He can always still get around this by registering his cars as Historic Vehicles, Show Vehicles, ect. and not have to worry about being limited on driving them since he has so many it probably wont bug him too much, other than being annoying. And if all else fails he can always just give more money to the state via smog credits.


I think one thing he is trying to point out is that majority of scientific research is funded by the government in one way or another and because of that scientific findings are very often skewed . Having done scientific research for years I have much experience with this and sadly quite often ones results and findings are altered or restated or hidden in order to please those that are funding the research so that one can keep their job, get more money and keep doing research, even if the findings are beneficial or show the oposite or even slightly go against what these investors would like to publicly state. It happens a lot.

 

stupid double posting

 

You don't know the difference between corporatism and capitalism, the mainstream media IS big business, and they are very "pro-big business", or very self serving..

Try reading something other than far right wing wacky conspiracy websites...

Do you know who owns the Washington Times? Talk radio? talk about a bunch of fake, partisan nutjobs..

 

Yep, and Soylent Green is people.

 

Here is a little article that is interesting not only in what it says but who print it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/13/sc...ng&oref=slogin

Now this article is from the Pravda of the US called the New York Times. I suggest that you read both pages.

 

All I could think of after reading this post was Gordon Gecko's quote
"Greed is good"

 

You're right, I should think, for now. Besides, he isn't strong enough to do anything substantial anyhow. I made the mistake of thinking about it rationally and very naively - that fixing 200 power plants should be an easier technical hurdle than fixing 2,000,000 polluting vehicles already in circulation. Either way, I was definitely trivializing.

I would prefer to see a hydrogen vehicle.

 

Yeah, someone else quoted this article earlier in the thread.

"Pravda," huh?

That's right, it's all a load of hooey based on what maybe 10% of recalcitrant "scientists" think. So we should all sit back in our Hummers and relax. There will be plenty of icecaps and glaciers to reflect the sun's heat (you know, they're so easy to re-form after they melt), lots of rainforests that produce oxygen, and lots of arable land to produce food. No problem...

Our kids are frakked.

 

Speaking of icecaps & glaciers, here's an excerpt of a Time magazine article from 1974:

Another Ice Age?

Monday, Jun. 24, 1974

... However widely the weather varies from place to place and time to time, when meteorologists take an average of temperatures around the globe they find that the atmosphere has been growing gradually cooler for the past three decades. The trend shows no indication of reversing. Climatological Cassandras are becoming increasingly apprehensive, for the weather aberrations they are studying may be the harbinger of another ice age.

... Since the 1940s the mean global temperature has dropped about 2.7° F. Although that figure is at best an estimate, it is supported by other convincing data. ...

Scientists have found other indications of global cooling. For one thing there has been a noticeable expansion of the great belt of dry, high-altitude polar winds —the so-called circumpolar vortex—that sweep from west to east around the top and bottom of the world. ...

Cold air is pulled down across the Western U.S. and warm air is swept up to the Northeast. The collision of air masses of widely differing temperatures and humidity can create violent storms—the Midwest's recent rash of disastrous tornadoes, for example. ...

Man, too, may be somewhat responsible for the cooling trend. The University of Wisconsin's Reid A. Bryson and other climatologists suggest that dust and other particles released into the atmosphere as a result of farming and fuel burning may be blocking more and more sunlight from reaching and heating the surface of the earth. ...

Whatever the cause of the cooling trend, its effects could be extremely serious, if not catastrophic. Scientists figure that only a 1% decrease in the amount of sunlight hitting the earth's surface could tip the climatic balance, and cool the planet enough to send it sliding down the road to another ice age within only a few hundred years. ...

Even if temperature and rainfall patterns change only slightly in the near future in one or more of the three major grain-exporting countries—the U.S., Canada and Australia —global food stores would be sharply reduced. ... Warns Hare: "I don't believe that the world's present population is sustainable if there are more than three years like 1972 in a row."

Source: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...944914,00.html (emphasis mine)

So there you have it: The leftist rag Time magazine quoting tax-supported scientists decrying man's industrial civilization is causing global cooling, unprecedented storms, mass starvation and the end of the world.

 

Yeah, you're right, science hasn't advanced AT ALL in the last 33 years.

The home PC is an illusion.

DNA analysis is a hoax.

Cloning is science fiction.

And the gay, atheist, tree-hugging, peacenik leftist hordes are out to destroy the lives of Mustang owners.

 

It wasn't posted earlier. The date on the article is today, March 13, 2007. Like I said try reading the article.

A little hypocritical don't you think considering that your buying a 2007 Redfire Mustang GT? What's the matter don't want to do your part by buying a Prius?

Maybe you ought to read your quote from George S. Patton again

 

You might try taking your own advice.

Again, perhaps you should read my earlier posts before just jumping in uninformed.

Maybe YOU ought to.

 

Sure we all play a part in it some how from products someone made that we seem to need, but having all these levies and sucharging my **** off will in the most part line some jokers pocket or be used in some admin cost to pay for someone to recieve all of our cash + Cash Cow yup. but we all most certainly need be awar of things we can do to help our Hippy children out in the future.

 

Okay here's where we disagree: you think the 1970s hype about global cooling simply was a mistake while the 2000s hype about global warming is the real deal. I contend that neither are mistakes: both are shrewd calculations to control & drain the productive class by the ruling elite. They use the following 3-step plan:

1) Find some specious doctrine -- such as original sin, greed, environmental degradation -- that sounds plausible to innocent producers

2) Employ social intellectuals to spread that doctrine & inculcate guilt into unsuspecting producers

3) Cash-in on people's wrongly-accepted guilt by extracting tithes, taxes, fines, fees, etc.

This way those that don't produce anything of value can continue to exist off those that produce genuine values. This 3-part plan has been employed for the last 2500 years and used by nearly every religious & political leadership since the time of Ancient Greece.


Gays are not going to save the world or your life. Atheists are the only people qualified to save the world from the religious/holy-war madness that has gripped our planet since the time of Ancient Rome.

 

Interesting perspective.

There's just one thing you're forgetting (excepting the fact that you've gone way off topic here) - the snows HAVE almost disappeared of Kilimanjaro...the arctic ice flows ARE breaking up and melting into the ocean...the rainforests of the Amazon ARE being clear-cut at an alarming rate. These are matters of undeniable fact, not the careless products of wild imagination. And as our worldwide population grows, it places an infinite strain on what are unequivocally finite resources.

Understand that there isn't just one thing happening here in one region of the world. There are multitudinous occurences going on simultaneously planet-wide. Last time I checked, this was the only planet we can live on...for the time being anyway.

And if I'm honest, I'll take the word of one thousand of the world's top scientists (regardless of where their funding comes from) over a bunch of anonymous posters on a chat board, a few of whom apparently don't even have the intellectual capacity to read the back of a chewing gum wrapper.

Now HERE we can find something to agree upon.