oldweesie

oldweesie

40p

28 comments posted · 0 followers · following 0

13 weeks ago @ Big Government - Pew Poll: Americans Ov... · 0 replies · +1 points

"Environmentalists are largely only powerful when you acknowledge them."

EXACTLY!!!

13 weeks ago @ Big Government - Pew Poll: Americans Ov... · 0 replies · +1 points

Never take at face value the reports from the MSM. I suspect this incident, along with others too numerous to mention, was orchestrated by Mullahs, perhaps with money from Saudi Arabia. Poor country. Poor people. Only to happy to jump at the opportunity to earn some cash by showing up for a rent-a-riot. Extra awards handed out to whomever can deliver the bodies of American soldiers.

13 weeks ago @ Big Government - Pew Poll: Americans Ov... · 0 replies · +1 points

"We need to stop trying to civilize war"

Hear! Hear!

13 weeks ago @ Big Government - Pew Poll: Americans Ov... · 0 replies · +1 points

Dire consequences, huh. Like when your balls freeze off and there's no food on your table because fossil fuels have been banned (meaning we can neither grow it nor import it) and a deep freeze has settled over the continent?

13 weeks ago @ Big Government - Pew Poll: Americans Ov... · 0 replies · +1 points

Riiiiight.

I was working on an "Indian" reserve when the word "Indian" first gained it's "pejorative" reputation. Several other words have since come into and out of fashion: "Native", "Indigenous", and finally "First Nation".

The notion of "nationhood" only gained ground after the word "nation" was discovered (in the mid-1970s) to be in the Royal Proclamation of 1763, wherein it was used to refer to the Indians that the Brits had some sort of unwritten mutual defense pact with to be used when the King wanted to whip those pesky New England colonials into line. The vast majority of Indians, at the time (mid-1970s), had never heard of the Royal Proclamation and had up to that point been quite content to refer to themselves as tribes.

Of course, the fact that the word "tribe" was also used in the Proclamation has been keep carefully hidden as it was inconvenient and not useful. As a consequence, today we have the absurdity of a community of only 30, or 130, people being referred to as a "Nation", which only goes to show that the so-called "First Nations" that live in those communities have no idea what the word means.

As a consequence, the word "Nation" has been rendered not only useless, but pretty much farcical.

And besides that, there are huge parts of what is now Canada that the Royal Proclamation did not cover, so even if you believe the Proclamation holds some sort of relevance today, it's certainly not relevant in large parts of the country.

15 weeks ago @ Big Hollywood - 'An Inconsistent Truth... · 0 replies · +1 points

Yet another consensus. This one is very apt. Remember the time when everyone thought the earth was the centre of the universe? Anyone who uses the "consensus" argument is revealing to his/her audience what a dunce s/he is. Consensus happens in politics, not in science. People who use the "consensus" argument as some sort of proof are really telling that Indian to get back on to the reservation. It's nothing more than a whip used to keep fresh understandings and new research from ever reaching the light of day. Shame on you for being one of those kind of people. And BTW, if that sort of attitude had prevailed in the field of science, I doubt you would be on any sort of antibiotics.

15 weeks ago @ Big Hollywood - 'An Inconsistent Truth... · 0 replies · +2 points

"Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas which is dumped into the atmosphere by humans to the tune of 30 billion tons per year, 100 times the amount from volcanoes."

Betcha they didn't count the 85% of active volcanoes that are at the bottom of the oceans in that.

15 weeks ago @ Big Hollywood - 'An Inconsistent Truth... · 0 replies · +1 points

And the blizzard in Japan, today.
http://tinyurl.com/7tsgyfc

15 weeks ago @ Big Hollywood - 'An Inconsistent Truth... · 0 replies · +1 points

Now, not only are you're contradicting yourself, but you are actually disproving your religion. So concentrations of CO2 were much higher than today in eras that preceded man's use of fossil fuels in the past 150 years. Wait!! How could that be??!! /sarc

Once again, my dear fellow Canuck, while correlation does not prove cause and effect, the rise in global temperatures does release CO2 into the atmosphere, but only about 800 years after the rise in temps.

Another Canuck

15 weeks ago @ Big Hollywood - 'An Inconsistent Truth... · 0 replies · +1 points

What would be the point of that? AGW religiosity doesn't respond to evidence. And besides, there have been numerous comments above that have provided evidence and in the last week or so, there have been numerous articles on the web that disprove your religion. Try selling your theory to the families of the 13 people (as of this morning) who have died in Europe from the cold snap they are having.

I'm waiting now for your "but that's only weather" meme.

Another Canuck