Connecting You to Your Community
Lodi, California •

Indexes


November 20th, 2009
November 19th, 2009
November 18th, 2009
November 17th, 2009
November 16th, 2009
November 14th, 2009
November 13th, 2009
ADVERTISEMENT

Global warming myth


Wednesday, August 1, 2007 6:36 AM PDT

Comments (141 comment(s))

I get so tired of reading and hearing how we the people of this Earth, and especially this country of the USA, are causing global warming.

We are not causing warming, nor could we, if we wanted to cause it. The people of this globe are too infinitesimal, as compared to the weather of this world, to make any changes to it on any large scale.

It's solar warming that changes the earth from ice ages to temperate ages and back again. Solar warming goes in cycles, warming and cooling in 15,000 — 20,000 year cycles, unless something catastrophic happens, such as a meteor hitting the earth. In that case, we would have global cooling caused by the dust and/or vapor thrown into the atmosphere from the impact. Some scientists think that's what happened to the dinosaurs.

The global warming hyperbole is nothing more than political activism to get us to change our way of living: don't use gas-guzzling cars, use less electricity, use public transit, etc., etc. The news media loves to jump on the band wagon, since controversy increases audience interest. As an example, from 1895 — 1924, global cooling was the fear of the time. Then in 1924 — 1950, it was global warming that was the big crises. From 1950 — 1979, it was back to global cooling again. Now, from 1979 to present day, it's the big global heating lie and everyone is swallowing it hook, line and sinker.

Don't believe me? Check the headlines of the New York Times during those periods of time.

Orin Waters
Lodi

Reader Feedback

Chuck wrote on Aug 14, 2007 11:02 PM:

" like any of it matters.. we're all doooomed...... run away "

Report Abuse

Jeff wrote on Aug 13, 2007 4:50 PM:

" Old timer: I think it's time to change the sand in your hour glass. "

Report Abuse

See No Evil wrote on Aug 13, 2007 2:49 PM:

" Chuck is a hoax. There is no Chuck. "

Report Abuse

Chuck wrote on Aug 13, 2007 12:20 PM:

" Global Warming is a hoax, now go back to bed, most of society are sheep anyway, will believe in any fashion that is needed... "

Report Abuse

Old Timer wrote on Aug 13, 2007 7:56 AM:

" Back in my day we used to refer to global warming as "summer". "

Report Abuse

Leonard wrote on Aug 12, 2007 9:02 PM:

" Daniel: No one her (or elsewhere) takes your posts on this subject seriously. You have become a joke. If you want to play with the adults, you will have to start acting like an adult. That means engaging in a serious discussion, dealing with the facts and paying some minimal attention to the science. You cannot simply create straw man after straw man and expect people to regard you as an honest participant. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 12, 2007 8:08 PM:

" Leonard: Since you are so confident in what you write, and there have been at least three global warming letters in opposition to your ideas, of which you are so certain, you should write, rather than confine your opinions to the boundaries of the blogs. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 12, 2007 5:43 PM:

" Leonard: I feel nothing but sorrow for you unacceptable behavior. No matter how much you try to offend others, your own inadequacies are obvious. Morover, the more noise you make toward other people, the more sober individuals become increasingly more cautions when they are around you. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 12, 2007 5:39 PM:

" Leonard: Again: You don't have the foggiest notion what I'm talking about, and it can be taught to high school students. [After a certain age, the brain closes and the ego takes over.] "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 12, 2007 5:36 PM:

" Leonard: Keep writing about mental illness. Do you remember the Pharoah in Exodus? He totally prescribed his own fate. "

Report Abuse

daniel wrote on Aug 12, 2007 5:35 PM:

" Leonard: There are no "imaginary criticisms of imaginary faults" in anything I write, unless it is clearly labelled as a joke. Your behavior resembles that of the denial citizens of Orwell's 1984, and the animals of Animal Farm. It is no wonder that you cannot understand anything that I write. "

Report Abuse

Leonard wrote on Aug 12, 2007 11:11 AM:

" Daniel: You last post has left me quite worried. Of course their are reasons to continue. With counseling and the proper drugs you can be a productive member of society. Delusional paranoia is a treatable disease. DON"T GIVE UP DANIEL, YOU HAVE A LOT TO LIVE FOR!!!!! "

Report Abuse

Leonard wrote on Aug 12, 2007 11:11 AM:

" Daniel: What worries me about your posts is the fact that you are making imaginary criticisms of imaginary faults in a study that you have not even read. This steadfast refusal to deal with the facts, coupled with your confusion between the world of fantasy and the world of reality suggests some sort of serious psychological disorder. Based on these symptoms, I am guessing that you may be suffering from delusional paranoia. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 11, 2007 10:21 PM:

" Leonard: You basically went berzerk when I started talking about the necessity of an experimental control in any scientific experiment or study. You don't have the foggiest notion of what I'm talking about, and you were offended that it can be taught to high school students, so you had to start calling names. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 11, 2007 10:08 PM:

" Leonard: Yes, my refusal to answer your questions shows disrespect. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 11, 2007 3:57 PM:

" Leonard: I don't see any reason to continue. Maybe someday you'll realize how wrong you are, but not necessarily. In the meantime, I have a personal right to feel sorry for you, and you can't do anything about that. "

Report Abuse

Leonard wrote on Aug 11, 2007 11:36 AM:

" I find Danniel's refusal to answer a simple yes or no question to be .....telling. "

Report Abuse

Leaonard wrote on Aug 11, 2007 8:11 AM:

" M: Well, if you had been ready a little earlier, you could have taken a tour aboard the Kapitan Khlebnikov but that ship left with its load of tourists in early July. "

Report Abuse

M Luhman wrote on Aug 10, 2007 11:17 PM:

" Brain I was not aware that the Northwest passage had open this year If it has can you direct me to where I can find a list of ships that have used it this year? Mark "

Report Abuse

Leonard wrote on Aug 10, 2007 7:40 PM:

" I think that we have to question the mental health of anyone who bases their position on an issue of great import on the imaginary faults of an imaginary version of a study which they have not read. The fact is that Daniel's main claim to authority on the subject of global climate change is his proud ignorance of the field in general. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 10, 2007 3:30 PM:

" Leonard: I can practically recite the content of any of your GW reports, without looking at them. If you think I'm joking, I suggest you think twice. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 10, 2007 3:29 PM:

" Amused: I am not really bickering, although it would appear so. There is a lower segment of American counter-culture, and they are supposed to have their nerves rattled. In the past 6 months I think I have come to know them pretty well, and I think it's safe to say that I never let them calm down but for a few days, at most. Leonard can't answer the questions, and you can see he has reverted into his lower evolutionary state. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 10, 2007 3:26 PM:

" Amused: I also think that I recommended a lobotomy to someone who uses the nobel prize as a demigod. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 10, 2007 3:24 PM:

" Leonard: Very cowardly to refer to people by the wrong gender, just because your happiness is tied to your Doomsday higher god. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 10, 2007 3:21 PM:

" Leonard: You cannot answer the questions, so you write, "professional psychiatric diagnosis," a substantial cowardly cop-out. "

Report Abuse

Leonard wrote on Aug 10, 2007 12:27 PM:

" Daniel: Have you ever had a professional psychiatric diagnosis? "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 10, 2007 12:02 PM:

" Jeff: Just for your information, I used to believe everything the government told me, much the same as you. Good luck with your judgement skills. "

Report Abuse

Leonard wrote on Aug 10, 2007 11:53 AM:

" Danielle: If you want to criticize the study, read it. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 10, 2007 11:15 AM:

" Ivan Dixon: Sorry. You need a dentist for your tooth. You only need a high school eduation to evalute the GW hoax. "

Report Abuse

daniel wrote on Aug 10, 2007 11:14 AM:

" Amused: If you have been following this column since the creation of blogs, Doomsday Chicken Littles have been preaching to nobel prize laureates, trying to use them as the highest eternal authority. I am tired of it, so I had to use the lobotomies to put them into their proper place. I'm fairly confident that I won't hear about nobel prize laureates anymore. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 10, 2007 11:12 AM:

" Amused: Thanks for acknowledging the entertainment. This blogger wonders sometimes if any of it is worth the time and energy. "

Report Abuse

Amused wrote on Aug 10, 2007 8:29 AM:

" I cant believe you lot have been bickering for over a week about something that, realistically, none of you have the slightest chance of proving either way in your own lifetime. Still not sure what lobotomies or Nobel Peace Prizes have to do with global warming. But ive had fun reading. Cheers guys - a most amusing, yet pointless debate! "

Report Abuse

Brian wrote on Aug 10, 2007 7:40 AM:

" Areas north of Canada that were once covered by ice are now becoming open waters and land. Canada and other countries are scrambling to make their claim where 25 percent of the world's oil is. New shipping lanes are in the works. I don't see any myth here. "

Report Abuse

Ivan Dixon wrote on Aug 10, 2007 4:21 AM:

" You know what Daniel, I sure am glad you wrote that about having a high school education because I think the tree surgeon I have doing my dentistry only graduated from the eighth grade. Come to think of it, since you've got all that fancy high school science learning, maybe you can fix my tooth? I hang out at the Barking Dog most nights. It would be great if you could bring your own pliers but if you don't, I've got a tire iron in the truck that might do the trick. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 9, 2007 10:29 PM:

" Leonard: You wrote: that I gave a "rant about how the scientists in question are under the control of the United Nations," and I do that for good reason. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 9, 2007 10:26 PM:

" Leonard: Furthermore, prior to any experiment, it is OK to "guess" GW as a hypothesis to test for "wrongness"; but, a valid experiment cannot be pre-disposed to arrive upon this conclusion, and it must be capable of detecting this hypothesis is incorrect, if it is so. [This is the fatal flaw of pseudo-science, in which studies are performed with pre-determined conclusions in support of GW.] "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 9, 2007 10:23 PM:

" Leonard: cont... Prior to the time of creation of the GW "conclusion," GW must not have existed. That is, if GW is science, created by science, then as a theory it could not have existed beforehand. This is a requirement. A reference to Stephen Hawkings isn't adequate, because he didn't develop GW theory, and GW scandalous politics was created before they recorded such a Stephen hawkings interview in which he allegedly endorsed GW politics. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 9, 2007 10:20 PM:

" Leonard: In science, there is always a person who is credited for doing an experiment, analyzing the data, and producing a new theory. In the past week, I have been challenging you for such a person. Perhaps you did not understand what I was asking for. The celebrity, Dr. Stephen Hawkings, was after the fact of GW politics being developed. No. If GW is a result of some science, there must've been a famous experiment or study which led to this conclusion. Who did it? "

Report Abuse

daniel wrote on Aug 9, 2007 10:15 PM:

" Leonard: Scientific method has a definite sequence in it, and if GW is science, it would fit in. If it does not, and it does not, it could only be politics. Scientific method, in order: 1)Observations, 2)Question, 3)Hypothesis (guess-must be capable of being tested for "wrongness"), 4)Experiment (is a test for "wrongness," and a control is used to show that "wrongness" can be detected, 5) Conclusion (comparison with original hypothesis, and a model), 6) Theory, 7)New Questions or New Hypotheses "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 9, 2007 10:12 PM:

" Leonard: I am justified in this whole assessment, because somebody made a statement that GW must've killed the trees. Whoever came up with this trash would not survive in a seminar full of scientists who would ask these same questions. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 9, 2007 10:10 PM:

" Leonard: ...cont: Since there wasn't a control, or any experiment at all probably, then I would be justified to ask if the subject trees died because of variables outside of GW, and I would be justified to ask anything I want. Was it "rust fungus," or insects; were the trees growing in their natural environment, or were they mistakenly planted by the forest service? I have a right to ask these questions outside of GW, because the said study couldn't possibly have been under control, and the investigation would have to be thrown out! "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 9, 2007 10:03 PM:

" Leonard: Two days ago, we had articles in the news about GW killing trees. A scientist cannot say that the supposed GW was causing the trees to die, unless he had a controlled experiment to support the claim. A controlled experiment is one in which there are two groups of trees. One is the control, and they have got to show that the trees would have lived if it were not for the GW, all other variables remaining constant. continued... "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 9, 2007 10:00 PM:

" Leonard: You wrote: "What specific "global warming experiments" are you referring to? Where were these experiments done? In what labs?" It would be more appropriate to ask you this question, because you have a steadfast belief that global warming politics is based on science. Anytime a scientist reports scientific theory, they have to make reference to the theory, which is based upon some sort of science, that supports the statement. Two days ago, we had articles in the news about GW killing trees. They have no right to say that. "

Report Abuse

Jeff wrote on Aug 9, 2007 6:52 PM:

" Daniel, I'm not mad at you, I just think you're a buffoon. no offense. "

Report Abuse

Leonard wrote on Aug 9, 2007 3:04 PM:

" Danny: What specific "global warming experiments" are you referring to? Where were these experiments done? In what labs? Where can we read their reports to verify your conclusions? The truth is that you have NEVER addressed the hard science that has been published on this subject. Every time a specific study has been discussed you have launched onto a tin foil hat rant about how the scientists in question are under the control of the United Nations and the transvestite space aliens from Alpha Ceti Tau. "

Report Abuse

Leonard wrote on Aug 9, 2007 3:00 PM:

" Doubting Reality: Al Gore is a red herring. Global Climate Change is the consensus of the VAST majority of the world's scientists. This would be true even if Al Gore had never been born. Why don't you try to deal with the facts and leave personalities out of it? "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 9, 2007 2:16 PM:

" Ivan Dixon: ...continued: In both of these fundamental definitions, it does not take a climatologist to figure out that GW experiments are "out of control," and experimental conclusions are in question, because they are not demonstrated against a known standard, or "control." I could expect a high school student to explain these principles. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 9, 2007 2:14 PM:

" Ivan Dixon: ...continued: In a valid experiment, the experimental method is validated by comparison against a known standard, which is known as the "control." If an experiment does not have a control, then the entire experiment is in question. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 9, 2007 2:12 PM:

" Ivan Dixon: In high school chemistry or physics, the scientific method is taught during the first weeks. You would be surprised how many people forget the fundamental definition for the vocabulary word "controlled experiment." At UC Davis, I saw a professor who forgot to control his experiment! In elementary terms, a controlled experiment has only ONE test variable. If it does not have just one, then the experiment is "out of control." "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 9, 2007 2:08 PM:

" Ivan Dixon: Respectfully: I would like to impress you with the acceptability of not having to find a climatologist. All you need is a basic understanding of high school science, that is, if the science teacher is sufficiently perceptive to consistently apply what the textbook says. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 9, 2007 2:06 PM:

" Jeff: Interestingly, and respectfully: I thought you were mad at me. I hope not. Thank you. "

Report Abuse

Doubting to Leonard wrote on Aug 9, 2007 6:48 AM:

" Al Gore is not a scientist. That is the point I was making. He is a self promoting politician who will say anything to get attention. Anything Al Gore says about scientific facts should be checked, including how the earth rotates. As for the temperature record, we know that earth had much more volcanic activity in the past, and we know that large volcanic eruptions lead to global cooling. Could it be that the lack of volcanic activity is contributing more to the global temperature increase to a greater degree than humans? "

Report Abuse

Leonard wrote on Aug 9, 2007 6:38 AM:

" Daniel: I knew that you were dedicated to mouthing the Big Oil party line but I had not realized that you were actually employed by the Oil Industry. How does that work? Are you actually registered as a lobbyist? Do you travel to Sacramento and Washington or do you merely write letters to the editor from your home base in Acampo? "

Report Abuse

Leonard wrote on Aug 9, 2007 4:56 AM:

" New York City experienced its first tornado in recorded history yesterday. "

Report Abuse

daniel wrote on Aug 8, 2007 9:59 PM:

" Also, the 3 time periods of recent American history show temperature trends that are documented in writing. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 8, 2007 9:58 PM:

" The original theories proposed by the writer: "global warming hyperbole is nothing more than political activism to get us to change our way of living" (in comparison with the communists and 3rd world, who do not seek to change), and "Solar warming goes in cycles, warming and cooling in 15,000 — 20,000 year cycles," are good statements. "

Report Abuse

Ivan Dixon wrote on Aug 8, 2007 8:30 PM:

" These scientists are, after all, the same ones who perpetuate the round earth lie. "

Report Abuse

Ivan Dixon wrote on Aug 8, 2007 8:30 PM:

" I agree with Daniel 538.4% about the scientists. Look it this way.If I have a abscessed tooth, am I going to waste money on a dentist?Of course not!!!I will just go to a tree surgeon and have him fix it with some string and a rusty set of pliers.Same deal with global warming.If I have a question about the climate, am I going to trust a world renowned climatologists with years of training and research?Of course not!!! I will simply rely on the opinions of an uninformed fellow with a terminal degree from a provincial technical school. "

Report Abuse

Jeff wrote on Aug 8, 2007 6:58 PM:

" Daniel, you might be right. "

Report Abuse

Leonard wrote on Aug 8, 2007 4:53 PM:

" Doubt: The climatological record goes back much further than 1000 years. Scientists have even used tree rings from petrified trees to examine climate cycles in the distant past. As for Al Gore, the former vice president also believes that the Earth revolves around the sun. Will you say otherwise just to spite him? "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 8, 2007 4:19 PM:

" You should also give me an award for not working in big aerospace corporations, anymore. Worse situation than big oil. Can you say Inter-Continental Ballistic Missile? "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 8, 2007 4:16 PM:

" You folks should give me an award for not working in an oil company. Although I was upper 20% of my class, some things that I expressed in job interviews with big oil excluded me from working there, while 50% of the people who sat right next to me in college got vacuumed into these gigantic companies. I could almost tell you which person got hired where: Exxon, Chevron, Getty Oil, Procter & Gamble, Arco, Shell Oil. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 8, 2007 4:14 PM:

" Eek and Jeff: I assure you that I am very logical, calculating, and scientific. I think when we first met, you were making fun of my credentials. I think a Weezer was there, too. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 8, 2007 4:11 PM:

" eek, Jeff: ...cont: Another thing that happens a lot throughout society, is that someone will make a couple statements, completely uninformed on what every single statement is saying. A good example is Kevin Jamiesen's letter 5 months ago. His letter only had 150 words, but he failed to address so much controversy, practically in every sentence that he wrote. A single 350 word response from one person was not enough. I decided that my letter would identify the source of the hoax. (Iron mountain special study group.) "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 8, 2007 4:01 PM:

" eek (and Jeff for this one): ...continued: You get a lot of random disjointed posts, because some people are changing the subject, getting me confused about the original question. I like to answer questions, but sometimes without my realizing it, the topic is being changed, and the thread will look confusing. There are a lot of open, un-answered questions. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 8, 2007 3:59 PM:

" eek (and Jeff for this one): ...continued: I am not criticizing people for being off-topic. I am saying that some people like to use distraction as a tool that entitles them to avoid a central issue. If someone can get me off-topic while a good question is posted, unanswered or disrespected, and cause me to forget a previous question that I asked, then that question does not need to be answered. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 8, 2007 3:55 PM:

" eek: ...Cont: Since people are throwing the nobel prize laureates at me, left and right, and they think they are throwing strikes, and typing ROTFLMAO, I had no choice but to show what the corruption of the nobel prize is, and what it was that people were relying upon. It isn't any better than a lobotomy. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 8, 2007 3:52 PM:

" Eek: More than one person has made an attempt to use nobel laureates as a where-all end-all to settle the global warming hoax, without showing that nobel laureates can be used as the final referee. There was Leonard, Kevin Jamiesen, I'm not sure which side Ivan Dixon is on, but he made an inatelligent statement about my word being more important than a nobel laureate, and I can't remember who else. continued... "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 8, 2007 3:46 PM:

" Eek, Jeff: I did not accuse anybody of having inferior intelligence. I was responding to Jeff's dead-ended post, even though his statement was not a question, or a proposition that offered a counter-point. Jeff's post was so dead-ended, that it was the posting I was referring to, which was not an intelligent post: The word "intelligent" was an adjective that modifed the noun "post." "

Report Abuse

Not sure...but doubting wrote on Aug 8, 2007 1:08 PM:

" The problem is.. if you beleive that the earth is 4.5 billion years old, and we are accurately measuring temperatures over 1000 years or so (tree rings, sediment layers), we are dealing with an incomplete data set to measure against. How do we know that humans are doing this, and it is not just a cycle that we don't have enough data to evaluate? I am not saying I don't believe humans have an impact on global temperature, but I am not ready to sign off on anything that Al Gore is absolutely certain about. "

Report Abuse

Jeff wrote on Aug 8, 2007 10:33 AM:

" Daniel, yeah, what he (eek) said. Take that. "

Report Abuse

eek wrote on Aug 7, 2007 5:15 PM:

" Daniel: You crack me up. You criticize Leo for being off topic a few posts after you are talking about Rose Kennedy's lobotomy, you insult women and scientists but call fellow bloggers disrespectful and offensive, and you provide no logic or scientific evidence for your claims but accuse others of having inferior intelligence. Keep it up. I think you are really getting your points across. "

Report Abuse

eek wrote on Aug 7, 2007 5:00 PM:

" Daniel: first, lighten up a little and take a joke. second, how is it respectful of you to judgementally lump groups of people together and call them liars? "

Report Abuse

Leonard wrote on Aug 7, 2007 10:09 AM:

" My cousin Mike works for the USGS and participated in that study. I asked him whether they received any sort of pressure from outside groups and he said "absolutely not". "

Report Abuse

Leonard wrote on Aug 7, 2007 10:06 AM:

" Federal scientists have found that tree deaths in the Sierra Nevada increased over the past two decades, coinciding with rising temperatures and drought conditions. If temperatures continue to rise, temperate forests that receive little rain and snowfall are poised for die-backs, according to findings released Monday by the U.S. Geological Survey's Western Ecological Research Center. "

Report Abuse

Audi 5000 wrote on Aug 7, 2007 7:55 AM:

" It was kinda cold yesterday "

Report Abuse

Jeff wrote on Aug 6, 2007 6:21 PM:

" Furthermore, while I feel I do not have to justify my n"ever having had anything to say", I have had plenty of opportunities to chime in over the first few years that LNS has offered these posts. It's hard to comment somtimes when authors make looney diatribes based on faulty logic and non-existent connections. "

Report Abuse

Jeff wrote on Aug 6, 2007 6:11 PM:

" Daniel, I also believe that many who seem to hold "anti-GW" views are mistaken in their interpretation of "man cannot destroy the earth" theory. I believe it is true that man cannon destroy this planet; earth will continue w/ or w/out us, regardless of what we do to it. It will survive. We however may not survive with it. I believe it IS possible for humans to disrupt the ecosphere to the point that it jeopardizes mankinds ability to sustain life on this planet. "

Report Abuse

Jeff wrote on Aug 6, 2007 6:06 PM:

" Daniel, secondly, look at the first post for this article... hwy looky there, it's me. "

Report Abuse

Jeff wrote on Aug 6, 2007 6:04 PM:

" Daniel, I don't know if I am more intelligent than you, but I do think you lack some (any?) logic skills. Maybe you could look into a critical thinking class or logic class at Delta. "

Report Abuse

Leonard wrote on Aug 6, 2007 4:26 PM:

" Danny: No. You made a statement which implied that you had special insight into the minds of some of the most important public figures of the late 20th century. I would like to see you either explain the nature of that insight or retract your statement. "

Report Abuse

Chris King wrote on Aug 6, 2007 3:43 PM:

" regardless if its a myth or not,i dont think toxic waste going into the air is good. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 6, 2007 2:06 PM:

" Jeff: Your cup runneth over with intelligence in that last statement. You're too intelligent for me. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 6, 2007 1:39 PM:

" Leonard: Can we have "on-topic" responses? I believe you are changing the subject. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 6, 2007 1:37 PM:

" Jeff: It's amazing how you seem to appear with such a strong opinion, without ever having had anything to say. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 6, 2007 1:31 PM:

" Eek: That's pretty disrespectful! "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 5, 2007 6:55 PM:

" Leonard: I forgot Mikhail supported GW. The Chinese and Indonesian leaders also follow another pattern. These are leaders of lesser-developed nations. The GW hoax attacks more productive nations, in order to reduce their productivity. "

Report Abuse

Leonard wrote on Aug 5, 2007 5:53 PM:

" Danny: You say that you know that Reagan, Gorbachev and Carter don't believe in global climate change because they only tell the truth in their own home. Should I infer from this that you have been a guest at each of these men's homes? If not, how do you know what they think on the subject? "

Report Abuse

eek wrote on Aug 5, 2007 5:10 PM:

" Daniel: being elite and of the highest class myself I can affirm global warming is a fact not a hoax. "

Report Abuse

Jason wrote on Aug 5, 2007 1:21 PM:

" Read the news! Open your eyes. "

Report Abuse

Jeff wrote on Aug 5, 2007 9:41 AM:

" Daniel, you are completely full of nonsense. I don't think you could have been trapped in circular logic, because you don't seem to follow any logic at all. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 5, 2007 2:43 AM:

" The "Birchman" was always trying to get me into a circular logic trap, starting with the Chinese not supporting or believing the GW hoax. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 5, 2007 2:41 AM:

" Leonard: ...continued: Accordingly, Bush, Clinton, Bush, maybe Ronald Reagan, Jimmy Carter: All of these know that GW is a hoax. Let me go through the Kennedy's: Definitely: Ted, Marie and Arnold Schriver, all of these know that GW is a hoax. It is because they are elite. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 5, 2007 2:37 AM:

" Leonard: You missed Mikhail Gorbachev. You are listing elite-class people. Of course they do not believe in global warming. Elitists do not tell the truth when they are on camera or microphone. When they go into the privacy of their own home, they talk different. "

Report Abuse

leonard wrote on Aug 4, 2007 8:22 PM:

" Dr Hansen further states that a lower limit on “dangerous anthropogenic interference” is set by the stability of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets. His view on actions to mitigate climate change is that "halting global warming requires urgent, unprecedented international cooperation, but the needed actions are feasible and have additional benefits for human health, agriculture and the environment. "

Report Abuse

Leonard wrote on Aug 4, 2007 8:22 PM:

" In 2003 Hansen wrote a paper called Can We Defuse the Global Warming Time Bomb. In it, he argues that human-caused forces on the climate are now greater than natural ones, and that this, over a long time period, can cause large climate changes. "

Report Abuse

Leonard wrote on Aug 4, 2007 5:02 PM:

" Daniel: Did you know that Lenin, Stalin, Kruschev, Mao, Ho Chih Mien and Pol Pot all did not believe in global warming? "

Report Abuse

Ivan Dixon wrote on Aug 4, 2007 12:18 PM:

" Dr Hansen, you should come to one our meetings of the Society for the Promotion of the Horizontal Horizon. We meet every 3rd Tuesday at the Barking Dog. "

Report Abuse

Ivan Dixon wrote on Aug 4, 2007 12:16 PM:

" Well said Dr Hansen. I knew there was a reason you were my favorite Chiropracter! Its all that book learnin. I would take your word any day over all those real scientists with their fancy doctorates and their years of research. Who needs an expert when you've got a bone cruncher, that's what I say. I'm behind you 538.4%!!! "

Report Abuse

Dr. Hansen wrote on Aug 4, 2007 10:40 AM:

" Well said Orin, and totally scientifically correct. It is good to cut pollution and real things that harm people, CO2 is NOT one of those and the poitical scientists are the only ones who think so, Hollywood stars too of course. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 4, 2007 9:51 AM:

" Ivan Dixon: Einstein was so intelligent, and made such important and revolutionary contributions to science that the Nobel Prize committee had no choice but to give him an award. If they didn't, then the general public would have questioned the award. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 4, 2007 9:49 AM:

" Ivan Dixon: I'm sorry. I never did figure out the flat world ridicule. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 4, 2007 9:47 AM:

" Ivan Dixon: I never said Einstein wasn't smart. I think I said that everybody expected him to get the nobel prize for his theory on relativity, but he did not get it until he explained the photoelectric effect, which was also a revolutionary advancement in the quantum mechanics. There is a funny story about that. Max Planck was the first scientist to suggest that energy was quantized (meaning that you take the stairway - never the handicap ramp). Planck thought his own theory was ridiculous. "

Report Abuse

Lodian wrote on Aug 4, 2007 12:09 AM:

" Ivan Dixon: Aren't you down under? LOL! "

Report Abuse

dinty leach wrote on Aug 3, 2007 7:57 PM:

" Wake up. it's not just about global warning. it's how we're wasting the earth's resources and needlessly polluting the atmosphere. "

Report Abuse

Ivan Dixon wrote on Aug 3, 2007 6:21 PM:

" Say what you will, that Einstein was one smart fellow. "

Report Abuse

Ivan Dixon wrote on Aug 3, 2007 5:59 PM:

" I've been to Australia and I can tell you that it is right side up just like it is here. "

Report Abuse

Ivan Dixon wrote on Aug 3, 2007 5:58 PM:

" I'm right there with you 538.4% on the global warming thing. As far as I am concerned, this is just one shameful trick by the Spherisit Conspirasists to get everyone to believe the round earth lie. Just look at the phrase itself! Right there in the front is the word "globe". How stupid do these people think we are? If the world was round, all the people in Australia would fall off because they were upside down. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 3, 2007 11:54 AM:

" Ivan Dixon: On Einstein, again, as reported previously by Leonard, Einstein supported the UN division of Palestein, and there were some other secretive things about him. His support for a UN directive might have predisposed him to the award. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 3, 2007 11:28 AM:

" Ivan Dixon: Most conspiratorial organizations usually have as a last priority the task of maintaining good public relations. For this reason, John D. Rockefeller, Sr. gave shiny dimes to children, while he was robbing their parents, and administrating the FDA for profit, not for medicine, and he was shareholder in the Federal Reserve. Occasionally, you might find the Nobel Prize giving out a legitimate prize. Einstein was so famous, that I could postulate that it was a necessity. "

Report Abuse

Leonard wrote on Aug 3, 2007 11:26 AM:

" Dannard: I think the key point here is that the lobotomy doctor did not believe in global warming. He was, therefore, on your side, not mine. Perhaps you knew him? "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 3, 2007 11:25 AM:

" 40,000 documented individuls received lobotomies. These procedures carved a quarter-inch x 2-inch gorge out of the left and right frontal lobes, starting at the orbital socket. Sister to former president JFK and Ted Kennedy, Rose Marie Kennedy received a lobotomy, in her younger twenties, because she was overly promiscuous, in the opinion of her father. I think she was sharing family secrets with boyfriends. Rose became incontinent, stared at walls for hours, and babbled. This was a Nobel Prize-winning procedure. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 3, 2007 11:20 AM:

" Leonard: And for your information, Nobel Prize recipients are not necessarily well-connected upstairs. Both sides of the GW dispute claimed signatures for living Nobel Prize recipients in the Heidelberg Appeal, whose wording is so generally worded, it is difficult to say for certain which side of the dispute it is on. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 3, 2007 11:18 AM:

" Ivan Dixon and Leonard: There is no end of controversy in the Nobel Prize. President Jimmy "I am so peaceful and democratic" Carter (who shovels peanuts) won the prize, as did Mikhail Gorbachev and Mr. "Peace" Kofi Anan. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 3, 2007 11:16 AM:

" Ivan Dixon: I stand fast by my statement that the Nobel prize stinks to high heaven. For example, when Henry Kissinger won the Nobel Peace prize, he shared it with someone else, who I believe was Vietnamese. The Vietnamese recipient declined the prize and gave it back, because Vietnam was still at war. The prize committee still believed that Kissinger deserved the prize, in spite of his negotiating the outcome of 2000 MIA's. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 3, 2007 11:14 AM:

" Ivan Dixon: Yes, Einstein won the Nobel prize, eventually. All the scientific community wondered why he didn't win it for his theory on relativity. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 3, 2007 11:12 AM:

" Leonard: You are endorsing the nobel prize as if it is the world's leading authority in GW doomsday-ism. I illustrated a simple example of the world's second-most highly esteemed award being given to a doctor who developed (and performed) the lobotomy procedure. "

Report Abuse

Ivan Dixon wrote on Aug 3, 2007 10:55 AM:

" Didn't Einstein win a Nobel Prize? "

Report Abuse

Leonard wrote on Aug 3, 2007 9:22 AM:

" Dannnnny: I will say, however, that the inventor of the lobotomy has never endorsed the theory of global climate change. I guess that means that he is on your side. "

Report Abuse

Leonard wrote on Aug 3, 2007 9:21 AM:

" Dan: As for lobotomies, I don't think we should get into the issue of mental health given your sensitivity on the subject. "

Report Abuse

Leonard wrote on Aug 3, 2007 9:18 AM:

" Dan: I have never implied that you are a homosexual but I am beginning to think that your excitement around the issue (you, after all, are the one who brought it up) is telling. Why are you so defensive about this? "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 2, 2007 9:42 PM:

" Leonard: Since you religiously accept any word of the nobel prize, why don't you get a lobotomy without questioning the validity of the prize? The lobotomy procedure is endorsed by the prize committee. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 2, 2007 9:41 PM:

" Leonard: Let me make clear that your reference to the Nobel prize stinks. The nobel prize complete reeks of death and stench. Did you know that the doctor who developed the lobotomy received the nobel prize for his contribution to medicine. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 2, 2007 9:40 PM:

" Leonard: Why haven't you looked within the American Meterological Association? I would think that an organization that is devoted to the weather would maybe help your cause. Since the voting is unanamous, according to your story, you should be able to look at every single member and obtain agreement. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 2, 2007 9:39 PM:

" Leonard: I already know that there aren't any "scientists who support the idea that human activity is causing Global Climate." The question was directed at you to see if you knew of any. It's a cop-out to parrot the names of organizations, whose affiliations are questionable. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 2, 2007 9:37 PM:

" Leonard: I previously had a problem with you changing my name, but when you put an "i" on it, it implies female or homosexual nature. I don't know how much more disrespectful you can get. That is why I previously made clear to you that I am heterosexual, and yes I am offended. If you want to continue offending people like that, go ahead, but don't expect any respect from me if you must continue. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 2, 2007 5:37 PM:

" Noam: If you are going to use Greenland for scientific purposes, you are going to need an experimental control. You are going to need some historical information on Greenland prior to the industrial age. Do you know what is an experimental control? "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 2, 2007 3:13 PM:

" Dan and Leonard: Just who are these strawman climatologists and environmental scientists? Throw out everything you, yourselves have to say, and show me who are these fictitious people who are the only "scientists" so religiously ordained with authority to judge on the environment. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 2, 2007 3:10 PM:

" Dan: If you think that climatologists and environmental scientists are the only individuals who are qualified to make any conclusions about the weather, then that pretty much disqualifes yourself. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 2, 2007 3:09 PM:

" Dan: When you mock a theory, you should at least get your own theory correct. According to the GW theory, we only get 0.2 deg-F increase every year. So they are extrapolating into the future, meaning it will get warm in the future. At present, we can't feel it yet. When we have a hot summer, and GW doomsday enthusiasts rejoice, they look pretty stupid, because they aren't even using their own theory. "

Report Abuse

T & C wrote on Aug 1, 2007 9:04 PM:

" Hey Orin, turn that temperature down in that hot tub. It's making you dizzy again. "

Report Abuse

Noam wrote on Aug 1, 2007 8:33 PM:

" http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=175b568a-802a-23ad-4c69-9bdd978fb3cd Studies refute fears of Greenland melt. "

Report Abuse

Leonard wrote on Aug 1, 2007 3:50 PM:

" Dan: Great post and right on target. "

Report Abuse

R.G. Goldstein wrote on Aug 1, 2007 2:15 PM:

" Global warming, global cooling, the earth has always cycled. That man could cause it or change it is the myth. One good volcanic blast will do more to modify the climate than all the useless handwringing from the global warming lemmings. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 1, 2007 2:12 PM:

" Ivan Dixon: It is by science that theories are improved. The notion of an earth-centered universe originated out of the church, not science. Copernicus and Galileo published their scientific findings at risk of prosecution. Copernicus died 3 days after publication, so they couldn't do anything to him; but, Galileo was placed on Church "trial." They were considering the death penalty to put him out of his misery. At the time, heritics were burned at the stake. "

Report Abuse

Dan wrote on Aug 1, 2007 12:55 PM:

" Waters is right. If 8 billion humans could actually change the atmosphere, you would actually be able to see smog in the air over cities. And all climatologists and environmental scientists agree with Orin - the world climate is absolutely unchanged, there are no measurable chemical changes and the earth's glaciers are as robust as ever. Keep spreading the gospel, Orin. "

Report Abuse

Daniel wrote on Aug 1, 2007 10:41 AM:

" Orin Waters: Thank you for your support. Leonard: Just so you know. Orin is not my ghost writer. There are now at least 4 members of society who know GW is a hoax and publish in the LNS. "

Report Abuse

Ivan Dixon wrote on Aug 1, 2007 10:13 AM:

" By the way, if you check the New York Times for March 15, 44 BC, September 1, 1492 and April 6, 1931, you will see that everything I say is completely true. "

Report Abuse

Ivan Dixon wrote on Aug 1, 2007 10:11 AM:

" Orin, I support you 538.4% "

Report Abuse

Ivan Dixon wrote on Aug 1, 2007 10:10 AM:

" I applaud Orin's superb use of logic. How quickly we forget the way scientific thought fluctuates.Just look at the subject of the Earth's place in the Universe. In Ancient Days, scientists thought that the world was flat and that the heavens were fixed overhead.Then, in the Middle Ages people said that the Universe rotated around the Earth.Now the fad is to say that the Earth actually rotates around the Sun.It just goes to show that these scientists will say anything to get attention.Of course, anyone can see that the world is flat and doesn't move at all, except in earthquakes. "

Report Abuse

Jeff wrote on Aug 1, 2007 9:33 AM:

" Yeah, I agree it would suck if something catastrophic happened to the earth. I'm not sure, besides a meteor, that could be, maybe the catasrophic build up of excess CO2 and other gases that prevented excess heat to escape our atmosphere and thus caused temerature changes in some important areas of the earth thus disrupting the present climate cycle and vastly changed weather patterns in different ways in different areas on the globe. Yeah, that's be bad. "

Report Abuse

Comments on this story are now closed.

Special Sections

Photo Reprints

Find Ads




Leaf Pickup

Services

Contact Us

Office

125 N. Church St.
P.O. Box 1360
Lodi, CA 95241
(209) 369-2761
Fax: (209) 369-1084

Newsroom

E-mail

(209) 369-7035
Fax: (209) 369-6706

Subscriptions

Subscribe

Problems with your subscription?
(209) 333-1400

Advertising

E-mail

(209) 369-2761
Fax: (209) 369-1084

Classifieds

Place an ad E-mail

(209) 333-1111
Fax: (209) 369-1084