If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
Summary: Adam is from the Ed Seedhouse School of Self Delusion: the tendency to believe that one is open minded and considers all evidence equally, while actually refusing to investigate and provide refutation for lines of evidence that lead to conclusions contradicting one's predisposed beliefs.
Paul Bonham's mind, however, is so "open" his brains have fallen out.
As to evidence, Paul has never provided one shred of evidence for his cooky opinions. Scientists and rational people, unlike Paul, have actual standards for what is, and what is not, evidence. Paul believes everything anyone tells him so long as it agrees with what he already believes.
Paul Bonham's mind, however, is so "open" his brains have fallen out.
As to evidence, Paul has never provided one shred of evidence for his cooky opinions. Scientists and rational people, unlike Paul, have actual standards for what is, and what is not, evidence. Paul believes everything anyone tells him so long as it agrees with what he already believes.
Well, not eveything is coming up rose for the warming cartel. Not all the press is sympathetic.
If we could clear up the pollution problems here in Canada with the loss of a mere 30,000 union jobs would you be agreeable? A lot of industry could relocate elsewhere and ship product to Canada. That would be the problem of their government to put a stop to pollution iin those nations if they felt the need to do so.
The article I have linked is from Britain. A nation with a highly paid workforce.
If we could clear up the pollution problems here in Canada with the loss of a mere 30,000 union jobs would you be agreeable? A lot of industry could relocate elsewhere and ship product to Canada. That would be the problem of their government to put a stop to pollution iin those nations if they felt the need to do so.
The article I have linked is from Britain. A nation with a highly paid workforce.
Ok, so the IPCC has extremely low credibility because of their idiotic mistakes, and outright lies.
ok, but there is actually a video above the article featuring a climate experts based in Washington talking about the reality of global warming and how it's all connected and the reasons why we need to find a solution to this problem(also gives chances of 19/20 that it is AGW). So there is a corrupted group that made exaggerations, go right ahead and bust them, but the truth is still out there. Climate experts who are independent or part of a non-corrupted organization know what the facts point to and that is AGW.
Maybe the deniers should also try responding to articles contradicting their view instead of just ignoring it.
Well, not eveything is coming up rose for the warming cartel. Not all the press is sympathetic.
What a revalation!!!! Amazing!!!!!! Some of the press are on the side of the deniers!!!!!!! Yes, that's right, you read it here first!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If we could clear up the pollution problems here in Canada with the loss of a mere 30,000 union jobs would you be agreeable? A lot of industry could relocate elsewhere and ship product to Canada. That would be the problem of their government to put a stop to pollution iin those nations if they felt the need to do so.
It would be better to create a few hundred thousand union jobs via efficiency and the production of clean energy. But of course only a solution that destroys union jobs would work for Gary.
The article I have linked is from Britain. A nation with a highly paid workforce.
Well, no one, least of all me, claims that scientists don't make mistakes. But scientists also have ways, unlike the press, of correcting their mistakes.
In the incident misrepresented by the propaganda piece Gary linked to, it was the scientists themselves that corrected erroneous information. Unlike Gorry, scientists will admit to their mistakes.
For a factual account of the report Gerry fibs about, see this link. I doubt that gury will ever read it.
Last edited by Ed Seedhouse; Tuesday, 31st August, 2010, 10:01 PM.
It would be better to create a few hundred thousand union jobs via efficiency and the production of clean energy. But of course only a solution that destroys union jobs would work for Gary.
Only a union boss would seriously believe business can afford to create a few hundred thousand jobs to produce the same amount of product.
I wouldn't give up a single union job (or any other job) for the climate change myth.
You're the one who seems to buy into that "science" so it's reasonable to ask what price is acceptable to you.
Only a union boss would seriously believe business can afford to create a few hundred thousand jobs to produce the same amount of product.
I have never held the title of "Union Boss", nor was I ever in a position to boss any of my union's members around. Gary's paranoid streak is showing again.
... i just told you what love is, and how it is impossible for it to have any power whatsoever, and thinking anything else is nothing short of complete delusion, you should check yourself into a mental hospital and everyone else who believes that should go in with you.
Maybe next time try being a bit more specific, all the forces of the universe? matter and energy make up our universe, what do you mean by forces(energy could be considered a force)?
From a very easy to find source:
"The fundamental forces (or fundamental interactions) of physics are the ways that individual particles interact with each other. It turns out that for every single interaction that we've observed take place in the universe, they can be broken down to be described by only four (well, generally four - more on that later) types of interactions:
Many physicists believe that all four of the fundamental forces are, in fact, the manifestations of a single underlying (or unified) force which has yet to be discovered."
I'd rather believe some form of God created all the forces of the universe then love(even though both are obviously false). That is how deplorable I feel your position is...
This is very interesting. You'd RATHER BELIEVE.... that says quite a lot right there. Perhaps you'd RATHER BELIEVE in AGW, because somehow it just sits right with you?
...since you kept on telling me to do research I did and I found quite a bit of contradictory evidence(who would have expected that, everyone besides Paul Bonham).
This is what I found:
"Like all human experiences, the NDE...blah blah blah...Again proving how logic and reasoning often fall short when things get emotional and people start being irrational.
NDE? I didn't claim any proof of anything having to do with NDE. My claim was that there is proof of REINCARNATION due to transcripts of hypnosis sessions, and later research showing that names and events mentioned match up with historical records that the person hypnotized could have had no knowledge of.
Of course, you and others are free to claim some type of collusion or "cheating". Interesting, that. The very same claim made against climate scientists!!! OMG!!!! What comes around goes around.
Penn and Teller also have a couple episodes on the bullshit of physics and ESP, i implore you to check it out and realize the falsehood of your current beliefs.
I love Penn and Teller, and I've seen many of their Bullshit episodes. Well, Adam, sorry to do this, but here's something that will make you wish you'd never brought up Penn and Teller:
"Both (Sharon) Begley and (Penn) Jillette were participants at James Randi's gathering of skeptics, The Amazing Meeting 6, in Las Vegas last month. In her blog post "Penn & Teller, and Believing in Dumb Things," this is how Begley describes what happened:
Someone asked Penn whether he still believed that man-made climate change is bunk, as he has said more than once. Penn's basic answer was: I loathe everything about Al Gore, so since Gore has been crusading against climate change it must be garbage.
Now, Penn & Teller’s terrific “Bull****,” now beginning its sixth season on Showtime, has debunked psychics such as John Edward, feng shui, acupuncture and other forms of pseudoscience and the paranormal. But here was Penn, a great friend to the skeptic community, basically saying, don’t bother me with scientific evidence, I’m going to make up my mind about global warming based on my disdain for Al Gore. (Both Penn and Teller are well-known libertarians and supporters of the libertarian Cato Institute, which has been one of the leaders in spreading doubt about global warming.) Which just goes to show, not even the most hard-nosed empiricists and skeptics are immune from the power of emotion to make us believe stupid things."
How do you know that space is empty? Lawrence Krauss has a lecture talking about dark matter, maybe the metal ball is full of dark matter, just like space which apparently has massive gaps of nothingness but it is actually full of dark matter.
Ah, I'm glad you bring up Dark Matter. Matter that must exist, but doesn't according to all our methods of observation. I wonder if you really did read Sylvia's book, because she writes very specifically that the "other side" isn't in outer space somewhere, it's right here occupying the same space as Earth (and every other civilized planet in the universe has it's own other side, similarly configured). The components of the other side -- buildings, plants, animals, us -- are as physically real once you are there as everything is here on this side. The problem is, everything on the other side is vibrating at such a high frequency that it is all undetectable by our current means of observation.
Hmmmm.... could it be that the other side is the Dark Matter we seek?
Adam, you will recall that I specifically said that what I believe in, i.e. Syvia's teachings, require some faith. Therefore I'm not posting here to "prove" it in any way. I have stated that reincarnation, the central tenet of Sylvia's teachings, is provable, and the proof is available to anyone who wants to find it. However, I'm not Paul Beckwith, who started this thread to prove AGW theories to doubters. That is, I'm not compelled to prove reincarnation. For anyone wanting to prove it to themselves, do your own research.
The only reason I am posting here at all is because you broadcast your anti-faith pro-science agenda at the bottom of every message you post, and I wrote that it was amusing, to which you took exception. In the ensuing discourse, I have proved that you are a fraud who considers himself open-minded and able to make purely logical judgments free of any bias whatsoever, making those judgments based on fact. Yeah, you and Penn and Teller, you make a great threesome!
And here's one final link for you regarding the drug Ketamine and NDE experiences:
"In this article I will consider more speculative suggestions that the brain can act as a transceiver, converting energy fields beyond the brain into features of the mind, as a television converts waves in the air into sound and vision. Advances in quantum physics suggest that certain drugs, and the conditions which produce NDE's, may 'retune' the brain to provide access to certain fields and 'broadcasts' which are usually inaccessible. This retuning is said to open doors to realms which are always there, rather than actually producing those realms, just as the broadcast of one channel continues when we change channels."
So you see, your vaunted proof that NDE's don't mean anything is itself subject to bias. Who cares if it's biological? If it tunes us into a reality that is beyond this mere physical reality, it doesn't matter how we get there. What you have to prove (in order to prove NDE's don't mean anything) is that the reality that is beyond this reality doesn't really exist.
And as Jerry Seinfeld would say, "Good luck with alllll that!"
Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.
Ah, I'm glad you bring up Dark Matter. Matter that must exist, but doesn't according to all our methods of observation.
In a post full of half truths and non truths, this one takes the cake. Science knows of and has proven the existance of many things that we cannot directly observe. Virtual particles are a good example, they can never be observed directly but their existance and nature is proven beyond all reasonable doubt.
Actually of course, we only and always observe everything indirectly. All that our brain can percieve "directly" is the electrical impulses that travel along our nerves. Everthing that we hear, taste, smell, see or feel is by indirect observation. The world we experience is actually created within our brains, and we see feel hear touch and feel only a small part of the actual reality all around us.
Of course the world outside our heads does exist, and we can be sure of it beyond any reasonable doubt as we all are, and with good reason. But that doesn't change the fact that we can never observe it directly.
To suggest that because we can only observe some phenomenon indirectly we therefore cannot know it exists, is total nonsense.
Of course most of the rest of his post is nonsense as well, but he piles nonsense upon nonsense and if you refute all his nonsensicalities he will bring more in and if you refute every bit of nonsense he brings up until there is no bit of nonsense left to refute, he just starts again from the beginning, which by then he has forgotten.
BUT, to actually get back to the thread topic, seeing all that stuff that Paul has written, and comparing his qualification with actual scientists and their observations of actually existing global warming, who are you going to bet on?
If, in other words, on the one hand we have a climate scientist who publishes in peer reviewed journals, and tells you that humanity is currently causing global warming. On the other hand Paul Bonham, who believes in psychic woo and tells you it ain't so. Who will you bet is right?
If you believe Paul please send me an email, because I can give you a great deal on a blue bridge. A little rusty but she still runs great...
Last edited by Ed Seedhouse; Wednesday, 1st September, 2010, 12:12 AM.
I love Penn and Teller, and I've seen many of their Bullshit episodes. Well, Adam, sorry to do this, but here's something that will make you wish you'd never brought up Penn and Teller:
"Both (Sharon) Begley and (Penn) Jillette were participants at James Randi's gathering of skeptics, The Amazing Meeting 6, in Las Vegas last month. In her blog post "Penn & Teller, and Believing in Dumb Things," this is how Begley describes what happened:
Someone asked Penn whether he still believed that man-made climate change is bunk, as he has said more than once. Penn's basic answer was: I loathe everything about Al Gore, so since Gore has been crusading against climate change it must be garbage.
Now, Penn & Teller’s terrific “Bull****,” now beginning its sixth season on Showtime, has debunked psychics such as John Edward, feng shui, acupuncture and other forms of pseudoscience and the paranormal. But here was Penn, a great friend to the skeptic community, basically saying, don’t bother me with scientific evidence, I’m going to make up my mind about global warming based on my disdain for Al Gore. (Both Penn and Teller are well-known libertarians and supporters of the libertarian Cato Institute, which has been one of the leaders in spreading doubt about global warming.) Which just goes to show, not even the most hard-nosed empiricists and skeptics are immune from the power of emotion to make us believe stupid things."
Oooops!
On balance, I suspect that global warming exists and that it is probably caused at least in part by people. I also believe that politicians and the very rich are going to use this to manipulate the masses. Not for the good of humanity (that is only an accidental byproduct, or more accurately a good cover) but mainly to retain their positions.
It's like snake oil salesmen of the 1800s who supplied "cures" for all sorts of real ailments. There is no reason to believe that the purchasers didn't really have various afflictions. However, those supplying the potions didn't care whether they helped anyone or not. They were in it for a totally different reason.
"Tom is a well known racist, and like most of them he won't admit it, possibly even to himself." - Ed Seedhouse, October 4, 2020.
This thread has gone on so long I have decided to repeat myself.
There was certainly a time when I believed that man-made global warming was true, but now I believe it to be a total lie. When Al Gore put out his movie some time ago, everyone got scared. That is, until the world cooled down for five years. Then Gore and the boys changed "global warming" to "climate change" and continued to perpetrate the hoax.
Years ago, Bush Sr. called those who suggested global warming as fear mongers (today they would be members of al Qaeda). Steven Harper called global warming a socialist plot, and other world leaders made similar sorts of statements ridiculing those who claimed global warming was real.
Then, a couple of years back, in the twinkling of an eye, all of a sudden everyone changed their tunes at the same time and now they all want to carbon tax our backsides off. Hmmmm.
This not only demonstrates that global warming/climate change is bull, but that the politicians of our world are puppets to higher powers that are giving them their orders. Now, of course, I might be too cynical. Maybe there was a mass enlightenment among politicians world wide, an enlightenment which did not affect the rest of us.
"The fundamental forces (or fundamental interactions) of physics are the ways that individual particles interact with each other. It turns out that for every single interaction that we've observed take place in the universe, they can be broken down to be described by only four (well, generally four - more on that later) types of interactions:
Many physicists believe that all four of the fundamental forces are, in fact, the manifestations of a single underlying (or unified) force which has yet to be discovered."
Duh!
This is very interesting. You'd RATHER BELIEVE.... that says quite a lot right there. Perhaps you'd RATHER BELIEVE in AGW, because somehow it just sits right with you?
NDE? I didn't claim any proof of anything having to do with NDE. My claim was that there is proof of REINCARNATION due to transcripts of hypnosis sessions, and later research showing that names and events mentioned match up with historical records that the person hypnotized could have had no knowledge of.
Of course, you and others are free to claim some type of collusion or "cheating". Interesting, that. The very same claim made against climate scientists!!! OMG!!!! What comes around goes around.
I love Penn and Teller, and I've seen many of their Bullshit episodes. Well, Adam, sorry to do this, but here's something that will make you wish you'd never brought up Penn and Teller:
"Both (Sharon) Begley and (Penn) Jillette were participants at James Randi's gathering of skeptics, The Amazing Meeting 6, in Las Vegas last month. In her blog post "Penn & Teller, and Believing in Dumb Things," this is how Begley describes what happened:
Someone asked Penn whether he still believed that man-made climate change is bunk, as he has said more than once. Penn's basic answer was: I loathe everything about Al Gore, so since Gore has been crusading against climate change it must be garbage.
Now, Penn & Teller’s terrific “Bull****,” now beginning its sixth season on Showtime, has debunked psychics such as John Edward, feng shui, acupuncture and other forms of pseudoscience and the paranormal. But here was Penn, a great friend to the skeptic community, basically saying, don’t bother me with scientific evidence, I’m going to make up my mind about global warming based on my disdain for Al Gore. (Both Penn and Teller are well-known libertarians and supporters of the libertarian Cato Institute, which has been one of the leaders in spreading doubt about global warming.) Which just goes to show, not even the most hard-nosed empiricists and skeptics are immune from the power of emotion to make us believe stupid things."
Oooops!
Ah, I'm glad you bring up Dark Matter. Matter that must exist, but doesn't according to all our methods of observation. I wonder if you really did read Sylvia's book, because she writes very specifically that the "other side" isn't in outer space somewhere, it's right here occupying the same space as Earth (and every other civilized planet in the universe has it's own other side, similarly configured). The components of the other side -- buildings, plants, animals, us -- are as physically real once you are there as everything is here on this side. The problem is, everything on the other side is vibrating at such a high frequency that it is all undetectable by our current means of observation.
Hmmmm.... could it be that the other side is the Dark Matter we seek?
Adam, you will recall that I specifically said that what I believe in, i.e. Syvia's teachings, require some faith. Therefore I'm not posting here to "prove" it in any way. I have stated that reincarnation, the central tenet of Sylvia's teachings, is provable, and the proof is available to anyone who wants to find it. However, I'm not Paul Beckwith, who started this thread to prove AGW theories to doubters. That is, I'm not compelled to prove reincarnation. For anyone wanting to prove it to themselves, do your own research.
The only reason I am posting here at all is because you broadcast your anti-faith pro-science agenda at the bottom of every message you post, and I wrote that it was amusing, to which you took exception. In the ensuing discourse, I have proved that you are a fraud who considers himself open-minded and able to make purely logical judgments free of any bias whatsoever, making those judgments based on fact. Yeah, you and Penn and Teller, you make a great threesome!
And here's one final link for you regarding the drug Ketamine and NDE experiences:
"In this article I will consider more speculative suggestions that the brain can act as a transceiver, converting energy fields beyond the brain into features of the mind, as a television converts waves in the air into sound and vision. Advances in quantum physics suggest that certain drugs, and the conditions which produce NDE's, may 'retune' the brain to provide access to certain fields and 'broadcasts' which are usually inaccessible. This retuning is said to open doors to realms which are always there, rather than actually producing those realms, just as the broadcast of one channel continues when we change channels."
So you see, your vaunted proof that NDE's don't mean anything is itself subject to bias. Who cares if it's biological? If it tunes us into a reality that is beyond this mere physical reality, it doesn't matter how we get there. What you have to prove (in order to prove NDE's don't mean anything) is that the reality that is beyond this reality doesn't really exist.
And as Jerry Seinfeld would say, "Good luck with alllll that!"
I'm pretty certain that the unifying force/power they are missing is not love, and that sounds like string theory(about how everything is united and such) but I'm pretty sure string theory is going to lead to a dead end, Professor Lawrence Krauss has a book out criticizing string theory. Why does everything have to be united? the universe is complicated and chaotic, no reason for unification.
Yes I'd rather believe in something I deem slightly less illogical, then your beliefs(.00000001(GOD) vs .000000000001(your beliefs)). But you don't understand no one would rather believe global warming is happening, it is terrible and is going to cause more and more damage as extreme weather continues, I've seen facts and evidence, and have come to the conclusion that the majority of climatologists observations are correct. But you're right I'd rather have this horrible problem to mankind happen, are you a fool?
Here is an article where a noted skeptic of global warming has changes his mind, Bjorn Lomborg the 3% of climatologists that deny global warming/climate change will continue to dwindle as more and more evidence stacks up against them.
I'm actually sure you did, you talked about how people had NDEs then said word for word exactly what happened two blocks away and this was all documented and recorded and verified but I just have to find it.
Moving on to reincarnation, most religious reincarnations suggest we can be anything not just humans(like trees, insects, other animals, etc...) so is Sylvia Browne's reincarnation just humans or other animals/insects/trees.
I've watched every episode of Penn and Teller:Bullshit, of course I'm aware of Penn Jillette's feelings on AGW(which is odd because he is also a prominent member in the skeptic community). Humans unlike God don't claim to be perfect, even though I have a lot of respect for Penn, he has his flaws, he is acting emotionally on AGW because of how much he hates Al Gore(I'm no fan either). So I don't see how one bad belief not based on scientific evidence but an emotional response has anything to do with their other claims where they have scientists on debunking bullshit basically.
Ed Seedhouse thoroughly refutes your point on dark matter and I'll leave it at that.
Sylvia Browne=bullshit, I'll leave it at that.
anti-religion not anti-faith that is too specific I'm against all religion and everything in religion(faith included),
pro-science yes that sounds accurate.
Why are you so close-minded on your absolute devout beliefs based on Slyvia Browne that you can realize she is a fraud and is making money off of your ignorance. You are a fundamentalist but of some weird side religion/cult based off of Slyvia Browne's garbage. All her claims are bunk due to the fact of the contradicting evidence. If there was none then my claim would be emotional not logical, but there is vast amounts of it. Stop listening to Sylvia Browne's bullshit and try to think logically for yourself, you are basically a slave to her and whatever she spews out is immediate fact for you.
The keyword in that whole paragraph, SPECULATIVE
definitions:
notional: not based on fact or investigation
bad: not financially safe or secure
Speculation is based on guessing or unfounded opinions, so that whole paragraph is unfounded and useless, great quote.
NO NO NO, the burden of proof does not fall on me, you are the one making a claim I am the one rejecting it! absence of evidence=evidence of absence,
You have to prove that there is an afterlife, I'm not making a claim myself that has to be backed up, I'm just saying proof of your claim or shut up about your delusional beliefs. You must prove or at least give proof of an afterlife.
Last edited by Adam Cormier; Wednesday, 1st September, 2010, 01:23 PM.
This thread has gone on so long I have decided to repeat myself.
There was certainly a time when I believed that man-made global warming was true, but now I believe it to be a total lie. When Al Gore put out his movie some time ago, everyone got scared. That is, until the world cooled down for five years. Then Gore and the boys changed "global warming" to "climate change" and continued to perpetrate the hoax.
Years ago, Bush Sr. called those who suggested global warming as fear mongers (today they would be members of al Qaeda). Steven Harper called global warming a socialist plot, and other world leaders made similar sorts of statements ridiculing those who claimed global warming was real.
Then, a couple of years back, in the twinkling of an eye, all of a sudden everyone changed their tunes at the same time and now they all want to carbon tax our backsides off. Hmmmm.
This not only demonstrates that global warming/climate change is bull, but that the politicians of our world are puppets to higher powers that are giving them their orders. Now, of course, I might be too cynical. Maybe there was a mass enlightenment among politicians world wide, an enlightenment which did not affect the rest of us.
Al Gore shouldn't influence your decision on global warming, ignore him focus on what the scientists are saying. Global warming and climate change are basically the same thing, but the reason it was changed to climate change because some people didn't realize that the extreme weather actually goes both ways, extreme cold and extreme heat(depending on the location and weather patterns will be completely interrupted changing climate basically). In Europe there is very few governments against global warming and they are basically unified in finding a solution while we are still arguing whether it exists or not over on the West.
Politicians shouldn't be important when it comes to a scientific debate, because they are politicians!! Al Gore is a moron for making this so political that the real science gets hidden behind layers of garbage and lies from the politicians who are on both sides of the debate.
Last edited by Adam Cormier; Wednesday, 1st September, 2010, 01:25 PM.
Tweet
Comment