Happy New Year!!!

On Sun, 04 Jan 2009 17:50:34 -0500, ASAAR wrote:

On Sun, 04 Jan 2009 14:14:44 -0800, Charlie Groh wrote:

Wrong. Gore may once have profited from tobacco, but it's Bush
and Cheney that were and are still profiting from Global Warming.


...how do you "know" this last? Just curious...

A little birdie (shot with an 80-400mm Nikkor) perched on an
Arbusto had enough Energy to tell me all about it. Have you
forgotten the Bush dynasty's ties with the oil industry and their
Saudi family friends that would routinely visit and sleep over in
Papa and Mama Bush's home? Cheney has oil ties too isn't just a
war profiteer. As Casey Stengel would say, "You could look it up."
Or continue to look the other way if you're not really curious...


....I'm curious enough to question your sources...not simple
"associations" that are circumstantial in nature. You sound like
judge and jury and are an obvious Bush hater. *Could* be he is an
honest person...misguided maybe, but honest.

You see, you don't *know*...

cg

Bill Graham wrote:
If you believe in something strongly enough, as in a religious belief, then
you are likely to put anyone who doesn't agree with you in your kill file. I
have noticed that there exists a new religion on the current scene....It is
called "Global Warming".

No, it's called "denial of global warming".

And, the "Global Warmists" believe in it just as
fervently as do Christians believe in their Christ.

Except that unlike religions, global warming has a lot of objective
evidence to support it.

They will tolerate no
doubt in this belief.

And, like most reigious wackos, you project your own feelings onto
others.

--
Ray Fischer

wrote in message
...
In , on 01/03/2009
at 03:33 PM, "Bill Graham" said:




"Charles" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 01 Jan 2009 14:37:19 -0500, Alan Browne
wrote:


Best Wishes for a Happy New Year to all of you, even those (or
especially those) in my killfile.

Happy Shooting. That's the goal!

I'll be away for a few days, but should be sending in my SI shots on
Sunday afternoon. Hope to see your shots there!

http://www.pbase.com/shootin/bw_redux


Thanks Alan, same to you... too bad you won't see this message!

Strange guy, Mr. Browne ... he once upon a time requested that I put him
in my killfile.

If you believe in something strongly enough, as in a religious belief,
then you are likely to put anyone who doesn't agree with you in your
kill file. I have noticed that there exists a new religion on the
current scene....It is called "Global Warming". And, the "Global
Warmists" believe in it just as fervently as do Christians believe in
their Christ. They will tolerate no doubt in this belief. "There is no
god save Global Warming, and Al Gore is his profit."


Son, the polar ice caps are melting. That means the earth is warming, and
at a rate mankind has never seen.
Never seen, since when? 500 years, 1,000, 5,000 10,000 years?

The entire planet is being changed.
Learn to trust those smarter then you are showing yourself to be here.

Changed for what number of times? Changed for the 2nd?, 3rd, 5th, 10th,
That is the real question.

Ray Fischer wrote:
Bill Graham wrote:
If you believe in something strongly enough, as in a religious
belief, then you are likely to put anyone who doesn't agree with
you
in your kill file. I have noticed that there exists a new religion
on the current scene....It is called "Global Warming".

No, it's called "denial of global warming".

Global warming is the religion, and the simple fact that its adherents
label skeptics as "deniers" tells us that they are not interested in
reasoned discourse.

And, the "Global Warmists" believe in it just as
fervently as do Christians believe in their Christ.

Except that unlike religions, global warming has a lot of objective
evidence to support it.

Many people believe that they have a lot of objective evidence to
support Catholicism, so I guess that it's not a religion either.

They will tolerate no
doubt in this belief.

And, like most reigious wackos, you project your own feelings onto
others.

If you did not insult people who disagreed with you you would be far
more credible.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

"mj" wrote in message
...
The entire planet is being changed.

Changed for what number of times? Changed for the 2nd?, 3rd, 5th, 10th,
That is the real question.

Since it's been in a constant state of change for millions of years, how do
you assign a number?

MrT.

"J. Clarke" wrote in message


[...]

Perhapd the entire planet is _changing_ but that does not mean that it
is _being_ changed. As for "trust those smarter than you are", who
would that be, _you_? Al Gore? A bunch of climatologists who
actually _believe_ what comes out of their computers without any kind
of validation other than that it fits one very short dataset?

You truly have no idea of the research processes or of the extent of the
research. Validation? There are tens of thousands of observational
studies. I'll say that again: *tens of thousands* of observational studies.

People like you are called "deniers" not out of any pseudo-religious
conviction but because you time and time again demonstrate to the world that
your so-called concern for the evidence is nothing of the sort, that you
don't even know what the evidence is and furthermore show no willingness to
find out what it is or listen to those who have. And you do it in
inappropriate places like these newsgroups, presumably because you know even
less about photography.

On Sun, 04 Jan 2009 16:26:53 -0800, Charlie Groh wrote:

...how do you "know" this last? Just curious...

A little birdie (shot with an 80-400mm Nikkor) perched on an
Arbusto had enough Energy to tell me all about it. Have you
forgotten the Bush dynasty's ties with the oil industry and their
Saudi family friends that would routinely visit and sleep over in
Papa and Mama Bush's home? Cheney has oil ties too isn't just a
war profiteer. As Casey Stengel would say, "You could look it up."
Or continue to look the other way if you're not really curious...


...I'm curious enough to question your sources...not simple
"associations" that are circumstantial in nature. You sound like
judge and jury and are an obvious Bush hater. *Could* be he is an
honest person...misguided maybe, but honest.

Obvious Bush hater? That's an odd thing to say about someone that
you know less well than Bush, who you seem to know so little about.
Some people have decided that it's not in their best interests to
know too much about Bush, and you seem to be one of those, despite
suggesting that you are a "curious" kinda guy.

You do seem to be one that would question almost *anything* that
shows Bush as he really is, not how his image makers portray him.
You do realize, don't you that this preppie Yalie, member of their
exclusive, secretive Skull and Bones society, that was born in New
Haven CT and attended the all-boys private Phillips Academy high
school in Andover, Mass. where he was their head cheerleader, only
got his "non-working" Texas ranch (as suggested by Karl Rove) to
create a "good old boy" image, when he entered politics. It sure
would be fun to share a brew with that guy, wouldn't it?

As expected, since he really doesn't care as much for chopping
brush as he pretended, he'll soon be ridding himself of his
fabricated ranch in Midland, Texas. That you think Bush is an
honest person shows that you're pretty ignorant of the real Bush,
and fervently believe the carefully crafted hype.

Misguided for sure, but honest? Find someone that believes that
and you're sure to find someone that probably believes that torture
isn't torture. That Bin Laden conspired with Saddam. That the
scandal tainted Harriet Miers, Bush's close friend and former
personal lawyer was qualified above all others to serve as an
Associate Justice of the Supreme Court until he, "The Decider"
decided that she wasn't. That Bush, who wasn't permitted by his
Secret Service to pilot the jet that flew him to the aircraft
carrier Lincoln, nevertheless hopped out of the cockpit and told the
waiting press "Yes, I flew it, I miss flying, I can tell you that."
That Shrub really, really meant it when he said about any in his
administration involved in the leaking of information about Valerie
Plame to the press, that "I want to know who it is" and that "that
person will be taken care of.". Oops, Bush gets off on this one.
He really did keep his word by taking care of I. Lewis "Scooter"
Libby. But no, Bush would never lie to anyone, honest. And don't
you believe any of the details in his record number of "signing
statements" that might suggest otherwise.

Maybe you should go on the wagon. Too much Kool-Aid isn't good
for your health and mental state.

J. Clarke wrote:
Ray Fischer wrote:
Bill Graham wrote:
If you believe in something strongly enough, as in a religious
belief, then you are likely to put anyone who doesn't agree with
you
in your kill file. I have noticed that there exists a new religion
on the current scene....It is called "Global Warming".

No, it's called "denial of global warming".

Global warming is the religion,

No, idiot, it's the fact, supported by vast amounts of scientific and
observational data from wide variety of scientific disciplines.

and the simple fact that its adherents
label skeptics as "deniers"

Because you are. You deny the most clear facts.

And, the "Global Warmists" believe in it just as
fervently as do Christians believe in their Christ.

Except that unlike religions, global warming has a lot of objective
evidence to support it.

Many people believe

Facts count. Your irrational beliefs do not.

They will tolerate no
doubt in this belief.

And, like most reigious wackos, you project your own feelings onto
others.

If you did not insult people who disagreed with you

Look in the mirror, hypocrite. YOU are the ones who insult people for
not following your bizarre little cult.

--
Ray Fischer

"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
Many people believe that they have a lot of objective evidence to
support Catholicism, so I guess that it's not a religion either.

Only those who don't understand what "objective evidence" is, or prefer to
debate semantics rather than facts.
But then I've never heard a catholic state that it *isn't* a religion
before.

MrT.

On Sun, 04 Jan 2009 21:57:17 -0500, ASAAR wrote:

On Sun, 04 Jan 2009 16:26:53 -0800, Charlie Groh wrote:

...how do you "know" this last? Just curious...

A little birdie (shot with an 80-400mm Nikkor) perched on an
Arbusto had enough Energy to tell me all about it. Have you
forgotten the Bush dynasty's ties with the oil industry and their
Saudi family friends that would routinely visit and sleep over in
Papa and Mama Bush's home? Cheney has oil ties too isn't just a
war profiteer. As Casey Stengel would say, "You could look it up."
Or continue to look the other way if you're not really curious...


...I'm curious enough to question your sources...not simple
"associations" that are circumstantial in nature. You sound like
judge and jury and are an obvious Bush hater. *Could* be he is an
honest person...misguided maybe, but honest.

Obvious Bush hater? That's an odd thing to say about someone that
you know less well than Bush, who you seem to know so little about.
Some people have decided that it's not in their best interests to
know too much about Bush, and you seem to be one of those, despite
suggesting that you are a "curious" kinda guy.

You do seem to be one that would question almost *anything* that
shows Bush as he really is, not how his image makers portray him.
You do realize, don't you that this preppie Yalie, member of their
exclusive, secretive Skull and Bones society, that was born in New
Haven CT and attended the all-boys private Phillips Academy high
school in Andover, Mass. where he was their head cheerleader, only
got his "non-working" Texas ranch (as suggested by Karl Rove) to
create a "good old boy" image, when he entered politics. It sure
would be fun to share a brew with that guy, wouldn't it?

As expected, since he really doesn't care as much for chopping
brush as he pretended, he'll soon be ridding himself of his
fabricated ranch in Midland, Texas. That you think Bush is an
honest person shows that you're pretty ignorant of the real Bush,
and fervently believe the carefully crafted hype.

Misguided for sure, but honest? Find someone that believes that
and you're sure to find someone that probably believes that torture
isn't torture. That Bin Laden conspired with Saddam. That the
scandal tainted Harriet Miers, Bush's close friend and former
personal lawyer was qualified above all others to serve as an
Associate Justice of the Supreme Court until he, "The Decider"
decided that she wasn't. That Bush, who wasn't permitted by his
Secret Service to pilot the jet that flew him to the aircraft
carrier Lincoln, nevertheless hopped out of the cockpit and told the
waiting press "Yes, I flew it, I miss flying, I can tell you that."
That Shrub really, really meant it when he said about any in his
administration involved in the leaking of information about Valerie
Plame to the press, that "I want to know who it is" and that "that
person will be taken care of.". Oops, Bush gets off on this one.
He really did keep his word by taking care of I. Lewis "Scooter"
Libby. But no, Bush would never lie to anyone, honest. And don't
you believe any of the details in his record number of "signing
statements" that might suggest otherwise.

Maybe you should go on the wagon. Too much Kool-Aid isn't good
for your health and mental state.


....whew. Well, off you go then. I made the remark "Bush hater" and
you go off like some kind of firework...OK, my bad for gleaning that
from your writing, I really wasn't name calling. I still question
your sources, because you never mention any. My degree is in
journalism, so I kind of think that way...I question what I read
because, sir, somebody *wrote it.* It may behoove you to do the same
once in awhile, but maybe not.

For example:
One of your statements, the one concerning President Bush not being
truthful about piloting the S-3B Viking, was, at the very least,
refuted by one of his quoted pilots, Navy Cmdr. John Lussier...

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/...rrier.landing/

....now, do *I* believe the content of that article? Somewhat. Only
because I believe CNN to have high journalistic standards; quoting of
any source MUST be attributed and checked out thoroughly.


And I mix my own KoolAid, thankyouverymuch.

cg