See other Immigration Articles
Title: How much longer will California remain a part of the United States?
Source:
www.dvorak.org
URL Source: http://www.dvorak.org/blog/2010/06/ ... n-a-part-of-the-united-states/
Published: Jun 6, 2010
Author: Dvorak
Post Date: 2010-06-06 11:50:16 by Mind_Virus
Keywords: None
Views: 2958
Comments: 283
How much longer will California remain a part of the United States? Published on June 6th, 2010 California’s white population has declined since 2000 at an unprecedented rate, hastening the day when Hispanics will be the state’s largest population group, according to newly released state figures. Analysts said the decline can be attributed to two main causes – a natural population decrease as Baby Boomers enter their later years and die at a faster rate than younger whites have children, and a migration from California since 2001 among whites who sought affordable housing as real estate costs soared. The study also confirmed projections that a steadily growing Hispanic population will surpass whites as the state’s largest racial demographic in 2016. Hispanics are expected to become a majority of all Californians in 2042, Heim said. A University of New Mexico Chicano Studies professor predicts a new, sovereign Hispanic nation within the century, taking in the Southwest and several northern states of Mexico. Truxillo, 47, has said the new country should be brought into being “by any means necessary,” but recently said it was unlikely to be formed by civil war. Instead, its creation will be accomplished by the electoral pressure of the future majority Hispanic population in the region, he said.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-129) not displayed.
.
.
.
#130. To: buckeroo (#129)
Not even once Buck. You cannot be trusted to keep score. We need an objective score keeper........like me. : )
"The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. ... We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of." Edward Bernays, Father of Public Relations
You again and again sidestep the main point which that to anything living above the level of vegetation, CO2 is a poison. More apt descriptions of your "respiratory byproduct" are "waste," and "poison." Look them up if you are unclear of their meanings Yes, good and bad are complementary also. So are health and sickness. You choose the ones that benefit you and minimize those that do not. Prima facie evidence of your own confused, emotional hissy fit. People should not be promoting large scale increases of toxic substances in their environments. And to humans CO2 is toxic. World class weaseling with 50 cent words trying to obfuscate the simple English statement that CO2 is toxic to human beings and even animals. How many times have you repeated your "hissy fit" mantra now while sticking your fingers in your ears and humming loudly to yourself to try to blot out my statement that CO2 is poison? Breathing is not "credible data?" "Hissy fit....hissy fit....hissy fit....hissy fit.....hissy fit.....hissy fit..." "Hissy fit....hissy fit....hissy fit....hissy fit.....hissy fit.....hissy fit..." Hold your breath for 5 short minutes and we'll see how much of a "relevant issue" respiration is, blowhard. Or if you prefer, inhale pure CO2 for the same length of time. Like you've been doing throughout this thread Don't quit your day job.
In the grand scheme of things, everything gets recycled. However for individual life forms there are things they can consume that benefit them, and things they can consume them that don't. Furthermore, plants themselves need oxygen to respirate and intake the energy to photosynthesize. Gas Exchange in Plants The wilful ignorance of the thread hissy fitter in completely disregarding the needs of even plants for oxygen is getting to the level of some sort of emotional psychosis.
Invalid. CO2 is not poison. CO is. Many things are. CO2 is not.
CO is. Many things are. CO2 is not. Wrong. CO is more lethal than CO2 because it binds to oxygen-carrying cells, permanently removing their capacity to carry oxygen, while CO2 simply displaces oxygen and prevents those cells from absorbing O2. In either case you will eventually die if either substance prevents enough oxygen from getting through. WILL EXPOSURE TO CARBON DIOXIDE RESULT IN HARMFUL HEALTH EFFECTS? Exposure to CO2 can produce a variety of health effects. These may include headaches, dizziness, restlessness, a tingling or pins or needles feeling, difficulty breathing, sweating, tiredness,
OH MY! The world is going to come to an end. We are going to breathe to death. AUNTIE EM! AUNTIE EM! IT'S A TWISTER! IT'S A TWISTER! I think I have had about all the fun I can take. Your theatrics and hysterics are only amusing to a point. Sure, sure, CO2 is a toxic gas, so is methane, and hydrogen, and you cannot live in a pure nitrogen atmosphere. Oddly enough you cannot exist permanently in a pure oxygen environment which results in a condition known as hyperoxia i.e., too much oxygen. All of those mentioned gases are present in our atmosphere and all of them, except Nitrogen which is an inert gas, are toxic at some level. Are you dead yet? Keep breathing you'll get there yet. CO2 is strictly speaking not toxic. It simply cannot be utilized by the body which is an "oxygen engine" using oxygen to oxidize and break down compounds as part of normal metabolism. The byproduct of that metabolism is carbon dioxide - CO2, which you breathe out as part of your bodies normal processes. In the presence of an atmosphere too rich in CO2 your lungs cannot eliminate it fast enough and it builds up in the body inhibiting metabolic function and yes eventually you will die - but only if the concentration is too high for too long. Atmospheric concentration of CO2 and O2 have been much higher in periods of the paleoclimate. However, I know this all sounds mundane and placid and since science is not your strong suit and it is ever so much more fun to convulse into hysterics generated by all the creepy horror stories coming out of that fiction factory known as the Climate Research Unit. As has become obvious from our exchanges your position is long on hysterics and short on science. Glowbull Warming resulting from antropogenic CO2 is a drummed up hysteria which has been created to sell a political agenda. It is science alright - the science of mass manipulation through creating a nonexistent problem and then herding the sheep into complying with the salacious desires of the Morlocks i.e., the International Banking Cartel and their Pet Psychiatrists. Glowbull Warming is a PsyOp drummed up to create hysteria and nothing more. You are free to be a sucker if you wish. Your choice, but include me out. "One of the least understood strategies of the world revolution now moving rapidly toward its goal is the use of mind control as a major means of obtaining the consent of the people who will be subjects of the New World Order." K.M. Heaton, The National Educator
Invalid. CO2 is not poison. CO is. Many things are. CO2 is not. Just about anything can become a poison at a high enough dose even oxygen. However, for the normal range of atmospheric CO2 you are correct - it is not a poison. The old aphorism from toxicology that I mentioned earlier in the thread needs to be refreshed: "The dose makes the poison." There are lots of poisons we can die from in high enough concentration. You can drink yourself to death on good single malt Scotch - if you drink enough of it in a short enough period of time. The problem of course is that our "good buddy" "Wrong Way Corrigan" is hyperventilating over a nonexistent problem. Not even under the extreme cooked up examples in the kitchen at the Climate Research Unit did they even attempt to sell the CO2 is toxic schlock. At the levels it occurs normally in the atmosphere, and it has again been in much higher concentrations in the past, it is about as toxic as a tumbler full of milk. WATCH OUT! That milk'll killya'.
"One of the least understood strategies of the world revolution now moving rapidly toward its goal is the use of mind control as a major means of obtaining the consent of the people who will be subjects of the New World Order." K.M. Heaton, The National Educator
AUNTIE EM! AUNTIE EM! IT'S A TWISTER! IT'S A TWISTER! ...All the fun I can take....Your theatrics and hysterics are only amusing to a point. ...Are you dead yet? Keep breathing you'll get there yet. ...I know this all sounds mundane and placid and since science is not your strong suit and it is ever so much more fun to convulse into hysterics generated by all the creepy horror stories coming out of that fiction factory known as the Climate Research Unit....your position is long on hysterics and short on science. Glowbull Warming resulting from antropogenic CO2 is a drummed up hysteria which has been created to sell a political agenda....the science of mass manipulation through creating a nonexistent problem and then herding the sheep into complying with the salacious desires of the Morlocks i.e., the International Banking Cartel and their Pet Psychiatrists. Glowbull Warming is a PsyOp drummed up to create hysteria... You rebut yourslf with your tedious and tendentious exaggerations, warped hyperbole, and invective much more in depth than I could ever bother to. Not only are you missing quite a few chips in your fact and reality processing mechanism, you are also unable to use basic English, and instead twist and conflate definitions to suit your own agenda. On the whole, however, poisons are usually not used for their toxicity, but may be used for their other properties. The property of toxicity itself has limited non-lethal applications: mainly for controlling pests and weeds, cleaning and maintenance, and for preserving building materials and food stuffs. Where possible, specific agents which are less poisonous to humans have come to be preferred, but exceptions such as phosphine continue in use. Most poisonous materials still in use are used for their chemical or physical properties other than being poisonous. Many over- the-counter medications, such as aspirin and Tylenol, are quite toxic if ingested in sufficiently large quantities. pwned
Ain't that the truth!
"With respect to the words general welfare, I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators." People work in greenhouses and submarines quite comfortably with higher concentrations of CO2. I guess the question becomes: If man does very well at higher concentrations and plants do exceptionally well at higher concentrations, where is the problem?
"With respect to the words general welfare, I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators." LOL! AT NO POINT IN THIS EXCHANGE have you adduced, brought forth, substantiated, corroborated, vindicated, nor confirmed the underlying point in contention i.e., antrhopogenic i.e, human caused Glowbull Warming resulting from excess Carbon Dioxide. In fact you have engaged in diversions, theatrics and evasions, all aimed at avoiding the question. I do have to grant you one thing though - chutzpah. After spending multiple posts avoiding the issue and bringing forward irrelevancies and strawmen to avoid it you actually have the nerve to accuse me of your vices. That definitely qualifies as chutzpah. And what is wrong with my use of the vernacular? If you wanted to deal in monosyllables you should have said so. I assumed you understood educated english. My mistake. Please excuse me me I will now use small words so you can know what I am saying. See Spot run. See CRU run. CRU got got lying now they run faster. See Phil run. See Phil Jones resign. Phil got caught lying. Now Phil needs a job. Poor Phil.
"One of the least understood strategies of the world revolution now moving rapidly toward its goal is the use of mind control as a major means of obtaining the consent of the people who will be subjects of the New World Order." K.M. Heaton, The National Educator
In the context of biology, poisons are substances that can cause disturbances to organisms,[1] usually by chemical reaction or other activity on the molecular scale, when a sufficient quantity is absorbed by an organism... According to this definition, oxygen is a poison.
I guess the question becomes: If man does very well at higher concentrations and plants do exceptionally well at higher concentrations, where is the problem? People aren't buying Carbon Credits. That's the problem.
"One of the least understood strategies of the world revolution now moving rapidly toward its goal is the use of mind control as a major means of obtaining the consent of the people who will be subjects of the New World Order." K.M. Heaton, The National Educator
One of the things that AGAviator hasn't address and is unlikely to address is the fact that we have, more than likely, reached IR (infra red) saturation. So if you assume the AGW alarmists are correct, which they aren't, and our current warming is because of CO2 increases, any further increase will have no effect.
"With respect to the words general welfare, I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators." lmao
LOL I guess so. Stops the corrupt from taking our money, that is a shame.
"With respect to the words general welfare, I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators." And we haven't even discussed the poison dihydrogen monoxide. None of us are safe until we ban that!
"With respect to the words general welfare, I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators." lmao We aim to please. "One of the least understood strategies of the world revolution now moving rapidly toward its goal is the use of mind control as a major means of obtaining the consent of the people who will be subjects of the New World Order." K.M. Heaton, The National Educator
My kinda man!
"With respect to the words general welfare, I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators." Interesting - I hadn't thought of that, but it makes sense. The atmosphere has only so much heat holding power, and the surface a relatively fixed albedo. So at some point you do reach maximum heat absorbtion versus reradiation. Much like in my garden - I live in zone 8a and have trouble getting a long enough hot season to grow melons - so I use an infrared absorbing plastic mulch to elevate soil temperature - otherwise I would not get enough heat units to ripen my melons, and I likes my melons.
"One of the least understood strategies of the world revolution now moving rapidly toward its goal is the use of mind control as a major means of obtaining the consent of the people who will be subjects of the New World Order." K.M. Heaton, The National Educator
Yes, absolutely. That Dihydrogen Monoxide is some killer stuff. I'd better watch it I have glass of it here on my desk and some of it is even in crystalline form.
"One of the least understood strategies of the world revolution now moving rapidly toward its goal is the use of mind control as a major means of obtaining the consent of the people who will be subjects of the New World Order." K.M. Heaton, The National Educator
"One of the least understood strategies of the world revolution now moving rapidly toward its goal is the use of mind control as a major means of obtaining the consent of the people who will be subjects of the New World Order." K.M. Heaton, The National Educator
The most dangerous kind. It's been known to sink boats.
"With respect to the words general welfare, I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators." The most dangerous kind. It's been known to sink boats. And some pretty big ones at that.
"One of the least understood strategies of the world revolution now moving rapidly toward its goal is the use of mind control as a major means of obtaining the consent of the people who will be subjects of the New World Order." K.M. Heaton, The National Educator
I guess the question becomes: If man does very well at higher concentrations and plants do exceptionally well at higher concentrations, where is the problem? The first problem is your shameless jumping from "quite comfortably" (your definition) to "does very well" (also your definition). Compared to...what? More oxygen, for instance, shameless liar? But I understand, someone who's invested a lot in a dishonest argument needs to pull something out of somewhere because at this point it's more important to you to twist language than to face basic facts and tell the truth without hyperbole and invective.
Excuse me punk. But in a debate among adults it is customary, perhaps not in your herd but here, to substantiate i.e., back up an argument with a chain of reasoning as opposed to throwing childish temper tantrums and engaging in uncivil ad hominem insults. At NO POINT have you made a point which was salient nor on the line of debate i.e., that fraud known as Glowbull Warming. One thing you have proven though - you are NOT a gentleman.
"One of the least understood strategies of the world revolution now moving rapidly toward its goal is the use of mind control as a major means of obtaining the consent of the people who will be subjects of the New World Order." K.M. Heaton, The National Educator
Do you actually have ANY science to counter ANYTHING I have said? I've talked about actual gas levels in ppmv, infrared absorption, historic CO2 levels and current levels in greenhouses. You have countered none of it. Stop calling names and start spitting out some science or go away!
"With respect to the words general welfare, I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators." biocab.org/Carbon_Dioxide_CO2.ht ml
Excellent link.
"With respect to the words general welfare, I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators." Thank you - a nice, simple, and to the point explanation. That means it will be ignored by our good buddy.
"One of the least understood strategies of the world revolution now moving rapidly toward its goal is the use of mind control as a major means of obtaining the consent of the people who will be subjects of the New World Order." K.M. Heaton, The National Educator
People work in greenhouses and submarines quite comfortably with higher concentrations of CO2. I guess the question becomes: If man does very well at higher concentrations and plants do exceptionally well at higher concentrations, where is the problem? The first problem is your shameless jumping from "quite comfortably" (your definition) to "does very well" (also your definition). Compared to...what? More oxygen, for instance, shameless liar? But I understand, someone who's invested a lot in a dishonest argument needs to pull something out of somewhere because at this point it's more important to you to twist language than to face basic facts and tell the truth without hyperbole and invective. No need to talk like that.
Do you actually have ANY science to counter ANYTHING I have said? I've talked about actual gas levels in ppmv, infrared absorption, historic CO2 levels and current levels in greenhouses. You have countered none of it. Stop calling names and start spitting out some science or go away! I could offer some other options to our "buddy", but I am afraid they are anatomically really not possible.
"One of the least understood strategies of the world revolution now moving rapidly toward its goal is the use of mind control as a major means of obtaining the consent of the people who will be subjects of the New World Order." K.M. Heaton, The National Educator
"With respect to the words general welfare, I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators." "With respect to the words general welfare, I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators." Love it. That reminds me - at one time I worked for a Market Research Firm doing surveys and I happened to call one household in the middle of a domestic debate. The guy who answered the phone, as soon as he figured out it was a survey, turned and I could hear him announce to his wife in acid dripping tones "honey here is someone else that could benefit from your opinion". He must have been wrong because she didn't do the survey.
"One of the least understood strategies of the world revolution now moving rapidly toward its goal is the use of mind control as a major means of obtaining the consent of the people who will be subjects of the New World Order." K.M. Heaton, The National Educator
I have a magnet on my fridge with that one on it.
"One of the least understood strategies of the world revolution now moving rapidly toward its goal is the use of mind control as a major means of obtaining the consent of the people who will be subjects of the New World Order." K.M. Heaton, The National Educator
LOL
"With respect to the words general welfare, I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators." You've repeatedly claimed there's no negative effect from increases of CO2 while totally ignoring the empirical facts that At NO POINT have you made a point which was salient nor on the line of debate i.e., that fraud known as Glowbull Warming. Since you're clearly unable to use standard English terminology, or make an argument without using your own custom-tailored words and invective, there has never been any debate outside your own addled brain. Throughout this thread you've consistently been the one to jump into warped accusations and sexually tinged names.
I'm far more concerned about what I breathe, than what a greenhouse breathes. That's where I will show my science. Science that relates to me, not purporting to justify some bullshit political/social/economic theoty.
You have stated the beginnings of a thesis however, it is a premise in search of support. I see nothing whatsoever to support it, put it in context, or showing how it is relevant. Your argument, such as it is, is an incomplete tautology and logically false. As for my sometimes acerbic tongue it was you not I that degraded first the level of civility. I'm just better at it than you are. Just admit it - you're jealous.
"One of the least understood strategies of the world revolution now moving rapidly toward its goal is the use of mind control as a major means of obtaining the consent of the people who will be subjects of the New World Order." K.M. Heaton, The National Educator
Again no science.
"With respect to the words general welfare, I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators."
Comments (171 - 283) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestBecause I nailed Original_Intent .... EVERYTIME.
#131. To: Original_Intent, buckeroo (#121)
You said: The first piece of actual data you need to look at is that CO2 is a waste product expelled by your lungs, which you then claim to be beneficial
Which is hyperbole completely unresponsive to the point. The point is not what do I prefer to believe or how many hissy fits can I throw - along with throwing up irrelevancies.
All mammals exhale - they take up Oxygen (O2) and exhale Carbon Dioxide (CO2) as a respiratory byproduct of normal metabolism.
All plants take up CO2 and give off O2 as a respiratory byproduct of normal metabolism.
In case you hadn't noticed the two are complementary. Kind of neat how that works eh? That is called science.
Throwing a hissy fit is NOT science. Your argument is so confused and emotional it is hard to tell what point you are trying to make other than you resent people breathing.
Throwing a hissy fit is NOT science. Adhering to a disproved idea is what led the Roman Church to try Galileo for heresy.
I said: "Throwing temper tantrums and holding your breath until you turn blue do not change the data set. If one is actually applying the scientific method ..."
You said: Some projection on your part. I repeat, what rationalization can you possibly come up with justifying consumption of items your body expels as waste? ..Thus throwing forth a tantrum and a point irrelevant to the scientific question of is anthropogenic carbon dioxide either a greenhouse gas or a problem on the global scale?
Needless to say you present nothing supporting your hissy fit, or your "Warmist" position in a factual way.
I have to presume from the complete absence of any credible data
You said: "Data is based on observable facts. Observable facts about waste products is the body gets more healthy when they are expelled, and less healthy when they are consumed. Deal with it."
Of which only the first sentence is relevant to the discussion you are trying to avoid. The rest is purely a hissy fit not very well expressed.
All you are doing is repeating the same tiresome, emotional, and irrelevant point as though repeating an irrelevancy somehow makes it relevant. Yawn.
In something around 5 short paragraphs you managed to totally avoid any of the relevant issues
So, get back to me when you can actually address the issues without throwing a temper tantrum or stamping your little foot.
I think the cow you had just became Roast Beef.
#132. To: James Deffenbach, buckeroo (#125)
Yes, and the plants use the CO2 and in return for it give us OXYGEN. A good trade I think.
In order to carry on photosynthesis, green plants need a supply of carbon dioxide and a means of disposing of oxygen. In order to carry on cellular respiration, plant cells need oxygen and a means of disposing of carbon dioxide (just as animal cells do).
For people, consuming CO2 does not benefit them. That's why people going into intensive care get pure oxygen to increase their survival chances. That's why people undergoing athletic training attempt to incease the circulatory and oxygen-carrying capacity of their bodies.
#133. To: AGAviator, Original_Intent (#131)
my statement that CO2 is poison
“It has been said, 'time heals all wounds.' I do not agree. The wounds remain. In time, the mind, protecting its sanity, covers them with scar tissue and the pain lessens, but it is never gone.” ~ Rose F. Kennedy
#134. To: wudidiz (#133)
(Edited)
CO2 is not poison.
#135. To: AGAviator, farmfriend, James Deffenbach, TwentyTwelve, wudidiz, all (#131)
#136. To: wudidiz, AGAviator, farmfriend (#133)
my statement that CO2 is poison
#137. To: Original_Intent, buckeroo (#135)
OH MY!...We are going to breathe to death.
In the context of biology, poisons are substances that can cause disturbances to organisms,[1] usually by chemical reaction or other activity on the molecular scale, when a sufficient quantity is absorbed by an organism...
#138. To: Original_Intent, AGAviator, James Deffenbach, TwentyTwelve, wudidiz (#135)
As has become obvious from our exchanges your position is long on hysterics and short on science.
James Madison, Letter to James Robertson, April 20, 1831
#139. To: Original_Intent, AGAviator, James Deffenbach, TwentyTwelve, wudidiz, buckeroo (#136)
Just about anything can become a poison at a high enough dose even oxygen. However, for the normal range of atmospheric CO2 you are correct - it is not a poison.
James Madison, Letter to James Robertson, April 20, 1831
#140. To: AGAviator, farmfriend, James Deffenbach, TwentyTwelve, wudidiz, all (#137)
Not only are you missing quite a few chips in your fact and reality processing mechanism, you are also unable to use basic English, and instead twist and conflate definitions to suit your own agenda.
#141. To: AGAviator, Original_Intent, farmfriend (#137)
Poison
“It has been said, 'time heals all wounds.' I do not agree. The wounds remain. In time, the mind, protecting its sanity, covers them with scar tissue and the pain lessens, but it is never gone.” ~ Rose F. Kennedy
#142. To: farmfriend (#139)
People work in greenhouses and submarines quite comfortably with higher concentrations of CO2.
#143. To: Original_Intent, AGAviator, James Deffenbach, TwentyTwelve, wudidiz, buckeroo (#139)
James Madison, Letter to James Robertson, April 20, 1831
#144. To: Original_Intent (#135)
Are you dead yet?
“It has been said, 'time heals all wounds.' I do not agree. The wounds remain. In time, the mind, protecting its sanity, covers them with scar tissue and the pain lessens, but it is never gone.” ~ Rose F. Kennedy
#145. To: Original_Intent (#142)
People aren't buying Carbon Credits. That's the problem.
James Madison, Letter to James Robertson, April 20, 1831
#146. To: Original_Intent, AGAviator, James Deffenbach, TwentyTwelve, wudidiz, buckeroo (#143)
James Madison, Letter to James Robertson, April 20, 1831
#147. To: wudidiz (#144)
Are you dead yet?
#148. To: Original_Intent (#147)
We aim to please.
James Madison, Letter to James Robertson, April 20, 1831
#149. To: farmfriend (#143)
One of the things that AGAviator hasn't address and is unlikely to address is the fact that we have, more than likely, reached IR (infra red) saturation. So if you assume the AGW alarmists are correct, which they aren't, and our current warming is because of CO2 increases, any further increase will have no effect.
#150. To: farmfriend (#146)
And we haven't even discussed the poison dihydrogen monoxide. None of us are safe until we ban that!
#151. To: farmfriend (#148)
#152. To: Original_Intent (#150)
and some of it is even in crystalline form.
James Madison, Letter to James Robertson, April 20, 1831
#153. To: farmfriend (#152)
and some of it is even in crystalline form.
#154. To: farmfriend (#139)
People work in greenhouses and submarines quite comfortably with higher concentrations of CO2.
#155. To: AGAviator (#154)
Compared to...what? More oxygen, for instance, shameless liar?
#156. To: AGAviator (#154)
But I understand, someone who's invested a lot in a dishonest argument needs to pull something out of somewhere because at this point it's more important to you to twist language than to face basic facts and tell the truth without hyperbole and invective.
James Madison, Letter to James Robertson, April 20, 1831
#157. To: AGAviator (#134)
“It has been said, 'time heals all wounds.' I do not agree. The wounds remain. In time, the mind, protecting its sanity, covers them with scar tissue and the pain lessens, but it is never gone.” ~ Rose F. Kennedy
#158. To: wudidiz (#157)
James Madison, Letter to James Robertson, April 20, 1831
#159. To: wudidiz, AGAviator (#157)
#160. To: AGAviator (#154)
“It has been said, 'time heals all wounds.' I do not agree. The wounds remain. In time, the mind, protecting its sanity, covers them with scar tissue and the pain lessens, but it is never gone.” ~ Rose F. Kennedy
#161. To: farmfriend, AGAviator (#156)
But I understand, someone who's invested a lot in a dishonest argument needs to pull something out of somewhere because at this point it's more important to you to twist language than to face basic facts and tell the truth without hyperbole and invective.
#162. To: Original_Intent (#161)
I could offer some other options to our "buddy", but I am afraid they are anatomically really not possible.
James Madison, Letter to James Robertson, April 20, 1831
#163. To: Original_Intent (#161)
James Madison, Letter to James Robertson, April 20, 1831
#164. To: farmfriend (#162)
#165. To: farmfriend (#163)
#166. To: Original_Intent (#164)
I could hear him announce to his wife in acid dripping tones "honey here is someone else that could benefit from your opinion".
James Madison, Letter to James Robertson, April 20, 1831
#167. To: Original_Intent (#155)
(1) Human and animal bodies expel CO2 as waste,
(2) Increasing consumption of toxic waste CO2 makes people and animals increasingly sick, culminating ultimately in death,
(3) Attempting to twist and conflate plain English definitions of the word "poison" which completely agree with my own terminology used here, and
(4) Distracting from these facts by throwing around pet phrases among people equally dishonest and delusional as you. One thing you have proven though - you are NOT a gentleman.
#168. To: farmfriend (#156)
I've talked about actual gas levels in ppmv, infrared absorption, historic CO2 levels and current levels in greenhouses. You have countered none of it
#169. To: AGAviator, farmfriend, wudidiz (#167)
(Edited)
(1) Human and animal bodies expel CO2 as waste,
(2) Increasing consumption of toxic waste CO2 makes people and animals increasingly sick, culminating ultimately in death,
(3) Attempting to twist and conflate plain English definitions of the word "poison" which completely agree with my own terminology used here, and
(4) Distracting from these facts by throwing around pet phrases among people equally dishonest and delusional as you.
#170. To: AGAviator (#168)
I'm far more concerned about what I breathe, than what a greenhouse breathes. That's where I will show my science. Science that relates to me, not purporting to justify some bullshit political/social/economic theoty.
James Madison, Letter to James Robertson, April 20, 1831
.
.
.