Global Warming and the Evil Republicans

[SimonFletcherRules!]

XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT FLASH XXXXX DECEMBER 7, 1997 23:56 PST XXXXX

GLOBAL WARMING ALERT: GORE BURNS 439,500 LBS OF FUEL TO ATTEND SUMMIT

"The most vulnerable part of the Earth's environment is the very thin layer
of air clinging near to the surface of the planet, that we are now so
carelessly filling with gaseous wastes that we are actually altering the
relationship between the Earth and the Sun - by trapping more solar
radiation under this growing blanket of pollution that envelops the entire
world," Vice President Gore told the U.N. Global Warming conference of 159
nations this morning in Koyto, Japan.

In what was one the most dramatic speeches in recent memory, Gore announced
to world leaders: "Whether we recognize it or not, we are now engaged in an
epic battle to right the balance of our Earth, and the tide of this battle
will turn on when the majority of people in the world become sufficiently
aroused by shared sense of urgent danger to join an all-out effort."

Applause filed the halls of the Kyoto International Conference Center. "We
must achieve a safe overall concentration level for greenhouse gases in the
Earth's atmosphere."

carbondioxidemethanenitrousoxidehydrofluorocarbons perfluorocarbonssulfurhexa
chloride.

The message is serious. So serious in fact, the DRUDGE REPORT has
calculated that Vice President Al Gore is burning more than 439,500 pounds
of fuel, or 65,600 gallons, at a cost of more than $131,000 on his 16,000
mile daytrip, just to deliver the warning.

Now that's commitment.

Air Force II's Global Warming Express features an itinerary that takes the
vice president from Washington to Florida to Washington to Alaska to Japan
and back -- all in just 72-hours.

Saturday, December 6, 1997

9:45 a.m. Air Force II departs Andrews AFB enroute Fort Myers, Fla.

12:05 p.m. Air Force II arrives Southwest Florida Regional Airport. Gate 69-A.

2 p.m. Vice President Gore addresses the 50th Anniversary/Rededication,
Everglades Municipal Airport, Everglades National Park.

6:40 p.m. Air Force II departs Florida en route AFB.

8:35 p.m. Air Force II arrives at Andrews Air Force Base.

9:45 p.m. -- Air Force II departs Andrews Air Force Base en route Elmendorf
Air Force Base

Sunday, Dec. 7

1:15 a.m. -- Air Force II arrives Elmendorf Air Force Base, Anchorage, Alaska

2:45 a.m. -- Air Force II departs Elmendorf Air Force Base en route Osaka, Japan

Monday, Dec. 8

5 a.m. -- Air Force II arrives Osaka International Airport, Osaka Japan


11:15 p.m. -- Air Force II departs Osaka, Japan en route Elmendorf Air Force
Base

12:35 p.m. -- Air Force II arrives Elmendorf Air Force Base, Anchorage, Alaska

2:05 p.m. -- Air Force II departs Elmendorf Air Force Base en route Andrews
Air Force Base

Tuesday, Dec. 9

12:45 a.m. -- Air Force II arrives Andrews Air Force Base

----

"The extra heat which cannot escape is beginning to change the global
patterns of climate to which we are accustomed. Our fundamental challenge
now is to find out whether and how we can change the behaviors that are
causing the problem."

Gore's plane, a Boeing 707 gas guzzler burns on average 4.1 gallons a mile.
The complete Washington to Florida to Washington to Alaska to Japan and
return to Washington trip calculated from commercial air mileage tables is
just over 16,000 miles total. Gas gallons needed for AIR FORCE II to go
16,000 miles: 65,600. Applying the average price of $2.01 per gallon of
Jet A to the 16,000 mile r/t -- the fuel cost alone passes $131,000.00.
There are 6.7 pounds per gallon of jet fuel. Total pounds of fuel burned on
Gore's Global Warming Express -- 439,500.

Unprecedented Leadership.

[W*GS]

This is from 1997.

Old news.

[SimonFletcherRules!]

some people need to be reminded about the hypocrites.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

This is from 1997.

Old news.
Uh, you're a little too kind to someone that doesn't even read what he's posting.

[bendog]

not all water under the dam, though (bad pun intended)

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20050825/pl_afp/unreformuschanges_050825132440

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Now, for something a little more current regarding government policies on the environment.............

-------------------------------------------------------------
9 States in Plan to Cut Emissions by Power Plants
By ANTHONY DePALMA
Published: August 24, 2005

Officials in New York and eight other Northeastern states have come to a preliminary agreement to freeze power plant emissions at their current levels and then reduce them by 10 percent by 2020, according to a confidential draft proposal.
The cooperative action, the first of its kind in the nation, came after the Bush administration decided not to regulate the greenhouse gases that contribute to global warming. Once a final agreement is reached, the legislatures of the nine states will have to enact it, which is considered likely.

Enforcement of emission controls could potentially result in higher energy prices in the nine states, which officials hope can be offset by subsidies and support for the development of new technology that would be paid for with the proceeds from the sale of emission allowances to the utility companies.

The regional initiative would set up a market-driven system to control emissions of carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas, from more than 600 electric generators in the nine states. Environmentalists who support a federal law to control greenhouse gases believe that the model established by the Northeastern states will be followed by other states, resulting in pressure that could eventually lead to the enactment of a national law.

California, Washington and Oregon are in the early stages of exploring a regional agreement similar to the Northeastern plan. The nine states in the Northeastern agreement are Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island and Vermont. They were brought together in 2003 by a Republican governor, George E. Pataki of New York, who broke sharply and openly with the Bush administration over the handling of greenhouse gases and Washington's refusal to join more than 150 countries in signing the Kyoto Protocols, the agreement to reduce emissions that went into effect earlier this year.

Mr. Pataki, who may be considering a run for the Republican nomination for president, has refrained from criticizing President Bush directly, but he has repeatedly said that the states need to act on their own even if the Bush administration has not made the issue a priority.

(CONTINUED)
http://tinyurl.com/a4lrc

[Rohirrim]

AND, just think, when Gore was giving those speeches, he was expelling carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Hypocrite!

[Montaq]

some people need to be reminded about the hypocrites.

Thanks, I won't vote for Gore in 2008 now.

[Montaq]

This just in - Democrat bombs Hiroshima!! hypocrites!

[Rohirrim]

This just in - Clinton launches missiles at OBL in an attempt to assasinate him!

This action has been described as... 1. Not enough (the wimp). 2. Illegal (we don't assasinate foreign leaders) 3. Wag the dog 4. A cover-up

[Spider]

Hilarious!

[Rigs11]

This just in.... Simon Fletcher no longer plays football.

[BroncoInferno]

This just in...Paul Revere Warns Minutemen: "This British are coming! The British are coming!"

[bendog]

http://www.ece.umr.edu/links/power/Energy_Course/energy/potential.html

I also saw an estimate taht wind would only feasably account for 25% by around 2050
http://www.nrel.gov/docs/gen/fy04/34871.pdf#search='wind%20power%20potential%20unite d%20states'

[Rigs11]

Presidential gas bill gets steeper
You think it costs a lot for you to gas up? How about Bush?

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Getting President Bush from here to there consumes an enormous amount of fuel, whether he's aboard Air Force One, riding in a helicopter or on the ground in a heavily armored limousine. The bill gets steeper every day as the White House is rocked by the same energy prices as regular drivers.

Taxpayers still foot the bill.

Air Force One fleet

In the air, Bush most often flies on a Boeing 747-200B laden with, among other things, an anti-missile system. Like gas for cars, fuel costs for the largest plane in the Air Force One fleet have gone up dramatically -- from $3,974 an hour in fiscal 2004 to $6,029 per hour now, according to the Air Force.

John Armbrust, publisher of Jet Fuel Report, said Air Force One is no different from its commercial counterparts in that respect.

"It's an expensive proposition to fly these planes, whether its Air Force One or a regular 747," he said.

Reducing his appearances outside the White House and making other gestures toward fuel conservation could help cut down on costs.

But some suggest that could do more harm for national morale and Bush's image than good for the financial bottom line.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/08/24/bush.gas.guzzlers.ap/index.html

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Simple Simon gets his ass handed to him - again.

[SimonFletcherRules!]

Simple Simon gets his ass handed to him - again.
stop man you're hurting my internet feelings.

[enjolras]

some people need to be reminded about the hypocrites.

What was he supposed to do.. Swim to Kyoto?

Seriously.. you've managed to drudge up a 8 year old article that was even stupid at the time it was written...

Congratulations.

[Broncoskicka]

Just like the stupid 1's the Dem's r writing on Bush

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

What was he supposed to do.. Swim to Kyoto?

Seriously.. you've managed to drudge up a 8 year old article that was even stupid at the time it was written...

Congratulations.

LOL

^5

[SimonFletcherRules!]

What was he supposed to do.. Swim to Kyoto?

Seriously.. you've managed to drudge up a 8 year old article that was even stupid at the time it was written...

Congratulations.

Hey, you want to fight global warming, you don't contribute to it.
Hypocrisy... the lifeblood of the Demorat.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Hey, you want to fight global warming, you don't contribute to it.
Hypocrisy... the lifeblood of the Demorat.

You are seriously out of your league over here (and probably anywhere else)!
You and errant and mouse kid and broncoskicka are a great representation of the right! What's on the agenda for today, why vice president Lyndon Johnson's cow's in TX were polluting the country back in July of '61?

[Montaq]

Just like the stupid 1's the Dem's r writing on Bush

I'm glad registration was opened back up so we can get great insight like this.

[BroncoInferno]

I'm glad registration was opened back up so we can get great insight like this.

ROFL!

[SimonFletcherRules!]

You are seriously out of your league over here (and probably anywhere else)!
You and errant and mouse kid and broncoskicka are a great representation of the right! What's on the agenda for today, why vice president Lyndon Johnson's cow's in TX were polluting the country back in July of '61?
I'm out of my league because I'm not a hopeless lib like yourself? ::)
I'm here to bring balance to your wacky opinions.
By the way, Lyndon Johnson brought us full speed into the Vietnam conflict.
Little history lesson for you revisionists.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

I'm out of my league because I'm not a hopeless lib like yourself? ::)
I'm here to bring balance to your wacky opinions.
By the way, Lyndon Johnson brought us full speed into the Vietnam conflict.
Little history lesson for you revisionists.
You bring 8 year old Drudge drivel and nothing else. And since you just charged in here bull-headed without learning a little something about who's here and their points of view, you bring a great deal of ignorance (evidenced in almost every post of yours).

By the way, being a Vietnam era veteran, I know a little bit about the history of that conflict.

Back to the topic, if you want to discuss global warming, learn how to talk about it. Research it, learn the views of the current administration. Find out what the latest opinions are from scientists who spend their careers researching it.
Starting a thread about global warming and using a former vice president's 10 year old plane travel as your talking point renders any point you might have had as ignorant and ridiculous. :hitself:

That's why you were handed your arse in this thread.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

You bring 8 year old Drudge drivel and nothing else. And since you just charged in here bull-headed without learning a little something about who's here and their points of view, you bring a great deal of ignorance (evidenced in almost every post of yours).

By the way, being a Vietnam era veteran, I know a little bit about the history of that conflict.

Back to the topic, if you want to discuss global warming, learn how to talk about it. Research it, learn the views of the current administration. Find out what the latest opinions are from scientists who spend their careers researching it.
Starting a thread about global warming and using a former vice president's 10 year old plane travel as your talking point renders any point you might have had as ignorant and ridiculous. :hitself:

That's why you were handed your arse in this thread.

Hammer, nail, head.

^5

[Spider]

I'm glad registration was opened back up so we can get great insight like this.
Hilarious! ....

[Spider]

I'm out of my league because I'm not a hopeless lib like yourself? ::)
I'm here to bring balance to your wacky opinions.
By the way, Lyndon Johnson brought us full speed into the Vietnam conflict.
Little history lesson for you revisionists.
LOL a member of the 101st fighting keyboard squadren telling a Nam vet about the Nam war ...... Hilarious!

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

LOL a member of the 101st fighting keyboard squadren telling a Nam vet about the Nam war ...... Hilarious!

That's Simple Simon and his ilk for you.

[SimonFletcherRules!]

By the way, being a Vietnam era veteran, I know a little bit about the history of that conflict.



Which is why you won't deny that it was the dems who started vietnam, yet nixon seems to get most of the flak for the conflict.
By the way, I admire your service to your country.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Which is why you won't deny that it was the dems who started vietnam...

Not real big on history, are you?

The U.S. began sending special forces and $216 million in military aid to South Vietnam in 1955 during the Eisenhower/Nixon Administration.

By 1963, JFK had decided to withdraw all of the American advisors from Vietnam - which is, arguably, the main reason he was assassinated.

Then, along came LBJ, who, IMO, was a bigger scumbag than Nixon, and the escalation ensued.

[SimonFletcherRules!]

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD width="70%">FACTS that the hippies hate</TD><TD align=right width="30%">08/18/05 02:55 pm</TD></TR><TR><TD colSpan=2><HR color=#cccccc noShade SIZE=1></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>1. There were 39 combat-related killings in Iraq during the month of January. In the fair city of Detroit there were 35 murders in the month of January. That’s just one American city, about as deadly as the entire war-torn country of Iraq.

2. When some claim President Bush shouldn't have started this war, please remember:
- FDR led us into World War II. Germany never attacked us; Japan did. From 1941-45, 450,000 lives were - lost, an average of 112,500 per year.
- Truman finished that war and started one in Jorea; North Korea never attacked us. From 1950-1953, 55,000 lives were lost, an average of 18,334 per year.
- John F. Kennedy started the Vietnam conflict in 1962; Vietnam never attacked us.
- Johnson turned Vietnam into a quagmire. From 1965-1975, 58,000 lives were lost, an average of 5,800 per year.
- Clinton went to war in Bosnia without UN or French consent; Bosnia never attacked us. Je was offered Osama Bin Laden's head on a platter THREE times by Sudan and did nothing. Osama has attacked us multiple occasions.
3. In the two years since terrorists attacked us, President Bush has liberated two countries, crushed the taliban, crippled al-quaida, put nuclear inspectors in Libya, Iran & North Korea without firing a shot, and captureda terrosist/dictator who slaughtered 300,000 of his own people.

The democrats, extreme left FC's own screeching hippies are complaining about how long the war is taking, but it took less time to take Iraq than it took Janet Reno to take the Branch Davidian compound at Waco. That was a 51 day operation.
We've been looking for WMDs and chemical weapons for less time than it took Hillary Clinton to find the Rose Law Firm billing records.
But please, continue screeching…don't let the facts get in your way.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD width="70%">FACTS that the hippies hate</TD><TD align=right width="30%">08/18/05 02:55 pm</TD></TR><TR><TD colSpan=2><HR color=#cccccc noShade SIZE=1></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>1. There were 39 combat-related killings in Iraq during the month of January. In the fair city of Detroit there were 35 murders in the month of January. That’s just one American city, about as deadly as the entire war-torn country of Iraq.

2. When some claim President Bush shouldn't have started this war, please remember:
- FDR led us into World War II. Germany never attacked us; Japan did. From 1941-45, 450,000 lives were - lost, an average of 112,500 per year.
- Truman finished that war and started one in Jorea; North Korea never attacked us. From 1950-1953, 55,000 lives were lost, an average of 18,334 per year.
- John F. Kennedy started the Vietnam conflict in 1962; Vietnam never attacked us.
- Johnson turned Vietnam into a quagmire. From 1965-1975, 58,000 lives were lost, an average of 5,800 per year.
- Clinton went to war in Bosnia without UN or French consent; Bosnia never attacked us. Je was offered Osama Bin Laden's head on a platter THREE times by Sudan and did nothing. Osama has attacked us multiple occasions.
3. In the two years since terrorists attacked us, President Bush has liberated two countries, crushed the taliban, crippled al-quaida, put nuclear inspectors in Libya, Iran & North Korea without firing a shot, and captureda terrosist/dictator who slaughtered 300,000 of his own people.

The democrats, extreme left FC's own screeching hippies are complaining about how long the war is taking, but it took less time to take Iraq than it took Janet Reno to take the Branch Davidian compound at Waco. That was a 51 day operation.
We've been looking for WMDs and chemical weapons for less time than it took Hillary Clinton to find the Rose Law Firm billing records.
But please, continue screeching…don't let the facts get in your way.


Old newsmax sh*t that is completely outdated and has been completely rebuked long ago.

Haven't you learned anything yet?

[SimonFletcherRules!]

I dare you to rebuke the facts.

[Montaq]

I dare you to rebuke the facts.

There are 1 million people who live in Detroit compared to 135,000 troops in Iraq.

[TheDave]

I dare you to rebuke the facts.

I dare you to stay on topic...

[Bronco_Beerslug]

I dare you to rebuke the facts.
Here 's one you can't figure out. You started an outdated thread about global warming and then posted some outdated drivel about how many people died in Detroit 2 years ago.

Man I'll be glad when school starts again!

[W*GS]

Raising the Ante on the Climate Debate

Almost alone in the world of science, there is a substantial U.S. effort to
discredit some basic conclusions in the global warming debate. There are
always legitimate reasons to query scientific conclusions, but the tenor of
the debate has taken on a flavor of its own. Since the epicenter of the
dispute is in Washington, D. C., the suspicion arises that not all of the
discussion is business-as-usual scientific disagreement.

The most recent example of the heightening level of the dispute involves a 23
June 2005 letter from U.S. Rep. Joe Barton (R-Tex.), chair of the House
Committee on Energy and Commerce, to Michael Mann (University of Virginia) and
his collaborators, Raymond Bradley (University of Massachusetts) and Malcolm
Hughes (University of Arizona). The dispute centers on the much discussed
"hockey stick" reconstruction of Mann et al. [1998, 1999]. In those
reconstructions, the twentieth century warming stands well above Northern
Hemisphere temperature fluctuations of the last 1000 years. Other
investigators, using some of the same data but with different approaches, have
also reconstructed temperatures of the last millennium (see Mann et al. [2003]
for a summary discussion). In general, there is more agreement than
disagreement among the various reconstructions. The differences stem mainly
from the scaling of the oscillations, but in all cases the late twentieth
century is anomalous in a millennial context.

The discussions on the hockey stick would require many pages to describe in
detail, but an apparent trigger for the 23 June development goes back to a
request about three years ago by a Canadian investigator, Steven McIntyre, for
all the files, data sets, algorithms, and source codes that went into the Mann
et al. reconstruction. McIntyre is a semi-retired mineral trader with an
interest in mathematics, and he wanted to test some of the results of the Mann
et al. studies. Although the data were already available on a public FTP (file
transfer protocol) computer site, Mann provided them in a different format, as
requested by McIntyre. The algorithm was described in the original 1998 Nature
paper, but an expanded version was added in 2004 on "Nature" supplementary Web
site. The source code was not provided because it is considered an intellectual
property right.

McIntyre continues to press for more information. Not all of this information
was provided, in part because of the sheer level of work required. Because I
had also produced a millennial climate reconstruction [Crowley and Lowery,
2000], I too was a recipient of a request from McIntyre. I can attest that his
initial message was of a somewhat peremptory character, requesting all my
files, programs, and documentation, and that a quick followup by him had a more
threatening tone, implying that the director of the U.S. National Science
Foundation (NSF) would be contacted if I did not comply. Even after I belatedly
supplied some data, McIntyre sent a number of follow-up requests asking for
more details on my data and analysis. These requests may have been
well-intentioned, but at some point I declined to answer any more, because I
was just too busy to stop and respond to the repeated questions and requests.

McIntyre and his co-author, Ross McKitrick, an economist at the University of
Guelph, Ontario, Canada, subsequently published a rebuttal paper [McIntyre and
McKitrick, 2003] without showing Mann, the provider of the data, a
prepublication Acourtesy@ examination to screen for any possible errors. The
McIntyre and McKitrick paper (referred to here as "MM") showed an unexpectedly
large warming in the 1400s, apparently calling into question Mann's analysis
and the uniqueness of the late twentieth century warming. However, the
consensus among climate scientists most familiar with the data is that the MM
warming in the 1400s is due to an error in the MM analysis method; it can also
not be supported by an examination of the data.

The debate continues. The most recent development appears to have resulted from
someone requesting a favor from Rep. Barton, for the content of the Barton
letter covers not only ongoing issues between McIntyre and Mann, but also a
level of detail that seems to go well beyond that. Two examples from the Barton
letter to Mann, his colleagues, NSF Director Arden Bement, Jr., and IPCC
(Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) Chairman Rajendra Pachauri
illustrate the magnitude of the requests.

Your curriculum vitae, including, but not limited to, a list of all studies
relating to climate change research for which you were an author or co-auth
or
and the source of funding for those studies. Provide the location of all da
ta
archives relating to each published study for which you were an author or
co-author and indicate: (a) whether this information contains all the speci
fic
data you used and calculations you performed, including such supporting
documentation as computer source code, validation information, and other
ancillary information, necessary for full evaluation and application of the
data, particularly for another party to replicate your research results; (b
)
when this information was available to researchers; (c) where and when you
first
identified the location of this information; (d) what modifications, if
any, you have made to this information since publication of the respective
study; and (e) if necessary information is not fully available, provide a
detailed narrative description of the steps somebody must take to acquire t
he
necessary information to replicate your study results or assess the quality
of
the proxy data you used.

The letters are available online at

http://energycommerce.house.gov/108/Letters/06232005_1570.htm.

Rep. Barton displayed a remarkable grasp of some details of climate statistics
when, he further requested whether Mann "calculate[d] the [sic] R2 [i.e., r 2]
statistic for the temperature reconstruction, particularly for the 15th Century
proxy record calculations and what were the results?" and "what validation
statistics did [Mann] calculate for the reconstruction prior to 1820?" These
are virtually verbatim statements from McIntyre's earlier critiques that had
been posted on his own Web site.

At some point, one must ask why should a member of the U.S. Congress get
involved in this matter which may have been raised by a Canadian? I believe the
purpose is twofold: (1) to send a signal of intimidation to researchers who
produce results that are not consistent with some political preferences; and
(2) to continue to dwell on the hockey stick "hot button" by raising questions
and fomenting uncertainty, with the aim to discredit greenhouse science so
skeptics in government and their supporters can continue to claim that there
are too many uncertainties to proceed with any action to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions. U.S. Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) has also focused on the Mann et
al. reconstruction as a way of delegitimizing the conclusions of the IPCC. The
presumed logic is that if the Mann et al. reconstruction can be proved fl awed,
then so too is the general report of the IPCC that highlights the Mann et
al. record. Of course, such "logic" -- basically, guilt by association --
conveniently ignores the manifold evidence for global warming summarized in the
IPCC report, the fact that the IPCC report represents a broad-based consensus
not dependent on any one author, and that the final report was approved not
only by scientists, but also by political representatives of the countries that
signed the report.

The broader scientific community should be aware of these developments, because
the politicizing of data/file requests could easily be expanded to other areas
where science intersects and confl icts with the interests of some political
groups. For example, requests could be made to paleontologists and molecular
biologists for all data and files supporting evolution. Likewise, radiochemists
could be entrained into pseudo-scientific debate because of all the massive and
magnificent geochronological data that have been gathered over the last few
decades.

Hopefully, these extrapolations will not happen and the Barton request will be
an anomaly. However, this development does warrant attention, as it seems to be
consistent with the tenor of the day. Scientists and the public need to be
aware of, and resist, any attempt to intimidate scientists who produce results
not consistent with the position of the political party presently in power.

Disclaimer
The statements in this Forum represent my own views and understanding of the
situation. Time invested in the Forum was not supported by funds from any
government agency. Although I am friends with Michael Mann, Raymond Bradley,
and Malcolm Hughes, I have not been involved with any of their interactions and
correspondence with Steven McIntyre.

References

Crowley, T. J., and T. L. Lowery (2000), How warm was the Medieval Warm Period?
Ambio, 29, 51,054.

Mann, M. E., R. S. Bradley, and M. K. Hughes (1999), Northern hemisphere
temperatures during the last millennium: Inferences, uncertainties, and
limitations. Geophys. Res. Lett., 26, 759-762.

Mann, M. E., R. S. Bradley, and M. K. Hughes (1998), Global scale temperature
patterns and climate forcings over the past six centuries, Nature, 392,
779-787.

Mann, M. E., et al. (2003), On past temperatures and anomalous late 20th
century warmth, Eos, 84(27), 256-258.

McInytre, S., and R. McKitrick (2003), Corrections to the Mann et al. 1998
proxy data base and northern hemisphere average temperature series, Energy and
Environment, 14, 751-771.

--THOMAS J. CROWLEY, Nicholas School of the Environment, Duke University,
Durham, N. C

[SimonFletcherRules!]

There are 1 million people who live in Detroit compared to 135,000 troops in Iraq.
and that proves what? You have to include the Arabs, dumbass.
Try again

[Montaq]

and that proves what? You have to include the Arabs, dumbass.
Try again

Ok douchebag. How many Iraqis were killed in January? We had 39 Americans and how many Iraqis? You gotta count everything.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Man I'll be glad when school starts again!

LOL

It will be time for Simple Simon to hop back on the short bus.

[W*GS]

Gee, I go to the bother of showing how at least one GOP member is indeed attempting to greatly politicize the ACC debate, and you guys wanna keep arguing about the Iraq war.

Thanks.

[elsid13]

Gee, I go to the bother of showing how at least one GOP member is indeed attempting to greatly politicize the ACC debate, and you guys wanna keep arguing about the Iraq war.

Thanks.


W*GS Thanks for the article. One of the problems I have with some of the current members of the Republican party is their attempt to undercut science with thier belief systems. See the debates in Kansas or on stem cells. Yes, the Democrats do it to but not same degree. That may be because of current majority that Republican currently enjoy.

Science and politics don't mix well......

[Montaq]

Ok douchebag. How many Iraqis were killed in January? We had 39 Americans and how many Iraqis? You gotta count everything.

No answer, Simon?

[SimonFletcherRules!]

1. There were 39 combat-related killings in Iraq during the month of January. In the fair city of Detroit there were 35 murders in the month of January. That’s just one American city, about as deadly as the entire war-torn country of Iraq.

A million people live in Detroit.
How many people live in Iraq? Talking about PEOPLE here not troops.

Iraq is often compared to Vietnam by nutcases around the country.


The Vietnam War cost the United States 58000 lives and 350000 casualties. It also
resulted in between one and two million Vietnamese deaths.

There have been 2,068 coalition troop deaths, 1,876 Americans, 93 Britons, 13 Bulgarians, one Dane, two Dutch, two Estonians, one Hungarian, 26 Italians, one Kazakh, one Latvian, 17 Poles, one Salvadoran, three Slovaks, 11 Spaniards, two Thai and 18 Ukrainians in the war in Iraq as of August 30, 2005. (Graphical breakdown of casualties (javascript:CNN_openPopup('/interactive/world/0401/chart.iraq.fatalities/frameset.exclude.html','620x430','toolbar=no,locat ion=no,directories=no,status=no,menubar=no,scrollb ars=no,resizable=no,width=620,height=430'))). The list below is the names of the soldiers, Marines, airmen, sailors and Coast Guardsmen whose families have been notified of their deaths by each country's government. At least 14,120 U.S. troops have been wounded in action, according to the Pentagon.

Absolutely NO CPMPARISON. Next?

[Montaq]

1. There were 39 combat-related killings in Iraq during the month of January. In the fair city of Detroit there were 35 murders in the month of January. That’s just one American city, about as deadly as the entire war-torn country of Iraq.

A million people live in Detroit.
How many people live in Iraq? Talking about PEOPLE here not troops.

Iraq is often compared to Vietnam by nutcases around the country.


The Vietnam War cost the United States 58000 lives and 350000 casualties. It also
resulted in between one and two million Vietnamese deaths.

There have been 2,068 coalition troop deaths, 1,876 Americans, 93 Britons, 13 Bulgarians, one Dane, two Dutch, two Estonians, one Hungarian, 26 Italians, one Kazakh, one Latvian, 17 Poles, one Salvadoran, three Slovaks, 11 Spaniards, two Thai and 18 Ukrainians in the war in Iraq as of August 30, 2005. (Graphical breakdown of casualties (javascript:CNN_openPopup('/interactive/world/0401/chart.iraq.fatalities/frameset.exclude.html','620x430','toolbar=no,locat ion=no,directories=no,status=no,menubar=no,scrollb ars=no,resizable=no,width=620,height=430'))). The list below is the names of the soldiers, Marines, airmen, sailors and Coast Guardsmen whose families have been notified of their deaths by each country's government. At least 14,120 U.S. troops have been wounded in action, according to the Pentagon.

Absolutely NO CPMPARISON. Next?

But in this instance, the nutcase, compared Iraq to Detroit.

How many Iraqis died in January?

[SimonFletcherRules!]

In case your handicapped brain couldn't quite wrap around the Detroit thing, he was saying that we lose more Americans in Detroit than in Iraq. Just a little of what they call PERSPECTIVE. PER SPEC TIVE. Look it up son.
Iraqi deaths are necessary, and innocent casualties are a part of any war. It doesn't help that the suicidal bombers kill their own brethren and hide in Churches and hospitals.
This is the vermin we are fighting, so excessive civilian deaths are directly their fault.
They won't stand up and fight like men, so they blend in to the population and get them killed in the process. Quite honorable, don't ya think?

[Montaq]

In case your handicapped brain couldn't quite wrap around the Detroit thing, he was saying that we lose more Americans in Detroit than in Iraq. Just a little of what they call PERSPECTIVE. PER SPEC TIVE. Look it up son.
Iraqi deaths are necessary, and innocent casualties are a part of any war. It doesn't help that the suicidal bombers kill their own brethren and hide in Churches and hospitals.
This is the vermin we are fighting, so excessive civilian deaths are directly their fault.
They won't stand up and fight like men, so they blend in to the population and get them killed in the process. Quite honorable, don't ya think?

And I'm saying we have 10 times more Americans in Detroit then we do in Iraq. That's the perspective in your idiotic post. You were the one who said you had to count the muslims.

[SimonFletcherRules!]

Detroit is just one city. Iraq is a whole country. again PER SPEC TIVE say it with me.
and of course you have to count the muslims. You turned it into counting the dead Iraqis.

[Montaq]

Detroit is just one city. Iraq is a whole country. again PER SPEC TIVE say it with me.

Exactly. Detroit is a city with 1,000,000 Americans and Iraq is a country with 130,000 Americans.

[SimonFletcherRules!]

In the Detroit case you must count Americans as potential enemies, because Americans are the ones killing Americans.
In Iraq's case, you must count the Iraqis as potential enemies, because Iraqis, not to mention countless terrorists flocking in from Iran and Syria, are the ones killing Americans.
Again, PER SPEC TIVE

[Montaq]

In the Detroit case you must count Americans as potential enemies, because Americans are the ones killing Americans.
In Iraq's case, you must count the Iraqis as potential enemies, because Iraqis, not to mention countless terrorists flocking in from Iran and Syria, are the ones killing Americans.
Again, PER SPEC TIVE

So everyone in Iraq is our enemy? We're there to liberate our enemy?

[SimonFletcherRules!]

open your ears. I said potential enemies.

[Spider]

So everyone in Iraq is our enemy? We're there to liberate our enemy?
I was talking to a Soldier in El Paso , I think he said he was a hat jack or somthing like that ...... told him what I thought of Bush, He agreed with me , then he told me guess why it is taking so long to train Iraqi Troops .... HE said , they call south half of Iraq , Iran2 , and Training most of the young men in Southern Iraq will be Training Iranian troops .....
He said , no one over there pays attention to Cindy Sheehan , he said , they are too damn Busy trying to survive .........
To those that support the war you realize you support movment untill contact ..... Real screwed up shít there .......
Then I told him about the 101st fighting Keyboard squadren .... We both had a good laugh .... though he doesnt blame people for supporting the war , they dont know half of what goes on ... Most over there blame Rumsfield .....
Either way , alot of those that support the war , have very little idea what they are supporting .......

[Montaq]

open your ears. I said potential enemies.

You're an idiot.

Since Iraq is so safe, how about this. I'll spend a weekend in Detroit without military or police protection and you go and do the same in Iraq. When we're done we'll compare notes.

[SimonFletcherRules!]

it's' unlikely you will die, but the same general number of people will.
arguing this with you is like arguing with a 12 year old deaf invalid.
Nurse! please change this guy's diaper!

[Montaq]

it's' unlikely you will die, but the same general number of people will.
arguing this with you is like arguing with a 12 year old deaf invalid.
Nurse! please change this guy's diaper!

So, your point is invalid.

[TheDave]

In case your handicapped brain couldn't quite wrap around the Detroit thing, he was saying that we lose more Americans in Detroit than in Iraq. Just a little of what they call PERSPECTIVE. PER SPEC TIVE. Look it up son.


Actually i think analogy is the word you are looking for ...

a·nal·o·gy
An analogy is a comparison between two different things, in order to highlight some form of similarity.

Yep it was an attempt to compare 2 different things... A Bad analogy, which has helped lead the author and yourself to a skewed perspective...


Carry on...

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Actually i think analogy is the word you are looking for ...

a·nal·o·gy
An analogy is a comparison between two different things, in order to highlight some form of similarity.

Yep it was an attempt to compare 2 different things... A Bad analogy, which has helped lead the author and yourself to a skewed perspective...


Carry on...

Aw, c'mon Dave - don't confuse Simple Simon in his efforts to "catapult the propaganda."

;)