    February 2006
    January 2006
    December 2005
    November 2005
    October 2005
    September 2005
    August 2005
    June 2005
    May 2005
    April 2005
    March 2005
    February 2005
    January 2005
    December 2004
    November 2004

    Google

    Olbermann Watch Masthead

    Managing Editor

    Robert Cox
    olby at olbywatch dot com

    Contributors

    Mark Koldys
    Johnny Dollar's Place

    Brandon Coates
    OlbyWatch

    Chris Matthews' Leg
    Chris Matthews' Leg

    Howard Mortman
    Extreme Mortman

    Trajan 75
    Think Progress Watch

    Konservo
    Konservo

    Doug Krile
    The Krile Files

    Teddy Schatz
    OlbyWatch

    David Lunde
    Lundesigns

    Alex Yuriev
    Zubrcom

    Red Meat
    OlbyWatch



    Technorati Links to OlbyWatchLinks to OlbermannWatch.com

    Technorati Links to OlbyWatch Blog posts tagged with "Olbermann"

    Combined Feed
    (OlbyWatch + KO Mini-blog)

    Who Links To Me


    Mailing List RSS Feed
    Google Groups
    Subscribe to Olbermann Watch Mailing List
    Email:
    Visit this group



    XML
    Add to Google
    Add to My Yahoo!
    Subscribe with Bloglines
    Subscribe in NewsGator Online

    Add to My AOL
    Subscribe with Pluck RSS reader
    R|Mail
    Simpify!
    Add to Technorati Favorites!

    Subscribe in myEarthlink
    Feed Button Help


    Olbermann Watch, "persecuting" Keith since 2004


    December 12, 2006
    COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN - DECEMBER 12, 2006

    "COUNTDOWN WITH KEITH OLBERMANN" (8:00 P.M.-9:00 P.M. ET)

    Host: Keith Olbermann

    Topics/Guests:

    • A NEW WAY FORWARD: Jonathan Alter, Newsweek senior editor and MSNBC political analyst
    • CELEBRITY ROUND-UP: Michael Musto, Village Voice

    Krazy Keith kicked off the opening carnival barker pitch in his typical hyperkinetic fashion. Bush delays his Iraq announcement, Afghanistan is a mess, the new Senate Majority Leader "blasted" the Prez, Obamamania, the Ipswitch Ripper, the Wii video system, and Richard Gere with his Gerbil. It's deja vu all over again!

    MADMAN

    Herr Olbermann kicked off The Hour of Spin proper by complaining that the President's Iraq plan will be delayed. Declared Olby: anyone who thought "Mister" Bush didn't think the war through before beginning it had "those suspicions all but confirmed today". Because the speech was pushed back a few weeks! It's not a new way forward, it's "a new way to wait". How tiresome can this discredited sports guy possibly get?

    After ticking off bad news from Iraq, KO read a statement from Harry Reid (D), then introduced a clip from Tony Snow as an attempt at "spin". No such snarky comment preceded Reid's quote, which is one more example of why Countdown is the most biased hour of "news" on television. A perfect time and place for lefty Alter.

    Rev Olbermann was distraught. How many more will die just so Bush can get a speech together? He's actually treating the passage of two weeks as if there were some sort of Christmas deadline! Alter was philosophical: they're gonna die either way. Olby suggested there was no "bonafide reason" for the delay, but even Alter didn't buy that. More cherry-picked poll numbers, "failed policy", and great thanks.

    For no reason other than that Sen Obama is the most highly rated far-left candidate on the horizon, Monkeymann served up a brief installment of Barack and Awe: he is still considering whether to consider running for President. Next some recycled reportage on Afghanistan, preceded by the usual tendentious and fact-challenged introduction (and repeating an old Olbermann lie re the Taliban that has was debunked months ago).

    After a scintillating oddball that will immediately be forwarded to the Emmy committee for their consideration, it was more reruns (this time from ITV, re the "ripper" murders) and the memorial for Princess Di. The #2 segment was devoted to the Wii video game system (another rerun from the network mothership), including an in-depth interview with a cnet guy about a problem he admitted is not all that widespread. The number of people who are injured playing at simulated sports using Wii, compared to the number who are hurt or killed doing the real thing...well, that raises the question of why Edward R Olbermann devoted all this time to a topic of such empty vacuity rather than to the quiescent canines noted below.

    Next up: Brangelina, Jennifer Aniston, Lindsay Lohan, Paris Hilton, Britney Spears, Richard Gere, Sly Stallone, and a full segment with the creepy Michael Musto. KO's forced laughter at the lamest of Musto's lines convinced us: they made a Love Connection. In the Media Matters Minute, Olby went after an evangelical church; the pastor resigned when evidence surfaced that he had dated men. Citizen Keith laughably stated he "hates the sin of hypocrisy". Hates it? If OlbySpin were a religion, hypocrisy would be its most hallowed sacrament!

    OLBY

    Quiescent canines: The Iranian convention of holocaust-deniers went unmentioned for yet another day by Herr Olbermann. The Islamist dictator is now keeping company with David Duke; perhaps Olby was reluctant to mention this because it turns out that Duke endorses the Olbermann/Democrat position on some issues. KO didn't report about armed forces recruiting goals. Like the slovenly political hack that he is, Olbermoronn goes out of his way to sweep a whole fistul of stories under the rug because they reflect badly on members of his party. Olby is so afraid to even mention the name of the most corrupt member of Congress that he ignored another rebuke to Rep Jefferson. The Duke rape case made news on Countdown, but the DA is a Democrat, so we're not surprised that Edward R Olbermann refused to report this. And Olby, who jumps on every slip of "Mister" Bush's tongue, remains silent about the incoming chairman of the intelligence committee, whose problem is not in how he elocutes, but rather the uninformed drivel that he speaks. Oh wait, he's a Democrat too. Krazy Keith, that great defender of privacy rights and opponent of unauthorized eavesdropping, predictably spiked this--another Dem protected by Olby. Still nothing on the specific accusations of falsification and plagiarism against Jimmy Carter. Finally, KO has yet to tell his viewers how Jack Abramoff implicated Sen Harry Reid.

    NAME

    Olbermann's book The book that bears Olberman's name is still #461 at amazon, while Mr Bill's "Culture Warrior" rose to #21. The OlbyTome sunk to #1,652 at Barnes & Noble, but O'Reilly's book is up to #18. Based on today's radio program, we have updated The Olbersaurus with a new entry ("horse"). Mondays are usually the strongest night for The Hour of Spin, and the numbers show Olby in second place both in total viewers and in the critical, beloved, all-important, coveted "key demo". Needless to say, his audience was drawfed by that of Mr Bill, who had three times as many viewers. Tonight's MisterMeter reading: 4 [GUARDED]


    Posted by johnny dollar | Permalink | Comments (192) | | View blog reactions
    user-pic

    192 Comments

    Don't you just love that artist's rendition of Olby as The Big Giant Head?

    I'm not the list bit surprised, but on a day when the entire world is condemning Iran for it's Holocaust denial conference and Iran's leader again says Israel will be destroyed, that some how doesn't make it on KO's so-called "Top 5 news stories of the day".

    Chances Ahmadinejad will even be a contender for "worst person in the world"? Well, he's not an American conservative, so I'll guess slim to none.

    He bypasses the story about Islamofascist Israel-haters and Holocaust-deniers and instead will report on Richard Gere and the gerbil urban legend. That's just what I expect from our Olby.

    Then why are you watching him?

    You have a point - why does anyone watch him? Especially with this lame-ass show tonight. What a bust.

    ah olberkook's worst person in the world
    faggots good-guns bad ah those good ol liberal "values".
    olbermann is a gerbil

    Why do we watch? To document his whopping lies and distortions and clear biases of course!

    What a noble calling. I'll bet you feel fullfilled!

    And Dan Abrams said Olby is the future of television news. The future is bleak.

    olbermann the champion of gerbil lovers and liberals the world over!

    Try as I might, I just can't break a window with a balled up piece of paper. That olbermann guy is amazing!

    speaking of anal-gerbils why has not the lord high butt-gerbil O'lilely posted yet?

    Wow, you guys are showing your true colors:

    "faggots good-guns bad ah those good ol liberal "values"." by Anonymous

    Nice.

    If I put a rock in the paper, does that count?

    Oh boo hoo shaun- i am not politcally correct and I am proud of it. If you want PC got to one of the whiney "progressive " blogs.
    when a self described "newscaster" like the Olbergerbil champions homosexuality and knocks the second ammendment then he ( and you for that matter) can go to hell.
    get yourself a tissue and go tell someone who cares.

    Would Edward R. Murrow put a rock in a balled-up piece of paper? I think not.

    Did Edward R. Murrow steal his moves from a better broadcaster? No again. Face it, all Olbermann can do is mimic and imitate.

    So Edward R Murrow threw balled up pieces of paper at windows too? Did he break windows like Keith?

    Olby hasn't gotten an original idea in his body. He steals from greater talents.

    Um those "Faggots" you are referring to are hard core conservatives who vote Republican idiot see unlike repukes we Liberals dont do one thing behind closed doors then come out and preach against. Keith is just blasting their hypocritcal asses

    Once gain Olbermann stays silent on the Iranian Holocaust conference. He just keeps covering up for his Islamic buddies.

    Olbermann has already been outed as a hypocrite many times over, most particularly in his personal life. Trust me, not all the hypocrites are on the GOP side of the equation at ALL!

    Johnny D sets the record straight on this deplorable journalist... The comments out of Iran are such an outrage and yet, it escapes Citizen Keith.

    His agenda is so obvious, his guests one-sided.
    He's afraid to debate anyone who opposes his view.

    And NBC chooses to worship at the alter of greed, whoring what's left of their news reputation for precious ad dollars.

    He's a modern day Howard Beal, Toyko Rose and Herrman Goebels.

    It's Al Jazeera at 30 Rock...What a deplorable journalist.... and a pussy to boot.

    LF

    Olbermann is just an apologist for Islamic supremists.

    disgusting hour of spin...

    Hey Danny Boy Abrams...

    How about serving up Olby to Al Jazeera...Just put in Arabic dubbing...and ship it to them.

    They will probably pay a fortune to beam this slop over to the middle east.

    It's a perfect example of showing the islamo fanatics how they are allegedly winning the war.
    Olbermann obviously hates this country.

    Danny Boy is staining his good father's name.
    Another Zero on the NBC payrolls. Abrams.

    He's almost as deplorable as Olby.

    Nice to know a gerbal story carried a higher priority than all the other news of the day he missed,

    Um Brandon maybe you're not aware that keith isn't MARRIED or engaged to anyone so i don't see how his personal life should be brought up. so how is a hypcrotite again ?

    Um Brandon I don't know if you are aware that keith is not MARRIED or engaged to anyone so i don't see why youre bringing up his personal life to show he's a hypocrite explain to me why this makes him one because i don't see the connection.

    No wonder no one watches his show
    Krazy Keith and that creepy man-ho
    Play slap and tickle
    With Michael's pickle
    Keith gulps another shot of Musto

    Liberal Goddess,
    What do you think of Olbermann's silence on the Iran Holocaust seminar? How about Olbermann's defence of Islamic Extremists?

    "Once gain Olbermann stays silent on the Iranian Holocaust conference. He just keeps covering up for his Islamic buddies."

    *smacks forehead* Listen, you nimrod. TALKING about Holocaust deniers is WHAT THEY WANT. The more you talk about them, the more publicity they get. If you want them to go away - DON'T TALK ABOUT THEM! That's what we've done for YEARS here in this country and no Holocaust denial group is taken seriously anywhere in the United States.

    "Olby is so afraid to even mention the name of the most corrupt member of Congress that he ignored another rebuke to Rep Jefferson."

    First, Johnny, Speaker Pelosi has stripped Jefferson of his power. He's no longer on the House Ways and Means Committee and Pelosi has stated that Jefferson will not get any position of relevance when the Democrats come back.

    Second, that's all we can do - Jefferson won a legitimate election. The House could choose not to seat him (as the Court has stated that the House can determine its own qualifications) or they could seat him and then expel him for his corruption. It could even be a one-for-one, as there are rumors that Vern Buchanan (R-Fla.) will not be seated because there are serious questions about the legitimacy of his election (some 18,000 undervotes, far more than any other county in the district, were recorded for that House race in a traditionally Dem area).

    Anonymous,
    The Most of the world, except the Muslims and their Leftists allies like Olbermann have condemned this. Why hasn't the self righteous Olbermann done that?
    He never condemns Islamic extermism!
    Why?

    Thank you Keith Olbermann for making the right wing hate you and your show. Good f---ing job I say. You must be saying things that they don't like hearing. Keep up the good work!

    codas,
    So thank Olbermann for not condemning the Iran Holocaust conference. Why is Olbermann always silent about what our enemies do? He supports Iran, that's the answer. He's propably a Holocaust denier too!

    "The Most of the world, except the Muslims and their Leftists allies like Olbermann have condemned this."

    Because it is patently absurd - as I said before, if tomorrow there was a conference convened to say the sky was green (despite all evidence to the contrary), does that have news value?

    ALL THE EVIDENCE says the Holocaust happened. Anyone who says it didn't is either a crackpot or a damned fool. And last I checked, you didn't need the news to tell you who the damned fools were. These people are doing this to GET ATTENTION - attention YOU give them by screaming about it.

    Olbermann only condemns Rightwing Americans. He never condemns Muslim extermists, why?

    > First, Johnny, Speaker Pelosi has stripped Jefferson of his power. He's no longer on the House Ways and Means Committee

    No kidding. Where did you hear that, because it wasn't from Olbermann. Why do you suppose he's covering up for Jefferson?

    There are people in the world who do not support, believe in, care for, or bend there knees in submission to what Anerica wants the world to be. Deal with it. Iran will dominate the middle east. It is ancient Persia. Deal with it. We have to. We are strong enough to survive.

    Codas,
    So you're a supporter of Ahmadinejad? Why do you support a Facsist that wants to start a Nuclear war to bring back the 12th Iman. Why does the left hypocritivcally attack religious Americans, yet support Muslims that want to destroy America? I guess it's Olbylogic.
    Hey move to Iran if it's such a great country!

    Olbermann is a so predictable. All he does is bash Bush, bash Conservatives, Bash Israel, Bash Christians, Bash banyone with a different opinion of him. He offers no solutions of his own. In fact he hopes another attack happens on the US so he can Bash bush, while not condemning our enemies.
    He's a sad pathetic figure!

    Red wolf:

    You keep asking questions, but you really don't want answers. You don't accept honest answers when you get them.

    Johnny Dollar,

    Just curious.. when is the last time Olbermoron did not lead his worthless show with a Bush bashing segment? My guess is it's been a long, long time.

    Codas,
    So you're a supporter of Ahmadinejad? Why do you support a Facsist that wants to start a Nuclear war to bring back the 12th Iman. Why does the left hypocritivcally attack religious Americans, yet support Muslims that want to destroy America? I guess it's Olbylogic.
    Hey move to Iran if it's such a great country!

    Posted by: Red Wolf at December 12, 2006 11:50 PM

    The fact that you would suggest I move To Iran says to me you don't understand the freedom I have as an American to agree or disagree with a current presidents foreign policy. Tell me of a time in our countries history that there where not people who wanted to see us fail or be destroyed as a country. America survives because of our freedoms and our courage to face our enemies with the knowledge that we are the best example of democracy in the world. As far as Ahmadinejad religious beliefs, take a closer listen to Dobson, Falwell or Robertson.

    > when is the last time Olbermoron did not lead his worthless show with a Bush bashing segment?

    That's an excellent question. It happens so rarely. I don't have time to do it right now, but you can just scan our archives and see what leads each Hour of Spin.

    > when is the last time Olbermoron did not lead his worthless show with a Bush bashing segment?

    That's an excellent question. It happens so rarely. I don't have time to do it right now, but you can just scan our archives and see what leads each Hour of Spin.

    Posted by: johnny dollar at December 13, 2006 12:11 AM


    Bush has earned every bashing he has gotten by being a stubborn bully.

    "All he does is bash Bush, bash Conservatives, Bash Israel, Bash Christians, Bash banyone with a different opinion of him."

    And how, pray tell, is that any different that what you do? You don't come into this with clean hands either - you bash liberals and say we should annihilate the Middle East. Pot, kettle. Kettle, pot.

    "He offers no solutions of his own."

    That's not his JOB. If he wanted to do that, he'd run for office. And if he did offer solutions, you'd blast him for not doing what he was hired to do.

    "In fact he hopes another attack happens on the US so he can Bash bush, while not condemning our enemies."

    This is where the wheels fall off. You can't seriously believe that any RATIONAL and SANE AMERICAN wants us to be attacked AGAIN? That's the kind of mindset of someone like Ahmadinejad has - you've made up your mind and are shoehorning facts to reach the pre-determined conclusion. In short, you're just as much a crackpot as he is.

    "He's a sad pathetic figure!"

    Looked in a mirror lately, sir?

    What does "stubborn bully" even mean? Bush has bullied no one who is our friend. And one man's "stubborn" is another's "persistence".

    Some quotes of the great Hunter S. Thompson :

    "George Bush is like a half-bright football coach who goes into a big game without a Game Plan"

    "Republicans have never approved of democracy, and they never will. It goes back to pre-industrial America, when only white male property owners could vote"

    "Did you see Bush on TV, trying to debate? Jesus, he talked like a donkey with no brains at all."

    "America...
    just a nation of two hundred million used car salesmen with all the money we need to buy guns and no qualms about killing anybody else in the world who tries to make us uncomfortable."

    "The music business is a cruel and
    shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run
    free, and good men die like dogs.
    There's also a negative side."

    "For every moment of triumph, for
    every instance of beauty, many souls
    must be trampeled."

    "I hate to advocate
    drugs, alcohol, violence,
    or insanity to anyone,
    but they've always
    worked for me."

    "When the going gets weird,
    the weird turn pro".

    "The Edge...
    there is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over".

    "A word to the wise is infuriating."

    "At the top of the mountain, we're all snow leopards."

    "All Olbermann does is Bush bashing"

    There hasn't been a president who has deserved as much bashing as Bush since Milhouse.

    Ah yes, Hunter S. Thompson. When the going gets bumpy, put your gun in your mouth and end it all. Wah wah wah.

    Hunter went out on his own terms, he had planned it since the 70's.
    You should have had 1/1000 of the life this man had.

    The great writer Tom Wolfe said," Hunter S. Thompson was the best comic writer in the English language in the past 100 years.

    and your resume please>>>>>>>

    New poll just out today:

    21% now support George Bush's Iraq policy.

    19% of them write at this site.

    WPITW last night....not even the "bronze" for....

    David Duke...who currently claims the gas chambers, still standing in the Nazi concentration camps in Europe, were not used to kill people.

    Hey, liberal apologists, please remember who Keith Olbermann named last night as WPITW and tell me why they were more qualified for the "honor" as opposed to the idiotic former KKK Grand Wizard!

    Keith Olbermann is just like the rest of the left in this country.....closeted anti-Semites.

    For those who say we should not discuss or even debate about the hatred dressed up as innocent scholarly inquiry in Iran (because it gives them what they want...attention)....a few quotes from AP...

    #1
    "In Washington, the White House condemned Iran for convening a conference it called "an affront to the entire civilized world."

    #2
    "The conference drew especially sharp condemnation in Germany, where Chancellor Angela Merkel said her country repudiated it "with all our strength, We absolutely reject this. Germany will never accept this and will act against it with all the means that we have," Merkel told reporters. She stood alongside visiting Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, who denounced the meeting as "unacceptable" and a "danger" to the Western world."

    #3
    "French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy was interrupted by applause from lawmakers when he told parliament in Paris that the conference showed a resurgence of "revisionist" theories "which are quite simply not acceptable."

    #4
    "The Los Angeles-based Simon Wiesenthal Center, answering critics who contend revisionists are simply exercising their right to free speech, quoted an unidentified survivor as saying: "If the Holocaust was a myth, where is my sister?"

    #5
    "Frantisek Banyai, the head of Prague's Jewish community - which was decimated during WWII from 120,000 people to just a few thousand today - decried the meeting as "aggressive, wrong and disgusting. It's immoral. It insults me and it insults each member of the Jewish community, because we lost members of our families," he said. "It's a slap in the face of those decent people who know the history and want to learn a lesson from it."

    #6
    "EU Justice and Home Affairs Commissioner Franco Frattini also condemned Ahmadinejad, who considers the Holocaust a "myth" and has called for Israel to be wiped off the map, for hosting the gathering. I want to state my firm condemnation of any attempt to deny, trivialize or minimize the Shoah," Frattini said. "Anti-Semitism has no place in Europe; nor should it in any other part of the world."

    #7
    "The Vatican called the Holocaust an "immense tragedy" and warned the world not to react with indifference to those who challenge its existence.
    "The memory of those horrible events must remain as a warning for people's consciences," the Holy See said."

    #8
    "Francois Nicoullaud, France's ambassador to Tehran from 2001-2005, saw the conference as another expression of Ahmadinejad's continuing efforts to get back to the basics of the Islamic revolution. "He's trying to scientifically justify the unjustifiable, in a sense," he said."

    #9
    "British Prime Minister Tony Blair said Tuesday that the conference was "shocking beyond belief" and "a symbol of sectarianism and hatred."

    #10
    "Deborah E. Lipstadt, a professor of Holocaust studies at Emory University in Atlanta, drew a sharp distinction between the conference and this year's publication of cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad, which triggered protests across the Islamic world. "It's one thing to poke fun at a faith - even Judaism. It's a different thing to lie about history," she said in a telephone interview. "The question is: When does hate speech become incitement? These people are haters - and haters can cause great damage."


    Seems like this conference was worthy news and important enough for a short comment....CON OR PRO!

    So, the great Herr Olbermann could not even spare the WPITW BRONZE spot for Duke, Mahmoud or any of the other fellow anti-Semites at the conference.

    You guys on the left love to keep your "dirty laundry" (read: what you really believe), hidden from normal people...The left is just like those numerous, dangerous and closeted gay evangelicals once again mentioned in the Olbermann's editorial.

    Hey codas and the other Olbermann apologists.... Did you ever think you could actually believe the SAME THING as DAVID DUKE? OHHHH THE IRONY!

    I am even prouder now.....I am in the 21% that DOESN'T include the former KKK Grand Wizard.

    "QUI TACET CONSENTIT"
    (SILENCE IMPLIES CONSENT)

    The "Holocaust Conference" is regretable, but perhaps its results may be positive. Decades of antagonism between Israel and its neighbors has created fertile ground in the Islamic world for Holocaust denial balderdash - people do not generally entertain empathy for those that geopolitics make their mortal enemies.

    But I understand that a number of orthodox rabbis are attending, in order to present their view, and I heard on NPR yesterday that a Palestinian scholar is attending with a strong presentation affirming the historical truth of the Nazis' crimes against the Jews.

    Perhaps this conference will open some eyes to the revisionist propaganda that is being pushed in the Islamic world - perhaps some good-faith bargaining on the part of Israel would remove some of the incentive for their neighbors to create and subscribe to such disturbing mythology?

    Thanks to the right-wing people in this country currently lack the ability to judge an argument on its own merits; "conservatism" adheres to faith, belief, and tradition; while "liberalism" embraces dialogue and the active search for understanding.

    If the liberal view prevailed in this country, we could kill this "holocaust denial" bullshit by holding just such a conferrence: the revisionists would be laughed out of the auditorium.

    But right-wingers like cee - who in this unusual instance accidentally find their dogma concurrent with historical truth - scream "Don't Talk About It!". Sadly, it would be a tough battle to have the full open airing of positions in this ubelievably lopsided issue have any effect on people trained to recieve their opinions from their leaders.

    I say "talk about it and send the agenda-laden neofascists packing with their asses hanging out".

    Ok, Loin.....I'll take you up on that one....

    Let's talk about human activity induced climate change.

    Let's talk about when life begins and when people should not be allowed to end it.

    Let's talk about the psychological and physiological origins of paraphilias including homosexuality.

    Let's talk about the impact The Great Society initiatives had on the African-American community.

    Let's talk about how the governmnet funded education system uses Secular Humanist philosophy as a foundation of indoctrination.

    I could go on, and on, and on.....

    Let's do it.....I know liberals are just SO000 open minded and tolerant of different opinions!

    (For those who are thick....the above was sarcasm)

    Your list contains many items on which vibrant debates have been raging for years - most of which are handily won by liberals, I might add, forcing right-wingers to whip out their Bibles as cover. I don't get your point.

    However, the one about "the impact The Great Society initiatives had on the African-American community" is the only issue you listed on which I would agree that political correctness on the left has stifled debate; to the detriment of the left, I might add. Were we to talk about these issues openly it would become apparent that it is the capitalist system that sickens our class/race relations - the "Great Society" was a paternalist band-aid for the wholesale exploitation that our wall-street oriented economy runs on.

    "Let's talk about human activity induced climate change.

    Let's talk about when life begins and when people should not be allowed to end it.

    Let's talk about the psychological and physiological origins of paraphilias including homosexuality.

    Let's talk about how the governmnet funded education system uses Secular Humanist philosophy as a foundation of indoctrination."

    Let me clarify my previous statement in regard to these pionts of cee's: The left's arguments did not "win" the debates around these issues - we weighed in on the side of the apolitical scientific data and consensus, which had already "won".

    Sorry but he's a hypocrite. And if he lies on air, making fun of celebs who date much younger women and then does the same thing in his personal life, it makes him a hypocrite, married or not. And he's also a liar. And yet, you have elevated him to the status of God, who can't be questioned. And we're not supposed to point these things out, we're supposed to remain silent about them, at least according to Olbyloon logic. Sorry, it doesn't work that way. The man is a liar, a hypocrite and he's incredibly and unbelievably biased. If you can't handle the truth, then I suggest you NOT read THIS website. After all, isn't that standard Olbyloon logic, if we don't like his show, don't watch it? Well if you don't like this website, don't read it. Better yet, don't post your inane drivel here where you try to defend him and his stances on subjects that it is clear neither of you have any understanding of.

    Yeah Loin....Global climate change is open for debate....again my sarcasm should be screaming through the CRT....

    The powers that self-proclaim authority on ALL of the issues I mentioned have been strong armed by liberals to "close the book," on further inquiry.....Even the wise jusitices of The Supreme Court REFUSE to even discuss when a person is a person deserving of human rights....(although in reality/by default for a child in 21st century USA it is when the birth certificate is completed).

    So don't dismiss my list so easily, Sir Loin of Milquetoast...."Elite academics," may have declared my list settled, but the reality is very different.

    Global climate change: something like 1000 major scientific studies have been launched, executed, and published on this subject in the past 20 years - 100% find that human activity is responsible for global warming. Debate is open on this matter, but patience for whack-jobs is very thin.

    Beginning of human life? You tell me: when does it occur? At conception? Then why do my sperm swim so ferociously prior to conception? Are you ending a human life by NOT permitting a sperm to encounter an egg? If not, why not?

    cee, to be true to your God you must seek out nubile women and impregnate them at every possible opportunity. Perhaps if we were to harvest each and every viable egg from every woman in the country and fertilize them in vitro, then we would be satisfying gods will.

    Most people, however, seem content to parse the unknown, and recognize human life at a point at which it looks and reacts like human life, as opposed to tadpoles and mucous blobs.

    "apolitical" _______________ fill in the blank.....there is NO such entity in the examples I gave you, Loin.......The data is either....

    INTERPRETED to support the left's conclusion, or
    CAREFULLY SELECTED to support the left's conclusion, or
    IGNORED that which contradicts the left's conclusion, or

    the "authority" simply makes a statement they claim as fact when it is really just an opinion or speculation. Finally, my favorite of the left's tactic is.....

    just ignore the argument totally.....like, "when does life begin."

    That is the most used tactic because lefties like Olbermann and you, Sir Loin of Milquetoast, are at their fundamental base....cowards.

    or, "parce the unknown" = "ignore the issue or end argument/inquiry"

    ?

    cee, you're the one not answering questions here - quit bitching and back your own piety.

    To reiterate:

    Beginning of human life? You tell me: when does it occur? At conception? Then why do my sperm swim so ferociously prior to conception? Are you ending a human life by NOT permitting a sperm to encounter an egg? If not, why not?

    You are all missing the point...let's be honest...how can you fit in a story as inconsequential as the Iranian conference when we have to also find time for Michael Musto, Richard Gere, and gerbils.

    Remember, his show (by his own admission) is a "news show". When you only have one hour to cover the biggest news of the day, Richard Gere and gerbils are clearly more important than trivial facts like various Congressmen being pulled from positions on committees.

    You are all missing the point...let's be honest...how can you fit in a story as inconsequential as the Iranian conference when we have to also find time for Michael Musto, Richard Gere, and gerbils.

    Remember, his show (by his own admission) is a "news show". When you only have one hour to cover the biggest news of the day, Richard Gere and gerbils are clearly more important than trivial facts like various Congressmen being pulled from positions on committees.

    cee compailns about "Elite Academics" lording it over the rest of us - represented by the 100% scientific consensus on Global Warming, for one example.

    Which downtrodden demographic does cee see as not being heard in this debate, I wonder? The poor Captains of Industry who sell us machines and the crap to burn in them? The scriptural dominionists, who want us to use up God's earth in preparation for the Rapture?

    cee demands that I answer questions, but he offers nothing in regard to his postions on the issues he raises. I, for one, understand and subscribe to the science detailing global climate change. I don't know when "life begins", but I find the point of fetal viability outside of the womb, using state of the art technology, of course, as a pretty reasonable measure. I like Secuilar Humanist education; suck on it, Bible Boy.

    What are your views on these matters?

    This site continues its lameness: The story (a link to FOX o' course) is a non-story. Jefferson was already taken off the ways and means committee a long time ago. FOX just ran out of right wing news so they recycled something. And, why should Olbermann have discussed such a nothing story.

    If William Jefferson ever actually gets INDICTED for ANYTHING, THAT will be a story.

    Um those "Faggots" you are referring to are hard core conservatives who vote Republican idiot see unlike repukes we Liberals dont do one thing behind closed doors then come out and preach against. Keith is just blasting their hypocritcal asses
    %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
    umm.... Liberal Goddess, have you read the book "do as i say, not as i do"??

    Liberals are just as much (if not MORE) hypocritical as conservatives. i.e. Micheal Moore claims he doesn't own stock but *gasp* there's stocks of haliburton with his signature on them. Liberal do almost EVERYTHING behing close doors that they preach against.

    Examples:
    Tax breaks/evasions, dirty rotten captalism (investing etc), paying less than the minimum wage, avoiding environmental codes...

    Should I go on?
    http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0RMQ/is_2_11/ai_n15675107
    (my favorite quote from that book:
    "Experience has taught these individuals that their ideas just don't work. When it comes to fundamentals ... they suddenly forget about affirmative action, environmentalism, progressive taxation, and antiglobalist hostility.")

    Ohio Mike,

    You're right. Celebrity/voyueristic crap should not be on anyone's TV screen, if they consider themselves to be useful members of society. That's why I've got TIVO - to skip the pablum and Madison Avenue's garbage.

    Why do you act as if Olbermann is solely to blame for airing this sort of thing? Have you ever watched CNN or Fox News? Its all "Runaway Bride" 24/7, and don't try to deny it.

    I like Olbermann's political feistiness, which finally came to fruition this year, but I despise the horseshit his show airs for ratings. That's what you get in the world of free-market information, however. We should go back to the days before network news divisions were factored in as profit-centers.

    The Fourth Estate owes the country honest reporting on real issues.

    Global climate change: something like 1000 major scientific studies have been launched, executed, and published on this subject in the past 20 years - 100% find that human activity is responsible for global warming. Debate is open on this matter, but patience for whack-jobs is very thin.
    *********************************************
    Sir Loin, when addressing science, please do not make things up.
    www.co2science.org

    There is not 100% agreement on human responsibility for global warming. Not only that, but I find all this alarm silly. Just 30+ years ago (in the 70's) we were being warned about global COOLING. Now, i'm not a climatoligist but looking at a thermomater, I can tell it can go up, or it can go down. Thus, if 30 years ago it was going down, it will have to go up at some point. So if we're doomed when the thermomater drops, and we're doomed when it rises... what are we to do?

    I say: "Stop global warming! Destory all means to measure temperature."

    MAKE sure you read:
    http://www.co2science.org/scripts/CO2ScienceB2C/about/position/globalwarming.jsp
    Most important sentence:
    "There is also little doubt the earth has warmed slightly over the same period; but there is no compelling reason to believe that the rise in temperature was caused by the rise in CO2. Furthermore, it is highly unlikely that future increases in the air's CO2 content will produce any global warming; for there are numerous problems with the popular hypothesis that links the two phenomena."

    William Jefferson is far more guilty of than Foley. Jefferson's crime is bribery, Foley was pursuing pages (whether they are underage or not is disputable).... Jefferson still has a job- Foley has been banquished. Are only Democrats innocent until proven guilty. Shaddup! Both guys should be gone... but the democrats continue to protect their scum. Shame on you. I bet OJ was a democrat,

    Grim,

    You are being dishonest. Moore didn't own the stock, nor could he profit by it. It was owned by a foundation that he controlled. There is a difference.

    > FOX just ran out of right wing news so they recycled something.

    This demonstrates just how clueless OlbyLoons can be. FOX didn't recycle anything. It's a story from the Associated Press. It's always delightful to see an OlbyLoon aim, shoot, and miss.

    Benson,

    Perhaps you can tell me why Jefferson hasn't been charged with anything. There is far more to this than meets the eye. In an investigation of this sort, the FBI would have film or audio recordings and more proof than they need. Or, perhaps you want to tell us all that Bush justice department is liberal.

    First, Loin, remember my post of the list was a sarcastic response to your calling for rational debate about an historical event....I would say there is not enough time to even scratch the surface of the facts of those debates I mentioned....but I will address the one on when life begins....

    At conception....if left untouched, a zygote composed of the chromosomes required from both gametes will form, (through a WELL KNOWN maturation process), a Homo sapien...identified by the DNA structure of same species. This zygotic cell will mature through embryo, to fetus, and when maturation is adequate, the fetus will become infant after parturition. This infant was Homo sapien from the moment of conception as defined by scientists.....64 chromosomes composed of two sets of 32 from the gametes.....ovum and sperm.

    The infant will continue to be Homo sapien, and through FURTHER maturation develop into toddler, child, adolescent, adult.......All with the SAME 64 chromosomes from the two sets of 32.....Logical enough for you, Loiny?

    At any point during the maturation process, from zygote to adult, interrupton of vital functions can cause a cessation of said process....death. The zygote may not implant, the embryo may not have correct chromosomal components vital for survival, infection may cause the embryo or fetus to cease development, etc....through disease in infancy, childhood, adulthood death can occur for a variety of causes....however, humankind has decided to try to eleviate some of these instances through medical practice....INCLUDING PREPARTURITION SURGICAL AND MEDICAL INTERVENTION FROM THE POINT OF CONCEPTION....So, I guess "life" is pretty clear to me.....

    How about you, Loin?

    So.... it's owned by a foundation that he controls, but he doesn't own the stock...

    1) Then why is his signature on the stock certificate (it's on the back of the book i mentioned).

    2) Your statement contradicts itself. Either he owns the stock (it's just through his foundation) or he doesn't really control the foundation and it's just in his name.

    Besides, that's just one example. You can either make me get my copy and post it chapter for chapter or just go get it yourself and then post a through rebuke.

    Idiot- foley wasn't charged when he was given the door. Clean your house.

    No wait, you don't have to get the book, here's a good summation:
    http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=47174

    *House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, who proclaims her support for unions, yet the luxury resort, the vineyard and the restaurants she partly owns are strictly non-union. While she advocates tough new laws enforcing environmental regulations on the private sector, the exclusive country club she partly owns failed to comply with existing environmental regulations for the past eight years – including a failure to protect endangered species.

    *Noam Chomsky has made a reputation for calling America a police state and branding the Pentagon "the most hideous institution on earth," yet his entire academic career, writes Schweizer, has been subsidized by the U.S. military.

    *Barbra Streisand is another proponent of environmentalism, yet she drives an SUV, lives in a mansion and has a $22,000 annual water bill. In the past, she has driven to appointments in Beverly Hills in a motor home because of her aversion to using public bathrooms.

    *Ralph Nader plays the role of the citizen avenger – the populist uninterested in wealth and materialism, pretending to live in a modest apartment. In fact, he lives in fancy homes registered in the names of his siblings.

    Dollar,

    Jefferson was stripped of his ways and means position in June. It is a non-story.

    Grim,

    The difference is in how Moore might benefit from it.

    The gerbil story was a legend from the 90s. Jefferson is far more relevant.


    Challenger Grim,

    Great Co2 site ("Center for the Study of CO2 and Climate Change")! They offer so much: NO peer-reviewed publications in ANY major scientific journal; just a couple of downloads they'll charge you to read. And its not like they need the money, having recieved boluses of cash from Exxon-Mobil for the past 10 years! Isn't it nice when you have the money to pay for "research" that protects your gravy-train, without pesky "scientists" getting in the way with their "peer-review" and stuff?

    Grim's post - like so much here at Olbermannwatch - reflects the ravages of Free-market information-dealing on the brains of the lazy and credulous.

    http://www.exxonsecrets.org/html/orgfactsheet.php?id=24

    Benson,

    I realized that you were answering me with your non sequitur about Foley. Foley probably didn't even commit a crime and I don't recall mentioning him. Republicans got rid of him to keep the homophobes from jumping ship. Are you really that dull?

    cee,

    Your clinical description of zygote development is impressive. Now, what does all that mean to you in social terms? How do you act on this information?

    Sir Loin,
    EVERY scientist has to have their research funded in SOME way. Explain to me why exactly scientists funded by group A is more preferrable to scientists funded by group B?

    Here's a shocking realization for you: Bias does not make anything true or false. Otherwise I could say that all those pro-human cause scientists are invalide because they are being funded by groups biased toward their position. Math teachers are undoubtedly biased toward traditional euclidian geometry... does that mean somehow 2+2 doesn't equal 4? Stop using bias as a smoke screen and at least provide some actual rebuttal.

    http://www.climatescience.org.nz/

    Oh, and it should also be noted that there's more that CO2 in our atmosphere. Know what also causes a LOT of the greenhouse effect? WATER VAPOR
    http://www.espere.net/Unitedkingdom/water/uk_watervapour.html
    "Water vapor is the most important greenhouse gas!

    In a very rough approximation the following trace gases contribute to the greenhouse effect:
    60% water vapor
    20% carbon dioxide (CO2)
    The rest (~20%) is caused by ozone (O3), nitrous oxide (N2O), methane (CH4), and several other species."

    I look forward to the proposals to reduce water vapor in our atmosphere since it is the main culprit.

    "Grim,

    The difference is in how Moore might benefit from it."
    %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

    Very well then sir (or madam) how might Moore benefit from it? If you can use a compare/contrast I'd be most appreciative.

    "I look forward to the proposals to reduce water vapor in our atmosphere since it is the main culprit."

    Grim,

    but it is the Human Induced INCREASE in atmosheric CO2 that has is leading to radical climate change! The levels of water vapor have been constant inrelevant terms. Your argument is like saying we could eliminate house fires by getting rid of Oxygen in the atmosphere, instead of engineering our structures to reduce the risk of fire.

    cee,

    the blastocyst or zygote represents a phase of human development, but are you prepared to declare them all legal "persons"? Should a woman experiencing a miscarriage be subjected to a coroner's inquest to determine the cause of death? When does the zygote become socially relevant?

    Certainly, Grim.

    A foundation doesn't benefit Moore personally. It must be non-profit, its dealings public and a certain amount of its holdings must be distributed to whomever it aids yearly. If Moore benefitted from his own foundation, that would be fraud and far more serious than what stock his foundation purchased.

    "EVERY scientist has to have their research funded in SOME way. Explain to me why exactly scientists funded by group A is more preferrable to scientists funded by group B?"

    Sure, whatever - scientists need their money. But SCIENCE needs peer-review - the process by which methodological validity is assessed by the scientific community at large. Your group skips that step; therefore they represent junk science.

    ...and personally, when a major polluter pays for a study that shows they are harmless to the environment, I reserve the right to take that with a grain of salt.

    S.L.O.B. says:

    "while "liberalism" embraces dialogue and the active search for understanding."

    What a load of crap. Your Orange Hero is the poster child for liberalism. Lies, distortions, selective editing, "clicking and ripping" all his material off left wing blogs, ass kissing sycophants parroting every syllable out of Orange Boy's mouth and cheerleading every left fringe utterance. "Dialogue and active understanding"? I think not.

    You really are an ass anon. They got rid of foley because he was a jerk hitting on pages. Political? Why the hell would the republicans ditch him just before an election? You live in a vaccuum? If Jefferson could explain why he had the cash, I'd give him a pass. He is mum. He is busted. You coddle him because he is a Dem. Thats what Dems do. Thats why your party is far more stupid than you will ever admit. Keep guys like Jefferson around til 08 and we will make the 06 elections results look trivial.

    but it is the Human Induced INCREASE in atmosheric CO2 that has is leading to radical climate change! The levels of water vapor have been constant inrelevant terms. Your argument is like saying we could eliminate house fires by getting rid of Oxygen in the atmosphere, instead of engineering our structures to reduce the risk of fire.
    &&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

    1) Growing up in one of the most widly chaotic weather zones in the world (we've had snow in april and it's close to 60 today), the claim "radical climate change" seems redundant to me. I'm curious as to what non-radical climate change would be like.

    2) There is also the fact that at a certain point, more and more co2 will not affect warming. It has a threshold of how much heat it can absorb.
    "A few years after Arrhenius published his hypothesis, Knut Ångström sent infrared radiation through a tube filled with carbon dioxide. He put in as much of the gas in total as would be found in a column of air reaching to the top of the atmosphere. The amount of radiation that got through the tube scarcely changed when he cut the quantity of gas in half or doubled it. The reason was that CO2 absorbed radiation only in specific bands of the spectrum, and it took only a trace of the gas to produce bands that were "saturated" — so thoroughly opaque that more gas could make little difference."
    http://www.aip.org/history/climate/co2.htm#L_0144

    3) you have also not addressed my point about how no matter which direction the temperature goes (up or down) someone reports that we're doomed. So I have to ask for one simple answer: What is the goal? Do we want the globe to get much cooler? Warmer? Do we want it to maintain a constant 2 degree temperature range? I'm not talking politics or society or anything like that, i want to know for real what is the goal on a global scale temperature and climate wise.

    If life begins at conception and is valued as God revealed to David in Psalm 139:

    For you created my inmost being;
    you knit me together in my mother's womb.
    I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made;
    your works are wonderful, I know that full well.
    My frame was not hidden from you
    when I was made in the secret place.
    When I was woven together in the depths of the earth, your eyes saw my unformed body.
    All the days ordained for me
    were written in your book
    before one of them came to be.

    then I believe, socially, we are aggressive to not allow death due to disease to occur at any stage of life. Whether it is:

    Giving progesterone injections in the first trimester to lower the possibility of miscarriage of the person as early as 8 weeks gestation

    Performing surgery on fetuses as early as 25 weeks gestation to allow continued development of the person

    Using medicines to stop premature labor as early as 20 weeks of gestation to allow the person to develop

    Providing good prenatal and infant care for promotion of healthy development of the person

    I could go on and on......

    The biblical framework of respect for life, when life was and is terminated for various reasons and God's holy omnipotence over all life is a rather complicated and controversial topic for the secular humanist to digest....but we have seen this on this site before.

    Dear 10:23 anon,

    It is a fact that Foley's antics were known about for quite awhile, so don't give me your ignorant garbage.

    "Keep guys like Jefferson around til 08 and we will make the 06 elections results look trivial."

    Did you miss the part where I said they could choose not to seat Jefferson (as the House can interpret the qualifications of its members) or could seat him AND THEN EXPEL him for his corruption (all it takes is a simple majority vote).

    Even if he stays, Jefferson will have NO power and NO clout within the party. They'll shove him into the most useless committees they can find until he is indicted (and he will be indicted), then force him to resign. He WILL be gone by the middle of the year, you can bet on that.

    "House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, who proclaims her support for unions, yet the luxury resort, the vineyard and the restaurants she partly owns are strictly non-union."

    By law, only employees can form a union. An owner cannot advocate or otherwise assist in creating a union. If the workers had organized and Pelosi had refused to recognize the union, you would have a story. And Pelosi pays MORE than the prevailing union wage (while still offering similar benefits).

    That's a truly beautiful passage - regardless of one's belief in the inevitability of any particular "destiny".

    Your following disclaimer is a little confusing, though:

    "The biblical framework of respect for life, when life was and is terminated for VARIOUS REASONS (emphasis mine) and God's holy omnipotence over all life is a rather complicated and controversial topic for the secular humanist to digest....but we have seen this on this site before."

    Yes, it is hard to digest - without puking, anyway.

    You seem to be saying - please correct me if I'm wrong - that life in the womb is sacred and inviolate - except when killing it is God's will. My impression that this is what you are saying is supported your previous allowances for the slaughter caused by America's wars; and your indirect but effusive support for using nuclear weapons as a "deterent" against the Muslim hordes. Once again; plase correct me if I am being unfair.

    Who determine's God's will in any case? Why are you just fine with the burning via white phosphorous of a pregnant woman in Falluja, or the horrible effects of our depleted uranium on the kids currently being "knit together" anywhere in Iraq?

    These thing have occurred/are occurring; they are the direct result of our country's behavior; what makes you so sure they are sanctioned by "God's holy omnipotence"?

    After listening to the ramblings of the radical right wing on this site, I have a few questions.

    Why IS IT the right wing that defies science on the climate change issue?
    Sure you're not going to get all scientists to agree on everything, but there is overwhelming evidence and the top scientists in the world agree co2 is the cause of climate change.

    When the oil companies are begrudgingly admitting the source of climate change, do you realize how far from reality you really are ?

    Just like I believe it was hinted that homosexuality is not innate?
    Are you kidding me ?

    How ignorant are you people !
    ( you prove it everyday)

    And the issue that is getting all of your panties in the bunch, the holocaust denial conference, of course it's nonsense, but what can you do about it?
    Absolutely nothing !
    We can't control what other countries do.
    We can control what this country does, but it seems you wear blinders when it comes to the failed policies of this president.
    You bring up ridiculous topics we in this country can do nothing about, yet you ARE part of the problem while you sit there in silence and give the Bush Administration a pass in all of the ways THEY are ruining this country and destabilizing the world.
    You're hot over William Jefferson, but not Cheney and Bush?
    The elephant in the room is your hypocrisy, and the blinders you wear concerning the politicans that do make policy in our own country.

    10;43 anon- Both parties knew foley was hanging with the pages- The degree of was in question. If you think only the republicans knew shows that you are far ignorant than i give you credit for. The dems pounced on it for political reason as seen by when they did. And if you watched anything other than MSNBC, you'd see that the recent report that absolved the republicans of wrong doing. You can't come here with your shallow backwash and expect it to stick. You Democrats KNOW that Jeffesron had 90+ thousand dollars in his freezer and what did you do? You became obstructionists and demanded the investigation cease... FACT. Again trying to protect one of your corrupt own. Look it up. Its probably even still googleable on MSNBC, keiths leftist homeground!

    By law, only employees can form a union. An owner cannot advocate or otherwise assist in creating a union. If the workers had organized and Pelosi had refused to recognize the union, you would have a story. And Pelosi pays MORE than the prevailing union wage (while still offering similar benefits).
    ===============================================

    Ok, I'll have to investigate that more, I'll give that one to you but there's still plenty of examples of liberal hypocracy. Which one is next?

    Jefferson? He's in for it. Some in the Democratic leadership haven't noticed yet, but the party's wide grassroots are not going to stand for any shenanigans. The mandate for firm rules and solid accountability is clear.

    Local politics will continue to send a lot of clearly crappy people to Washington; its up to stern procedure at the institutional level - the house and senate - to keep matters on the up-and-up. This is the hallmark of liberalism - the rule of law; accountibility, accountibility, accountibility.

    I strongly advocate ethics investigations/sanctions against Jefferson, as do most Democrats I speak with.

    Not anon! He thinks Jeffesron should be proven guilty before you touch him.

    Why IS IT the right wing that defies science on the climate change issue?
    Sure you're not going to get all scientists to agree on everything, but there is overwhelming evidence and the top scientists in the world agree co2 is the cause of climate change.

    When the oil companies are begrudgingly admitting the source of climate change, do you realize how far from reality you really are ?
    ============================================

    Ok, let's agree with you for a moment that humans are the cause of all climate change through our co2 emissions etc. So what are we supposed to do about it? China is one of the biggest producers of co2 nowadays and as I believe you yourself put it:
    ---------------------------------------------------
    Absolutely nothing !
    We can't control what other countries do.
    ===================================================

    I again ask someone to answer my question: what is the goal??? At what point can Al Gore put up his "mission accomplished" sign?

    One last point.
    You are not unlike the deniers of the holocaust when you don't zero in on the president and party that has been in power the past 6 years.
    You also seem to be denying the results of the past election.
    It appears that you are incapable of "learning" anything from the reality that sits in front of your face.
    Those who deny the Holocaust are just plain ignorant.
    Those who deny the source of the problems in this country as just as ignorant.
    Those who don't want to admit the truth about climate change and want to "fiddle while Rome burns"do it at the peril of the health of our very planet.
    Time to take a good hard long look in the mirror and realize you are no better than the Iranian president and his backward views.

    "You became obstructionists and demanded the investigation cease... FACT."

    Funny, I thought it was Dennis Hastert (a REPUBLICAN) who got all obstructionist and angry about the case because the FBI raided Jefferson's Congressional office.

    CNN - May 26, 2006

    "Meanwhile, the search of Jefferson's office in the Rayburn House Office Building has caused unease on Capitol Hill about the possible breach of separation of powers between Congress and the executive branch.

    Both Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist and House Speaker Dennis Hastert said they were "very concerned" about the search, which was conducted under a warrant issued by a federal judge."

    Yep, I was right.

    "Not anon! He thinks Jeffesron should be proven guilty before you touch him."

    Well, I did mention "ethics investigations" before I said "sanctions", and that is the appropriate procedure...

    Benson,

    What democrats knew about Foley?

    And yes, a man who the justice department hasn't said a word about since the initial seizure, should be given the benefit of the doubt.

    Sir Loin said: "The mandate for firm rules and solid accountability is clear."

    From the AP...

    "...Democrats have been mum about another member of the Ways and Means Committee, Rep. James McDermott, who on Monday was admonished by the House ethics committee for violating ethics standards by giving reporters access to an illegally taped telephone call involving Republican leaders a decade ago.

    Pelosi must also make a decision about Rep. Alan Mollohan of West Virginia, who is in line to become chairman of an Appropriations subcommittee that oversees the FBI. Mollohan faces questions about personal business deals."

    I do not know God's will, Loin....However, I do know that the result of human behavior without the saving grace of God is death....

    death from war
    death from abortion
    death from crime
    death from disease
    etc.

    The same moral indignation you seem to have for the death of people because of war is not expressed when normal fetuses are ripped out of their mother's wombs for no other reason than the bad timing of the pregnancy. The same moral indignation you likely have when a convicted murderer is executed humanely is not expressed when a mother flushes her newborn infant down the toilet.

    The death that occurs in the biblical passages that get liberals all flustered occurs in the context of knowing God's will....judgement, result of sin. Every biblical passage is sound in the faith that God is a perfect and just judge.

    Despite what some "christians" claim as knowing the will of God, presently, I disagree and believe no one knows the will of God as events unfold.

    I have faith that despite the sinful actions of humankind that result in all death, all can look to God for His grace and salvation through the atonement (Christ's death and resurrection). From the people who conduct war to the person who chooses abortion for their child, the grace is available and would change that person from within.

    This discussion is far off topic of when life begins but the contradictions in the secular humanists view of "life," could not be ignored.

    "China is one of the biggest producers of co2 nowadays"

    but not up to our level yet. Negotiation, finding common goals, and cooperating on them - that's how you effect the behavior of other countries short of going to war with them pr throwing up your hands.

    By the way, CHina'a auto emmission standards are twice as stringent as ours. That's part of our trade deficit with China - their laws won't let them buy our gas-hogs.

    > Jefferson was stripped of his ways and means position in June. It is a non-story.

    :Did you even read the AP story? The decision was just made TUESDAY. The AP thought it was a story. So did USA Today, Yahoo News, the Washington Post, the Minneapolis Star Tribune, The Hill, The Advocate, Philadelphia Inquirer, San Fran Chronicle, LA Times, Buffalo News, and many others--they all reported on the TUESDAY decision that was made Tuesday. But Anonymous knows better than the AP and all these newspapers. His secret sources tell him that there was no decision made on Tuesday--it was really made months ago, and only he knows about it.

    Gee, now who should I believe? All these newspapers, the Associated Press, etc? Or should I believe Anon, who is desperately trying to cover for his hero, the infamous, deplorable Keith Olbermann, one of the FEW who spiked this story on Tuesday? For some reason I think I'll stick with the AP and all those newspapers, who did not censor the news to fit OlbySpin.

    Innocent till proven guilty is in law. Foley has not been proven guilty of anything- yet he's gone. Your hero Jefferson still pulls a check off my taxes even though he was caught red handed. Spare me your heroic values. You democrats that defend these cancers are as repulsive as the deed doers themselves. Take a tip from sir loin of grissle... call a spade a spade and move on. Defending ALL democrats is why you look so stupid!

    I again ask someone to answer my question: what is the goal???


    With the ice caps melting,animals becoming extinct, the food chain being broken, droughts and flooding becoming more prevalent, thousands of people dying because of it,and more serious problems that lie ahead and you ask what is the goal?
    How can people that appear somewhat intelligent become just plain stupid when it comes to climate change?


    At what point can Al Gore put up his "mission accomplished" sign?

    Al Gore is smart enough not to use tacky and ridicuous slogans on an issue as important as this one, unlike the inventer of this slogan.
    Reversing climate change will continue long after we are dead.
    We have done too much damage to have any quick fixes.But the biggest problem is ignorance and the ones that continue to "deny" the causes of climate change.
    If we continue the viewpoints and policies that contribute to the problem,our grandchildren will curse us and ask why didn't we act when the evidence was right in front of our faces ?

    "Those who don't want to admit the truth about climate change and want to "fiddle while Rome burns"do it at the peril of the health of our very planet."
    ***********************************************

    The health of our planet? That is one of the biggest statements of BS I've seen in a long time.

    Here's a revelation for you: We could detonate every nuke bomb, chemical container and bio weapon ALL of humanity owns and... the earth would just go along its merry way through the universe as it has for billions of years. Life might even evolve again on this funky little sphere.

    BUT the fact is, humans can't do a damn thing to this hunk of rock if we wanted to. The most we'll do is doom ourselves and wipe out our own race but we're not going to hurt this celestial object any.

    "It appears that you are incapable of "learning" anything from the reality that sits in front of your face."

    That's reality for you... the planet will survive just fine with or without us and in SPITE of us. Learn basic science.

    OK, cee,

    Where do you stand on the legality of abortion? You neatly wash your hands of the collateral damage of haphazard warfare; do you similarly eschew any earthly position or preservative action in regard to aborted fetuses? After all; "despite the sinful actions of humankind that result in all death, all can look to God for His grace and salvation through the atonement", or so I've heard.

    dollar,

    All that stupid sarcasm for nothing, eh?

    "WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Rep. William Jefferson, who on Friday was stripped of his seat on the powerful House Ways and Means Committee, said the House minority leader singled him out because she wants to be speaker of the House one day.

    Jefferson, D-Louisiana, is the subject of an ongoing bribery investigation. No charges have been filed against Jefferson and he maintains his innocence..."

    http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/06/16/jefferson.caucus/index.html

    Wilkpedia Jefferson and see all the evidence against him- then tell me we should give him the benefit of the doubt. Knowledge is power. Your ignorance is bliss for me!

    Anon (11:12),

    Ninety thousand was found in Jefferson's freezer. No more is known. And, if more was, the justice department would've leaked it before the election. I'll wait to judge.

    With the ice caps melting,animals becoming extinct, the food chain being broken, droughts and flooding becoming more prevalent, thousands of people dying because of it,and more serious problems that lie ahead and you ask what is the goal?
    How can people that appear somewhat intelligent become just plain stupid when it comes to climate change?
    -------------------------------------------------
    So, when the ice caps expand, animals never become extinct (guess it just sucked for the dinosaurs), droughts and flooding never occur and people stop dying we'll have accomplished our goal?

    ===============================================
    Al Gore is smart enough not to use tacky and ridicuous slogans on an issue as important as this one, unlike the inventer of this slogan.
    Reversing climate change will continue long after we are dead.
    We have done too much damage to have any quick fixes.But the biggest problem is ignorance and the ones that continue to "deny" the causes of climate change.
    If we continue the viewpoints and policies that contribute to the problem,our grandchildren will curse us and ask why didn't we act when the evidence was right in front of our faces ?
    ==================================================
    Ok, can someone answer my question without going off on a tangent on some unimportant detail?

    At what point can ANYONE say the job is "done"? Whether it is us or our grandchildren or the next species that evolves from us, when can we say we've accomplished what we set out to do?

    I'm not asking for quick fixes or anything, all I'm asking is what are we AIMING for? What is the goal? If i'm going to pick a direction and head that way, I'd like to know what the eventual destination will be even if I won't be the one to reach it (i.e. Moses).

    Please, correct my ignorance and tell me what we're going for with all this education and policy change? (as I pointed out, I was asking in a non-political manner, what is the goal state for our world)

    That's reality for you... the planet will survive just fine with or without us and in SPITE of us. Learn basic science.

    And science is telling us that something is very very wrong.
    Science is looking at the facts. Just look at how CO2 is starting to make changes in mother earth that we have never seen before.
    Saying this is all cyclical is like being a denier of the holocaust.
    You choose to believe the smallest of minority of scientists, yet want to ignore the vast majority.
    Let me ask you, what is YOUR goal to believe the small minority on such a serious issue?

    Fortunately, the world is acting and coming to their senses on this issue. The USA( rather the president and his very few followers that are left) lack vision and common sense and are bringing up the rear on this crucial issue.

    Anon, here's a bit of a civics lesson for you. Come January, we have a NEW Congress. All the committee assignments are new. That might be why the DEMOCRATS announced on Tuesday that Jefferson will not get his committee seat. Because it's a new committee, in a new Congress, and new committee appointments are made. The decisions made for the previous Congress do not apply. Is that clear enough for you?

    If it isn't, please reread the piece from the Associated Press and the dozens and dozens of newspapers, who certainly made it clear that this latest decision, made just yesterday, applied to the new incoming Congress. Because it was made yesterday, that's why all those different papers, along with the AP, considered it news. Clear now?

    Perhaps you can explain this to Olbermoronn too, though it wouldn't matter. He'd spike the story regardless of which Congress was involved.

    Benson,

    And, he still hasn't been indicted. Wow! A man can draw a picture of a bomb with a crayon and get indicted but all this evidence (which no one has seen) doesn't provide anything.

    And you don't see anything fishy about it. Place head firmly in sand.

    A very wise person once said," You either are part of the problem or part of the solution."

    Challenger Grim is definitely part of the problem when he denies the facts that are right in front of his face.

    What is the goal you keep asking?
    I already answered it, but I'll leave your question out there hanging in the air letting it speak for itself as an example of the "deniers of climate change".
    You would make the Iranian president proud !

    Anon- Thats why you are so ignorant. He's not innocent. He just is legally innocent. My guess you voted for the felon to be. I suppose you think Marion Barry was a good politician too. Its people liek you taht let OJ go.

    dollar,

    Yeah, big news. The seat Jefferson was stripped of, he's still stripped of.

    And Francisco Franco is still dead. Again, non-story.

    How would I vote in Louisiana if I don't live there, Benson? That's just plain stupid. I believe that O.J. was guilty; however, he was tried and found not guilty. The wealthy have a different system in this country.

    And science is telling us that something is very very wrong.
    ---------------------------------------------------
    For our own survival, yes. But let's have some perspective here. We'll probably all die sure, but the earth is going to continue on. Enough crying about "The Planet", it doesn't care about us or what we do.


    *************************************
    Let me ask you, what is YOUR goal to believe the small minority on such a serious issue?
    -------------------------------------
    My goal is merely to get the truth and to obey the tenants of science (my first and deepest love) and logic to the fullest. Logically speaking the earth is always going to be in a great deal of flux and every living animal exhales co2 (tangent: you could almost conclude then that extinction of animals would then be a GOOD thing since they are putting a lot of co2 in the air too) and water vapor both.

    Like I said before, just 30 years ago we were warned that the world was getting cooler. Now we're being warned that the world is getting warmer and I'm just wondering when will we stop being warned?

    What is the goal you keep asking?
    I already answered it, but I'll leave your question out there hanging in the air letting it speak for itself...
    *************************************************
    So...........
    The goal is to get the earth to stop doing what it has been doing for BILLIONS of years?

    Another wise man once said:
    "Ah cannah change da laws of physics captain'!"
    (yes, that was Scotty lol)

    "That might be why the DEMOCRATS announced on Tuesday that Jefferson will not get his committee seat. Because it's a new committee, in a new Congress, and new committee appointments are made."

    That's right, Johnny, its a regular game of "musical chairs" in the commitees after each election! C'mon, don't be intentionally obtuse.

    When the majority shifts, the leadership changes - but both parties generally put their members back in their preferred commitees; the membership of the desireable committees are as stable as the the congressional incumbency. Only when someone really falls out of favor with his/her party is there a removal. Nice try though.

    "Global climate change: something like 1000 major scientific studies have been launched, executed, and published on this subject in the past 20 years - 100% find that human activity is responsible for global warming. Debate is open on this matter, but patience for whack-jobs is very thin." Loin

    Consensus is not scientific. At one time 100% of scientists believe the Earth was flat. Consensus in science does not make fact. Calling people whack-jobs because they do not believe in the majority opinion is very bad for open and spirited debate in science.

    "Consensus is not scientific."
    **************************************************

    But it is very important in science.

    Although I'd like to know where s.l.o.b. gets his numbers because they sound a little exagerated to me.

    Wow, when Bill-O's ratings fall, the claws come out! Meeow, Neo-con kitties!

    I'd just like to point out, I can't watch Bill OR Keith seeing as how I don't have cable.

    The legal protection called "the right to privacy," which is the foundation by which legal abortion is founded on, is yet another lengthy and tiresome discussion which I think I discussed with you and colbert last month. My opinion on that travesty of judicial scholarship is something I do not feel like repeating.

    The only point I can make in relation to when life begins is that the majority in the Supreme Court cases dismissed the search for the answer to that question....a cop-out....and only ascribes value to the life or health of the women. The viability argument has NO real world application because even a viable fetus deemed needing to be aborted in order to save the life OR protect the health of the mother, can be aborted. This allows for arbitrary and unheard-of free reign for individuals to determine who can live and die.

    Morally, there is no question in my mind that abortion is murdering a human person, under the law of God as written in the Old Testament. With that said, the current US law does not deem it as murder. Fine. However, I know that judgement by God is inevitable for all sin (murder, lying, stealing, etc.) and those who accept salvation through grace and repent will be forgiven.

    Killing in self defense is allowed by biblical law. War can be a tool of self defense and in my judgement, the current behavior of the US in Iraq is in self defense against an enemy declared to kill military and civilian individuals who need protection. The soldiers, their supervisors and the leaders including Bush are not committing murder.

    Killing as a punishment for crime is also allowed under biblical law. The US code has passed laws that allow for capital punishment and I support these laws. Again, even the murderer is given grace and the opportunity to repent by the loving God and forgiveness is available. But the societal laws have been agreed upon and due process should be followed.

    The problem with abortion is that there is no due process for the embryo or fetus because society has decided not to address the question of when life begins...legally. In the real world most people act as though life begins at conception with all of the activity at trying to keep embryos and fetuses maturing in the womb.....WHEN THEY ARE WANTED! This is the ethical contradiction that secular humanists ignore....

    Wanted embryo/fetus...protect that life/use medical technology to save that life...no cost is too high!

    Unwanted embryo/fetus...One may end the life, as a decision between the woman and their healthcare provider.

    I now live in Keith Olbermann.

    What is the goal for climate change?

    To reverse the damage that has already been done and make sound policy to thwart any further damage.

    "War can be a tool of self defense and in my judgement, the current behavior of the US in Iraq is in self defense against an enemy declared to kill military and civilian individuals who need protection."

    Self-defense requires that the actor believes there is an imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm. So tell me, cee, were we in IMMINENT danger from Iraq? If we weren't, your argument of self-defense is bunk.

    To reverse the damage that has already been done
    %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

    Bob, can you let me know what damage we're reversing and what the ideal state of the earth will be after we've reversed it?

    I'm just asking, paint me a detailed picture of what the world will be like when we succeed in stoping global warming.

    Self-defense requires that the actor believes there is an imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm. So tell me, cee, were we in IMMINENT danger from Iraq? If we weren't, your argument of self-defense is bunk.
    **************************************************

    Well Iraq was behind the 1993 bombing of the WTC...

    Self-defense requires that the actor believes there is an imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm. So tell me, cee, were we in IMMINENT danger from Iraq? If we weren't, your argument of self-defense is bunk.
    ***************************************************

    Well Iraq was behind the 1993 WTC bombing...

    Ack, sorry for the double post, it wasn't showing up the first time after multiple refreshes.

    Carbon dioxide (CO2) gas generated by man's burning of fossil fuels and the forests is responsible for about half the greenhouse gas warming. Other gases (CFCs, methane, nitrous oxide, tropospheric ozone) are responsible for the rest. Increases in all these gases are due to mankind's explosive population growth over the last century, and increased industrial expansion. Approximately 80% of atmospheric CO2 increases are due to man's use of fossil fuels: oil, coal, and gas. These petroleum-based energy sources first came into use with the burning of coal. Since 1945, petroleum consumption has increased dramatically, due in large part to increased usage of automobiles worldwide, and the substitution of mechanized farm machinery for animal power. Mankind is in the process of conducting a major, unintentional experiment, that of feeding back into the atmosphere in a short space of geological time the fossils fuels that have slowly accumulated over the past 500 million years.

    The intellectual powers that we enjoy has enabled us to make effective use of technology and thereby changed the environment. Technology is partly responsible for explosive population growth and responsible for the resulting damage to Earth's resources. The industrial revolution caused a rapid increase in the Population growth, as oil and gas fuels were exploited for our use. There is a clear link between the problems of global warming and overpopulation, as increases in CO2 levels follows growth in population. Presently, we have too many people on Earth, who are using technologies that are destructive for the Earth. We cannot continue to grow, and make use of limited natural resources.

    Someone here today mentioned China as being one of the largest producers of CO2. That is simply not true. Though Americans make up just 4 percent of the world's population, we produce 25 percent of the carbon dioxide pollution from fossil-fuel burning -- by far the largest share of any country. In fact, the United States emits more carbon dioxide than China, India and Japan, combined. Clearly America ought to take a leadership role in solving the problem. And as the world's top developer of new technologies, we are well positioned to do so -- we already have the know-how, we just don't have the political will.

    Thanks scientist, though I am wondering where water vapor does figure into everything.

    And thanks for clearing me up on China there, I had mixed up what someone had said that it is PROJECTED to outpace the U.S. (although this projection is being debated i know)
    http://news.mongabay.com/2006/1127-co2.html

    "Raupach said that while China's carbon emissions are currently growing at the fastest rate, its per capita emissions are still below the global average. To date its "accumulated contribution since the start of the industrial revolution around 1800 is only five per cent of the global total... [compared to] the US and Europe which have each contributed more than 25 per cent of accumulated global emissions." China's CO2 emissions are expected to surpass those of the United States -- the current leader of carbon dioxide pollution -- by 2009, but even by 2030, its emissions per person are projected to still be only half to three-fifths of the average in industrialized nations. "

    It will surpass the US in 3 - no wait 2 years (only a few weeks left in this year).

    But what of all the studies that show that more and more countries are experiencing a DECLINE in population?
    http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2242/is_1674_287/ai_n15950311

    Also, I do have to wonder...
    **************************************************
    Presently, we have too many people on Earth...
    **************************************************
    So.... do you think the nazis and communists had the right idea in wiping out large numbers of people? Or should we just put a lock down on medical research that's letting people live longer and longer?

    Olberwoman is a total hack who would not recognize the truth if it was sitting in front of him gift wrapped and boxed up.

    "Well Iraq was behind the 1993 WTC bombing..."

    So 10 years later we decide that we have to respond in self-defense? Not gonna fly, pal. Waiting 10 years means the threat wasn't IMMINENT.

    Oh, and scientist, I almost forgot...

    Didn't someone say (it was... the 70s i think) that we were all supposed to run out of food and starve to death because of overpopulation somewhere around... the 90s I do believe.

    I'll make you the same deal i made Mike. At a certain date in the future (I'll let you pick once) we'll meet for a round of drinks. If you were right and humanity is dying out, I'll buy. If things are still ok, then you buy.

    Deal?

    Let me sum this up for everyone: It's the boy who cried wolf phenomenon. I've heard so MANY warnings about the doom of our planet over my [reletively short] lifespan that by now they just have no meaning to me. By now this is like.... the 4518647th time we should all be dead.

    Oh, and can someone answer one more thing for me? How will we tell the difference? When say the temperature starts to drop and/or co2 levels decline as well, by what method will we be able to tell whether it was due to our activity or natural forces?

    "Well Iraq was behind the 1993 WTC bombing..."

    So 10 years later we decide that we have to respond in self-defense? Not gonna fly, pal. Waiting 10 years means the threat wasn't IMMINENT.
    ****************************************************
    Well...... 7 of those 10 years we had president Clinton...

    3 of the 10 years we had Bush...

    Draw your own conclusions.

    "Although the governments of 163 countries ratified the Kyoto Protocol, (notably excluding the United States and Australia), there is a growing debate about how effective the Kyoto protocol has been. Some politicians, including President of the United States George W. Bush [71], Prime Minister of Australia John Howard [72] had argued that the cost of mitigating global warming via the Kyoto protocol is too large to be practical. This view may be proving correct, as the signatories of the Kyoto protocol are currently struggling to meet their targets [73], including Europe and Japan. After only five years, Canada has given up entirely. Also, of the 163 countries that have signed and ratified Kyoto, only 31 are actually required to lower greenhouse emissions."

    Took this from Wikipedia. It appears that Bush was correct in not signing the Keyoto treaty.

    "Well Iraq was behind the 1993 WTC bombing..."

    that assertion is false.

    It appears that Bush was correct in not signing the Keyoto treaty.

    The US is the largest producer of greenhouse gases. The purpose of the Kyoto Accord was to limit greenhouse gases.

    You're an idiot !

    Bob, can you let me know what damage we're reversing and what the ideal state of the earth will be after we've reversed it?

    It's as if this is the first you have heard of the problem. I wonder why that is.You're probably just pulling my leg but I'll play along and maybe educate others who read this.
    Here are just a few basic facts that I'm sure you'll refute.

    Global warming is already causing damage in many parts of the United States. In 2002, Colorado, Arizona and Oregon endured their worst wildfire seasons ever. The same year, drought created severe dust storms in Montana, Colorado and Kansas, and floods caused hundreds of millions of dollars in damage in Texas, Montana and North Dakota. Since the early 1950s, snow accumulation has declined 60 percent and winter seasons have shortened in some areas of the Cascade Range in Oregon and Washington.

    Of course, the impacts of global warming are not limited to the United States. In 2003, extreme heat waves caused more than 20,000 deaths in Europe and more than 1,500 deaths in India,while European agriculture suffered an estimated $12.5 billion in losses. And in what scientists regard as an alarming sign of events to come, the area of the Arctic's perennial polar ice cap is declining at the rate of 9 percent per decade.

    The ten warmest years in recorded weather history have taken place since 1987. Whether it's the retreat of glaciers, the melting of the permafrost in Alaska, or the increase in severe weather events, the world is experiencing what the global warming models predict.

    Britain's most influential scientist, Sir David King, recently excoriated the Bush administration for ignoring the threat posed by climate change. "In my view, climate change is the most severe problem we are facing today," he wrote in Science magazine, "more serious even than the threat of terrorism."
    Ah yes, this is probably the reason the right is playing deaf dumb and blind on climate change. George Bush hasn't bought into it, even though the government scientists have ( that he has ignored )

    Even the Pentagon...yes the PENTAGON ( HELLO !) recently issued a warning that global warming, if it takes place abruptly, could result in a catastrophic breakdown in international security. Based on growing evidence that climate shifts in the past have taken place with breathtaking speed, based on the freshening of sea water due to accelerated melting of glaciers and the polar ice caps.

    What ideal state will the earth be in when we reverse it?
    That's just a smug question I'll let you ponder yourself.


    I'll make you the same deal i made Mike. At a certain date in the future (I'll let you pick once) we'll meet for a round of drinks. If you were right and humanity is dying out, I'll buy. If things are still ok, then you buy.

    Deal?

    This is why the right has been totally discredited on this issue.
    Yeah, let's make a deal on humanity.

    Thanks for succinctly bringing to light one of the best climate change arguments.

    So.... do you think the nazis and communists had the right idea in wiping out large numbers of people?

    Did Bush have the right idea, since he has killed tens of thousands of people in Iraq ( many of them innocent women and children), yet the problems there are "grave AND DETERIORATING".

    We had a war in Iraq and people died? Thanks for the heads up 'voice of reason'!

    Let's see (from the leftist hate-Bush handbook)...

    Requisite Bush = Hitler comparison? CHECK
    Bush kills tens of thousands? CHECK
    Many innocent women and children? CHECK and CHECK

    Your day's work is done...

    "that assertion is false."

    ummm..... no, it's not:
    http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2751/is_n42/ai_17839897

    "Voice of Reason" from the hate-Bush handbook...

    - Bush = Hitler comparison? CHECK
    - Bush responsible for killing tens of thousands? CHECK
    - Including *innocent* women and children? CHECK

    So.... do you think the nazis and communists had the right idea in wiping out large numbers of people?

    Did Bush have the right idea, since he has killed tens of thousands of people in Iraq ( many of them innocent women and children), yet the problems there are "grave AND DETERIORATING".
    ***************************************************
    Voice, please pay attention. I was asking scientist's view on this issue since he said the world was being overpopulated. Why don't you go ask him whether Bush had the right idea.

    We're talking about the climate so don't be dragging Iraq into where it doesn't belong at this time. Please read and be reasonable (like your name tries to claim).

    Thank you.

    This is why the right has been totally discredited on this issue.
    Yeah, let's make a deal on humanity.

    Thanks for succinctly bringing to light one of the best climate change arguments.
    ====================================================
    Hmmm... let's see here... 2006 predicted as record year for hurricanes and then.... nothing happens.

    http://newsbusters.org/node/9370

    So let me get this straight, the scientists can't even get a prediction right for THIS YEAR and yet "the right" are the ones being discredited? I love this new logic where being proven wrong discredits your opponents. Get right the predicitions for one year, and then I'll start beliving the predictions for twenty or more years from now.

    It's as if this is the first you have heard of the problem. I wonder why that is.You're probably just pulling my leg but I'll play along and maybe educate others who read this.
    Here are just a few basic facts that I'm sure you'll refute.
    *************************************************
    Refute? not planning on it, though I may ask for some clarifications.

    =================================================
    Global warming is already causing damage in many parts of the United States. In 2002, Colorado, Arizona and Oregon endured their worst wildfire seasons ever. The same year, drought created severe dust storms in Montana, Colorado and Kansas, and floods caused hundreds of millions of dollars in damage in Texas, Montana and North Dakota. Since the early 1950s, snow accumulation has declined 60 percent and winter seasons have shortened in some areas of the Cascade Range in Oregon and Washington.
    ************************************************
    Is that property damage adjusted for inflaction and population? If 2002 was such a sevre drought in the states you listed, why have droughts not continued up to 4 years later? Have these places ever experienced drought previously?

    ==================================================
    Of course, the impacts of global warming are not limited to the United States. In 2003, extreme heat waves caused more than 20,000 deaths in Europe and more than 1,500 deaths in India,while European agriculture suffered an estimated $12.5 billion in losses. And in what scientists regard as an alarming sign of events to come, the area of the Arctic's perennial polar ice cap is declining at the rate of 9 percent per decade.
    *************************************************
    Umm.... Europe's heatwaves were caused by an atmospheric anomly.
    http://climatesci.atmos.colostate.edu/2006/11/06/was-the-2003-european-summer-heat-wave-unusual-in-a-global-context/
    Also, what are the rates of people dying from heat in India prior to that year? Is that 1500 number the 'spike' in standard death rates?

    ================================================
    The ten warmest years in recorded weather history have taken place since 1987. Whether it's the retreat of glaciers, the melting of the permafrost in Alaska, or the increase in severe weather events, the world is experiencing what the global warming models predict.
    ************************************************
    As I stated before, it was also predicted that this year would be a record year for huricanes and... it wasn't.
    http://newsbusters.org/node/9370
    Can someone refer me to a straight breakdown of model accuracies vs model errors? If the former is greater than the latter, I'll start relying upon them a little more.

    =================================================
    Britain's most influential scientist, Sir David King, recently excoriated the Bush administration for ignoring the threat posed by climate change. "In my view, climate change is the most severe problem we are facing today," he wrote in Science magazine, "more serious even than the threat of terrorism."
    Ah yes, this is probably the reason the right is playing deaf dumb and blind on climate change. George Bush hasn't bought into it, even though the government scientists have ( that he has ignored )
    **************************************************
    I am still curious as to what exactly we're supposed to do. Even if we could adopt the Kyoto protacols, even the drafters of it said that would barely make a dent and lower the temperture maybe... half a degree. I'm not denying that maybe we need to do something, I'm saying maybe current ideas are not sufficient and we need to start thinking outside the box.

    =================================================
    Even the Pentagon...yes the PENTAGON ( HELLO !) recently issued a warning that global warming, if it takes place abruptly, could result in a catastrophic breakdown in international security. Based on growing evidence that climate shifts in the past have taken place with breathtaking speed, based on the freshening of sea water due to accelerated melting of glaciers and the polar ice caps.
    *************************************************
    This doesn't sound bad, though I am wondering, what are we going to do if things suddenly reverse and the world undergoes a cold snap and we enter a new ice age. Is that to be preferred?

    =================================================
    What ideal state will the earth be in when we reverse it?
    That's just a smug question I'll let you ponder yourself.
    *************************************************
    Why is that a smug question? We've had ice ages and warming periods. Droughts, floods, hurricanes and tsunamis long before humanity even walked upon the earth (not to mention extinction). Since everything you have brought up has always been around (the only thing that's changed is now people are around to make note of these events), are you basically purposing that we change the very nature of the earth so that bad things never happen?

    I guess so (since you won't answer me and that's the only conclusion I can draw logically from your posts). Well then sir, I salute you and wish you luck in the endeavor to bend the laws of physics.

    I'm wondering how many of you from the Flat Earth Society have been able to put your hatred aside for liberals long enough to see Al Gore's film, "An Inconvenient Truth " ?

    Flat Earth Society members must be those who believe in man made global warming...I say this because those who believed the Earth was flat were the consensus of scientists before they were proved wrong

    I'm wondering how many of you from the Flat Earth Society have been able to put your hatred aside for liberals long enough to see Al Gore's film, "An Inconvenient Truth " ?
    ****************************************************

    You know, Columbus never argued with anyone over the shape of the earth, by that point in time, everyone accepted the fact that it was round. What he argued with his contemporaries the MOST about was it's SIZE. Guess who was right? Bingo: the other people. Yes, that does mean Columbus was a bit of a lunatitic that couldn't accept he was wrong but at least he got lucky that there was at least a land mass between europe and india (the long way).

    Why do I bring this up? Because like most ignorant morons, people on one side of this debate like to demonize the other by calling them "flat-earthers" bringing up the mistaken view of Columbus. Well, the truth of the matter is, now (as it was then) the argument isn't about round vs flat earth but big vs small earth. Or in other words, those who think the problems are severe and those who think they are small. (p.s. you'll notice I put Gore and his ilk into the category that was "right" by history rather than lucky - keep that in mind before you flame)

    Now... keep that in mind and reread what I post and this time, please address my questions and keep your wits (how ever much you may have) about you when posting a response.

    I am still curious as to what exactly we're supposed to do. Even if we could adopt the Kyoto protacols, even the drafters of it said that would barely make a dent and lower the temperture maybe... half a degree. I'm not denying that maybe we need to do something, I'm saying maybe current ideas are not sufficient and we need to start thinking outside the box.

    We don't need to "think outside the box" There already has been a plethora of solutions given.
    The problem isn't finding solutions, the problem is to have the political will to attack the problem. For one,reduce production and combustion of fossil fuels, and hence emissions of carbon dioxide .The GOP led Congress had that opportunity this year to raise fuel efficiency in cars. They failed...again.They caved in to corporate pressures.
    The paradigm will( hopefully) be changing with the democratic controlled Congress taking over.

    Europe is in the process of actually doing something about the problem by developing "green " policies and solutions.
    They are in the process of restructuring their economy to adapt to these problems.
    Many feel that it can be an economic windfall, not a detriment.
    If we put out the effort and knowhow like we did with Kennedy's challenge to put a man on the moon, We can succeed.

    But as you know, you and your party think the word environmentalist is a dirty word and have set us back 6 years.

    Whoever is president in 08 WILL reverse course and start to attack the problem.It's a crime that we will be 8 years behind the world on this issue.

    Here are a few more solutions by the Union of Concerned Scientists:

    http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/solutions/

    Need more?

    Al Gore gives many solutions in his film "An Inconvenient Truth"

    Hey there, Challenger Grim, The flat earth society has nothing to do with the view of columbus. it is an actual society of people who still beleive the earth is flat. The organization has existed since the 1500s. it is also used as a bit of an insult to those who remain unswayed by overwhelming scientific evidence.

    wikipedia:it a popular metaphor for dogmatic thinking and unreasoning adherence to tradition, with the term "Flat-Earther" coming to refer to a person who rejects changes in the scientific consensus, and by extension one who lives in the past.


    "Yes, that does mean Columbus was a bit of a lunatitic that couldn't accept he was wrong but at least he got lucky that there was at least a land mass between europe and india (the long way)."

    Well that's all and good Columbus wasn't a scientist. It sounds like most scientist (at least most educated people, going by what you are saying) took the view that columbus was wrong about the size of the earth. just like the majority of scientist take the postion that those who think global warming will have minimal impact are wrong.

    Al Gore was VP for eight years. The Clinton/Gore administration did next to nothing about global warming in that period of time. I think it's all talk on Al's part.

    Al Gore was VP for eight years. The Clinton/Gore administration did next to nothing about global warming in that period of time. I think it's all talk on Al's part.


    And you base this on...?

    "On November 12, 1998, Vice President Al Gore symbolically signed the protocol. Both Gore and Senator Joseph Lieberman indicated that the protocol would not be acted upon in the Senate until there was participation by the developing nations.[41] The Clinton Administration never submitted the protocol to the Senate for ratification." Wikipedia

    Gore could not even get his boss convinced.

    Thanks for the link bob, but sorry, the scientists are going to have get a MUCH better batting average on their predictions before I believe a word they say. Examples:
    *http://www.nationalcenter.org/NPA390.html
    *(see my above link on huricanes)
    *http://epw.senate.gov/pressitem.cfm?party=rep&id=263746
    *http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2004/mar/040301a.html
    ^That one deals with your whole point on the pentagon:
    "The Guardian writes that “a secret report, suppressed by U.S. defence chiefs ... warns that major European cities will be sunk beneath rising seas as Britain is plunged into a ‘Siberian’ climate by 2020. Nuclear conflict, mega-droughts, famine and widespread rioting will erupt across the world.” The “secret report, suppressed by U.S. defence chiefs,” as revealed by Gunter, was already known to Fortune magazine last month, who called it an “unclassified report ... that the Pentagon has agreed to share … .”

    Gunter reveals that the co-authors work for a California consulting company, Global Business Networks, that “specializes in concocting ‘alternative’ images of the future that encourage its corporate and institutional clients to be ready in case extreme surprises emerge.”

    One of the authors, Peter Schwartz, Chairman and founder of GBN, is falsely described by the Guardian as a CIA analyst. Schwartz describes himself as a ‘scenario planning futurist,’ “who ‘helps organizations think the unthinkable by creating alternative stories or scenarios about how the future might pan out,’” Gunter says that the Guardian failed to mention that the chief clients of GBN are Hollywood movie producers who hire the company to consult on science fiction scripts."

    http://www.consumer-guides.info/gov_info/global_warming_facts.html#The_Skeptical_Environmentalist
    http://www.consumer-guides.info/gov_info/global_warming_facts.html#AL_GORE_INCONVENIENT_TRUTH_
    http://epw.senate.gov/pressitem.cfm?party=rep&id=257909
    ^Oh yeah and it turns out that MOST of the scientists that viewed Al Gore's movie declared it bunk.

    So yeah, I need more. Preferrably truthful sources.

    JT, if the majority of scientists believe in global warming, it's a very SLIM majority.
    http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/financialpost/story.html?id=3711460e-bd5a-475d-a6be-4db87559d605

    Let me ask you another question. As darwinists like to point out, for a scientific hypothesis to be tested, there has to be a condition by which it can be disproven.

    So tell me, what would be the condition for Al Gore's theory to be disproven?

    Anonymous,

    I don't have to show what they didn't do. You need to show what they did do. I don't remember them doing much of anything about "global warming". If they had lots of us would have remembered it.

    You know, Columbus never argued with anyone over the shape of the earth, by that point in time, everyone accepted the fact that it was round.

    Challenger doesn't know his history.
    Ministers and churches argued with Columbus for years after 1492 still insisting that the world was flat.
    Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo and Newton all fought against the church to air their new ideas.
    The age of humanism brought us the enlightenment through science beating back the religious community.

    And Rico,obviously you know nothing about what Clinton and Gore did for the environment.
    The Clinton-Gore Administration negotiated an international treaty to reduce greenhouse gas.
    They secured $1.1 billion for research and development of energy efficiency and clean energy technologies, and set a goal of tripling U.S. use of bio-energy and bio-products by 2010.
    Clinton issued several Executive Orders. The first order directed agencies to dramatically improve energy efficiency in federal buildings, saving taxpayers over $750 million a year when fully implemented. The second order improved fuel efficiency by requiring the Federal government to reduce fuel use in its vehicle fleets by 20 percent in five years. The third order offered federal workers incentives to use public transportation, cutting fuel use and the pollution that contributes to climate change.
    And that's just a sampling.

    In my opinion Clinton Gore didn't do enough for the environment, but then along
    came Bush and he dismantled most of the Clinton/Gore policies.


    You also say Gore is all talk.
    Did you see his movie?
    Do you know the scientific data he used in the film?

    Admit it, you have no idea what you are talking about.

    Oh yeah and it turns out that MOST of the scientists that viewed Al Gore's movie declared it bunk.

    Challenger ..you are so full of shit it's coming out of all ends.

    You were wrong about Columbus...now you make up lies about Gore.

    The nation's top climate scientists gave An Inconvenient Truth, five stars for accuracy.

    The scientists that saw the movie ( or read his book)conveyed that Gore correctly depicted the science...that the world is getting hotter and it is a manmade catastrophe-in-the-making caused by the burning of fossil fuels.

    "Excellent," said William Schlesinger, dean of the Nicholas School of Environment and Earth Sciences at Duke University. "He got all the important material and got it right."

    You just make up things and hope people don't know any better.
    What little credibility you had,it all just went down the drain.

    Want my link ?

    Read and weep:

    http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/2006-06-27-gore-science-truth_x.htm

    Challenger doesn't know his history.
    Ministers and churches argued with Columbus for years after 1492 still insisting that the world was flat.
    Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo and Newton all fought against the church to air their new ideas.
    The age of humanism brought us the enlightenment through science beating back the religious community.
    ====================================================
    Bob, do us all a favor and try reading some.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Columbus#Navigational_theories
    "Following Washington Irving's myth-filled 1828 biography of Columbus, it became common supposed knowledge that Columbus had difficulty obtaining support for his plan because Europeans believed that the earth was flat.[4] In fact, few people at the time of Columbus’s voyage, and virtually no sailors or navigators, believed this. Most agreed that the earth was a sphere. This had been the general opinion of ancient Greek science, and continued as the standard opinion (for example of Bede in The Reckoning of Time) until Isidore of Seville misread the classical authors and stated the earth was flat, inventing the T and O map concept. This view was very influential, but never wholly accepted. Knowledge of the Earth's spherical nature was not limited to scientists: for instance, Dante's Divine Comedy is based on a spherical Earth. Columbus put forth arguments that were based on the circumference of the sphere. Most scholars accepted Ptolemy's claim that the terrestrial landmass (for Europeans of the time, comprising Eurasia and Africa) occupied 180 degrees of the terrestrial sphere, leaving 180 degrees of water."

    "The problem facing Columbus was that experts did not accept his estimate of the distance to the Indies. The true circumference of the Earth is about 40,000 kilometers (25,000 statute miles), and the distance from the Canary Islands to Japan is 19,600 kilometers (12,200 statue miles). No ship in the 15th century could carry enough food to sail from the Canary Islands to Japan. Most European sailors and navigators concluded, correctly, that sailors undertaking a westward voyage from Europe to Asia non-stop would die of starvation or thirst long before reaching their destination. Spain however, only recently unified through the marriage of Ferdinand and Isabella, was desperate for a competitive edge over other European countries in trade with the East Indies. Columbus promised them that edge."

    So yeah, I wasn't wrong about Columbus. Try expanding your own mind before you start insulting people based upon your own misconceptions.

    Oh, and bob, here's some info on the so called "consensus" on global warming.
    http://www.consumer-guides.info/gov_info/global_warming_facts.html#AL_GORE_INCONVENIENT_TRUTH_
    "Continuing with our media analysis: On July 24, 2006 The Los Angeles Times featured an op-ed by Naomi Oreskes, a social scientist at the University of California San Diego and the author of a 2004 Science Magazine study. Oreskes insisted that a review of 928 scientific papers showed there was 100% consensus that global warming was not caused by natural climate variations. This study was also featured in former Vice President Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth,” http://epw.senate.gov/fact.cfm?party=rep&id=259323

    However, the analysis in Science Magazine excluded nearly 11,000 studies or more than 90 percent of the papers dealing with global warming, according to a critique by British social scientist Benny Peiser.

    Peiser also pointed out that less than two percent of the climate studies in the survey actually endorsed the so-called “consensus view” that human activity is driving global warming and some of the studies actually opposed that view.

    But despite this manufactured “consensus,” the media continued to ignore any attempt to question the orthodoxy of climate alarmism. "

    Also...the nonsense spewed here about "oh hurricane season was real light this year. Thus it proves climate scientists wrong".

    It's a full time job correcting the lies and misconceptions of Challenger and the right wing at this site.

    Scientists never said global warming causes more hurricanes. What they have said is that human activities heat the world, warmer sea-surface temperatures will fuel hurricanes, increasing wind speeds and rainfall. Thus climate change makes hurricanes more powerful , more intense....endangering more people in hurricane regions.


    Scientists never said global warming causes more hurricanes. What they have said is that human activities heat the world, warmer sea-surface temperatures will fuel hurricanes, increasing wind speeds and rainfall. Thus climate change makes hurricanes more powerful , more intense....endangering more people in hurricane regions.
    ====================================================

    Umm.... Bob, this past hurricane season, there were also less severe hurricanes than projected.

    Quote from Brian Williams in may of '06:
    "between eight and 10 hurricanes and half of those would be major, we were told, meaning at least Category 3."

    Williams later this year:
    "Well, the season officially ended today back home, and we are happy to report, what did happen, turns out, wasn't even close. There were only nine named storms, not 16 of them. Five hurricanes, none of them making landfall in the U.S. And only two of the storms, Gordon and Helene, were strong enough to be called anything close to major."

    So..... scientists still got it wrong, hurricanes were not more powerful or intense this year.

    Oh by the way bob, another blow to your consensus belief.

    "More than 4,000 scientists from 106 countries, including 72 Nobel prize winners, signed the Heidelberg Appeal (1992), calling for a rational scientific approach to environmental problems. Many senior scientists have also supported The Statement by Atmospheric Scientists on Greenhouse Warming (1992), The Leipzig Declaration (1997) and finally the Oregon Petition (1998) which received the signatures of over 19,000 scientists."

    For a "small minority" that's pretty sizable.

    Challenger Grim: That is an interesting article, however I don't think it is accurate.

    "JT, if the majority of scientists believe in global warming, it's a very SLIM majority."

    Well if you mean slim to only include, all major scientific bodies in the United States whose members' expertise bears directly on the matter of global warming, then yes, the majority is slim.

    For example: The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Created in 1988 by the World Meteorological Organization and the United Nations Environmental Programme, IPCC's whose purpose is to evaluate the state of climate science as a basis for informed policy action, PRIMARILY ON THE BASIS OF PEER_REVIEWED AND PUBLISHED SCIENTIFC LITERATURE. IPCC has stated several times that global

    Also backing this up are, the National Academy of Sciences report, The American Meteorological Society, the American Geophysical Union, and the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS).

    I am suprised you are claiming the amount of scientist who beleive in global warming is slim. i thought your point was that it is real but that the impact is not so great?

    Someone said that "science is not consensus". Yes it is. It relies on the consensus regarding the validity of the process of inquiry.

    Right-wingers dispute Human-induced climate change because they don't wnat it to be true; the implications - if taken seriously - would drasitcally effect their comfort-levels and the profit-margins of the people who provde their opinions.

    I also don't want it to be true - its a horrible scenario for human civilization and the environment. However, the tried and true, replicable process of inquiry regarding this issue suggests that it is real, and therefore I accept that it is true. That's the diference.

    Actually JT... there is some question about the IPCC...
    http://www.climatescience.org.nz/assets/20061126223340.Henderson.Beesley.pdf

    And perhaps I should clarify. As far as the globe getting warmer, I don't think anyone disputes that because... well temperature can only go in two directions up and down. It was going down, now it's going up. It will probably go down at some point.

    The big question is whether it's natural or whether it's 'man made'. Following that question is it's possible impact.

    And Sir Loin,
    I'm reminded of a quote (can't remember who it was by at the moment):
    "Global Warming is mankind's attempt to inflate his own importance on a world hostile to his existence."

    J$. How come you didn't mention Olby's lie in the Worst Person in the World when he claimed the lady in TX was giving a "Glock Pistol" to anyone who bought a house over $150,000. She is actually only giving a Glock--no need for the word pistol--to LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS who buy a house. Nice spin, Olby.

    "Actually JT... there is some question about the IPCC..."

    Challenger grim... There are several flaws in offering up the article you mention as some proof about the validity of the IPCC.

    First, the author of the article is one man, and an Economist, not a climate scientist. meaning he is not qualified to weigh in on the science of the IPCC, nor does he attemt to.

    Secondly the bulk of the author's problem with the IPCC seem to be that their economic conclusons are un-sound(So we have one economist who beleives the IPCC is not doing a great job in regards to economics..) No where is there any attack on the science of the IPCC in the article. In fact, all he does is mention that their was an error in the past and points out that having journals peer-reviewed is not 100% protection against errors. Which is true; However, having journals peer-reviewed certainly decreasing the possibility of errors being published.

    Finally you have ignored the fact that the National Academy of Sciences report, The American Meteorological Society, the American Geophysical Union, and the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). all support the idea that not only is global warming real it is man made. this constitues pretty much every major american scientific organization qualified to weigh in the matter.

    In regards to the ramifications of global warming, I'm not entirely sure if there is any significant debate on that.. I will research it this evening and see what I can find.

    Most of the literature I have read on the subject has suggested the impact could be quite devastating... but if there is debate on this issue I am certain wthis is where the bulk of it would be, Aa the future is not entirely verifable.

    JT, I have to wonder, what would it take to disprove any of this? (Imagine I'm Galileo for a minute asking what data you want?)

    Anything on the measurements that show antartica as a whole has been gaining enough ice lately to LOWER the ocean's level by a small (VERY small fraction)?

    I'm sorry but my biggest problem with all this is the same darwinists have with intelligent design: there's almost no way to disprove the hypothesis.

    Record property damage and casualties - does this take any factor into account of A) greater populations in high risk (i.e. hurricane zones) or B) inflation or even C) scio-economic factors. Example: the record heat wave that killed so many people in Europe... well Europe also has a per capita of air-conditioners much lower than the US. If more of those nifty little units had been widely available, the death toll would have been lower.

    Improper perspective- What I'm referring to can best be summed up by a quote from someone above:
    "Just look at how CO2 is starting to make changes in mother earth that we have never seen before."
    Well... considering that 1) mankind hasn't been on earth relative to her age and 2) it is only VERY recently that we've been getting a true global picture, of course we've never "seen" a lot of what's going on right now. Almost ANYTHING the earth will do (cool or heat) will be something mankind has never "seen" before because our eyesight is just beginning to encompass her.

    What is the goal? - It'd be nice if someone could actually give me an answer to this. I'm beginning to suspect it's because nobody really knows the answer. Remember the Ice Age? (no, not the movie) Is THAT what we want? Do we want large glaciers to again cover much of the earth? Do we want to stop extinction or bad weather? Well hurricanes and volcanos and tornados and so much more were all wiping out large segments of us (and other fauna/flora) long before we even made fire. Not to mention extinction. If the goal is to get the earth to stop being the earth, then why doesn't everyone just admit they are on a power trip and using this hoax as a stepping stone?

    Finally, you ever heard the story of the "father of hygene"? I like using him more than the whole "flat earth" etc examples because he's a much better example.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignaz_Semmelweis

    "His observations went against the current scientific opinion of the time, which blamed diseases (among other quite odd causes) on an imbalance of the basic "four humours" in the body, a theory known as dyscrasia.

    Semmelweis' claims were thought to lack scientific basis, since no explanation was given to his findings. Such a scientific explanation was only made possible some decades later when the germ theory of disease was developed (see Pasteur, Lister, and others). Another ideological problem was the fact that Semmelweis' ideas were thought to give special significance to death and dying (it was mainly doctors not washing their hands after autopsies who transferred germs), an idea which was deemed "religious" or "superstitious" in the post-Enlightenment intellectual environment that dominated scientific circles at the time."

    Sound familiar at all? What no one that's studied science knows is that scienitists are still biased, if not even more so:
    (http://www.worldclimatereport.com/index.php/2005/12/22/proving-science-bias/)
    "Scientists compete with each other for finite resources, just like bankers and corporations. In this case, successful competitors are those who are rewarded by their universities or institutions. In all science, this means publishing research articles in the refereed scientific literature. That research costs tremendous amounts of money and there really is only one provider: Uncle Sam (i.e. you and me)."

    Let me wrap up with one final question. Since it seems that just about everyone that agrees is considered a "credible" source and everyone that disagrees to be 'unreliable', please tell me what you would consider a credible source that disagrees with the standard line right now?

    Challenger-

    Loved the last paragraph! Every time global warming comes up anything I and others put in front of them is ripped to pieces with the usual line of our sources aren't credible. And yes, the only sources that seem to be of any credence to them are people who agree with them. They continually say they are open for debate but balk at anything that actually debates their points no matter who or where its from.

    My personal favorite is the point about Gore's film. Even I have pointed out to them that scientists that agree with them and the movie's message in principle, have discredited some of the studies and points in the movie. Thus, these people either ignore them or berate their own!

    Fred, I'm still wondering why nobody seems to have a good idea about what the final goal is.

    Would you hitch a ride with a driver that was just barreling down the road at high speeds with no destination in mind? So why are these people asking us to join them in a direction that will be risky without letting us know what the end goal is?

    (well... so far the 'end goal' that I've heard can be summed up with: "When bad things stop happening.")

    Grim-
    Honestly, even if they come up with an end goal, it is not reachable.

    If we try to get temps in the range they want (which seriously aren't too different from current)...can we get there and stay even if we take ALL their advice? The earth fluctuates constantly and for like 4 billion years. Even if we do get in their temp range, the species thing isn't going to change...the liberal conundrum->I always wonder about...they are strict Darwinists, however, then they try to save every species from extinction...huh? How does that fit together? Plus, we are finding new species of critters almost daily...do we stop them from coming about (species abortions?)?

    If things start towards a freezing trend (like the 1970's, see newsweek) do we start coal burning again?

    Like I said anything we do will not work. The best way to prove this is to look at Yellowstone National Park. Do just some minor reading about the history of the park and you will see that it was set aside to "preserve" the place exactly as it was and managing its eco-systems. But by trying to preserve it, they got out of balance with nature (animal over population due to lack of hunting & getting rid of natural predators, among other things) and every time they tried to do something to re-adjust the eco-system it just got more out of whack. Things change and we kinda got to roll with the punches...their is a reason we are the dominant species here (not including dogs/cats who have trained us well)...WE ARE THE BEST ADAPTORS EVER! We can live in hot or cold, wet or dry, high or low...heck we can even survive on other celestial bodies! It'll take more than a couple of degrees to wipe us out.

    JT, I have to wonder, what would it take to disprove any of this? (Imagine I'm Galileo for a minute asking what data you want?)


    What data have you provided? You argue that there is not much of a consensus regarding global warming and yet when I demonstrate that virtually every major scientific organization in the United States including the IPCC have taken the position that the data indicates 1) global warming is real and 2) it is probably man made.

    The data you reply with in response to this is an article criticizing the economic findings of the ipcc. No where do you criticize the science.

    So what data would I like? find me something where a major scientific organization in this country has achieved some kind of consensus that global warming is not occurring or that it is not man made and we can discuss that.

    "Just look at how CO2 is starting to make changes in mother earth that we have never seen before."
    Well... considering that 1) mankind hasn't been on earth relative to her age and 2) it is only VERY recently that we've been getting a true global picture, of course we've never "seen" a lot of what's going on right now. Almost ANYTHING the earth will do (cool or heat) will be something mankind has never "seen" before because our eyesight is just beginning to encompass her."

    I'm sorry but this statement is just wrong. We are able, using geologic methods, to determine a pretty accurately the temperature of the earth between 1,808,000 to 11,550 years ago. We know the earth is heating up.

    "What is the goal? - It'd be nice if someone could actually give me an answer to this."

    I'm not sure I understand your question? What is the goal? The goal is to avoid a disaster that the majority of evidence seems to suggest we are making for ourselves. I suppose it could turn that we are wrong on this, but living life that way is pretty dumb. If the weatherman says "there is a 98%chance of rain tomorrow." He could be wrong. But I would bring my umbrella because 98 out of 100 times he is going to be right.

    "I'm beginning to suspect it's because nobody really knows the answer. Remember the Ice Age? (no, not the movie) Is THAT what we want? Do we want large glaciers to again cover much of the earth?"

    Are you suggesting that by trying to curb greenhouse gasses we are creating another ice age?


    "If the goal is to get the earth to stop being the earth, then why doesn't everyone just admit they are on a power trip and using this hoax as a stepping stone?"

    There is no convincing evidence this is a hoax and there is overwhelming evidence it is real.

    "Finally, you ever heard the story of the "father of hygiene"? I like using him more than the whole "flat earth" etc examples because he's a much better example.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignaz_Semmelweis"


    Great one man was right it happens but the fact is that you have to make the best decisions based on the data at hand. The data on hand from most of the reputable scientist is that global warming is real and dangerous.

    "Sound familiar at all? What no one that's studied science knows is that scientists are still biased"

    By that line of reasoning we should then conclude that smoking is good for you, breast cancer isn't real, asbestos improves breathing and everything science says is false. because that is what you are arguing. You are not standing up and saying the data on global warming is incorrect--here is the correct data. You are saying I don't trust science, it is biased. If that is the case we shouldn't believe anything that science teaches us.

    "Let me wrap up with one final question. Since it seems that just about everyone that agrees is considered a "credible" source and everyone that disagrees to be 'unreliable',"


    No but an economist commenting on the economic conclusions of an organization is certainly not acceptable in a scientific debate. If we were debating stem cell research and I included a quote saying "stem cells work that is all there is too it" and the source is my plumber would you accept it?

    Find me either a large scientific body, with strong academic credentials or find me a very credible scientist. (Strong academic qualifications) and give me a compelling reason why I should listen to him over a larger number of (Scientist with outstanding credentials who think global warming is real) and then I will listen. Because frankly I feel like navigating my future based on what science says is the most likely outcome makes the most sense.

    You make a pretty good point Fred. Like I've said, I find current global warming scares to be just an attempt to inflate our own egos.

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    WE ARE THE BEST ADAPTORS EVER! We can live in hot or cold, wet or dry, high or low...heck we can even survive on other celestial bodies! It'll take more than a couple of degrees to wipe us out.
    ====================================================
    Well... not quite. The ULTIMATE adaptors are single celled organisms/bacteria. They've shown up in places we can't even go at the moment for a great length of time (i mean, there's a species that lives in our stomach acid!).

    We are an interesting 2nd though.