Generation Terrorists » Forum
Sign up   |   Start new thread   |   Lost password?   |   Edit profile   |   Member List   |   myGT   |   Blog
Keyword
From
To
 

I Wonder If Hif Would Have Posted This
Zacq Posted: Mon May 9 18:57:59 2005 Post | Quote in Reply  
  The Devil is Out of Details
by Ann Coulter
May 5, 2005

Liberals have been unusually hysterical the past few weeks. But we're not getting much in the way of details which is odd because the devil is usually found in the details. As we reviewed vis-a-vis the judiciary in last week's column, whenever liberals won't give you details, it's because the details don't help them.

We keep hearing Tom DeLay's name uttered in angry, accusatory tones, but I still don't know what law he's supposed to have broken. As far as I can tell, DeLay didn't even cheat at golf during that trip to Scotland. But you know what liberals always say: "Where there's nothing, there's fire."

As long as liberals can keep repeating "Tom DeLay" and "ethics violation" in the same sentence and get the media to throw a grade-A hissy fit - and it's so hard to tease that out of the mainstream media when it comes to a Republican and they've got themselves a scandal!

Close your eyes and even now you can hear Aaron Brown saying: "Embattled Rep. Tom DeLay came under fire again today when it was disclosed that his Permanent Record showed he refused to take a nap once while in kindergarten. We turn now live to Wolf Blitzer with former kindergarten teacher Louise Millicuddy in Livingston, Texas. Wolf, could this bombshell spell the end for the combative Tom DeLay?"

How about asking the Democrats I would recommend asking Rep. Rosa DeLauro this - to explain precisely which law they believe DeLay broke? People will have already left the building before we get the most basic outline of the allegation. These are the same legal geniuses who looked at dozens of Whitewater-related felony convictions and said, "Crime? What crime?"

DeLay's own constituents seem to like him, unless you include Democrats claiming to be Republicans. Liberals never tire of this trick or imagine that it could ever become any less believable. Turn on talk radio right now and you'll hear some liberal caller claiming to be a lifelong Republican scandalized by the Bush tax cuts or some other policy that has been a mainstay of the Republican Party for at least a century. The callers are always teachers. (No wonder our kids aren't learning their teachers are always on the phone with talk-radio shows pretending to be Republicans.)

A ringleader of the DeLay witch-hunt in Texas is Patricia Baig, who took out a full-page advertisement in a Texas newspaper calling for DeLay's resignation. Baig signed her letter, "A Texas Republican for Ethical Reform."

There is no record of Baig ever voting in a Republican primary, belonging to any Republican clubs or contributing to any Republican politicians in Texas or anywhere else.

To the contrary! Baig contributed to the Democrat who ran against DeLay in his last election. She used her maiden name for the ad, calling herself "P.A. Perine (Texas Republican)." She is a substitute teacher.

All of that was duly noted by a New York Times reporter. (If we are good and decent people, conservatives will put that reporter on a 24-hour watch to make sure he isn't killed in the middle of the night.) But liberals think they can fool normal people with their road-to-Damascus "I used to be a Republican" conversion stories. They can't even fool The New York Times!

Baig's entire retort to the absence of any evidence that she is a Republican was to say that lots of Republicans don't vote in Republican primaries or contribute to Republican candidates (which, in her defense, is at least a better excuse than Kevin Phillips'.)

So, like their theories on "global warming," a liberal's claim to be a Republican is a non-disprovable assertion involving a lot of hot air.

Another conservative getting the Emmanuel Goldstein treatment is John Bolton, Bush's nominee to be ambassador to the United Nations. The charge against Bolton consists of the allegation that he is an absolute beast to his co-workers.

Have the Democrats heard about Katie Couric? As The New York Times described it last week: "America's girl next door has morphed into the mercurial diva down the hall. At the first sound of her peremptory voice and clickety stiletto heels, people dart behind doors and douse the lights." (Funny, I do the same thing when I'm watching the "Today" show at home by myself.)

Things have gotten so bad at "Today," sometimes they show that videotape of Katie's lower bowel exam just to lighten things up.

Can't Barbara Boxer do something to protect the staff of NBC's "Today"? They're at least Americans. First they had to live through the horrors of the Bryant Gumbel years, and now this. Also, I can't be completely clear here, because somebody could get killed, but why isn't a certain lamp-throwing junior senator from New York helping them out? Oh wait I think I know why ...

I repeat: Bolton has been nominated to be ambassador to the United Nations. It's not like it's an important job. Get a grip, people! He's not replacing Paula Abdul on "American Idol."

The U.N. is an organization with thousands of people from all over the world with one thing in common: They badly need to be yelled at, preferably by a guy who looks like Wilford Brimley. When did collegiality with representatives from North Korea and Syria become a pressing national issue?

Why just imagine if Bolton raised his voice in front of Sudan's ambassador, or (gasp!) Burma's! I mean, Myanmar's! (Sorry, military junta that runs Myanmar!)

Democrats are enflamed at the idea of Bolton mistreating representatives of slave-traders and dictators, but won't lift a finger to help the staff of "Today." We used to be a country that cared about ratings genocide.

The only silver lining to the Democrats' efforts to kill Bolton's nomination is that if they succeed, Bush could nominate Ronald Reagan's ambassador to the U.N.'s Economic and Social Council instead. (Alan Keyes!) Maybe then we could finally get on with the important work of quitting the U.N. and kicking them out of New York. Isn't it somebody else's turn to host those guys yet?





Just.. wow. Wow.

What's your favorite part, the utter WRONG of it all which we could argue over for a hundred posts, or the horrible, horrible writing style?

Does she consider herself a journalist, or any type of reporter of some sort or writer at all? Maybe she doesn't. If she does, she should look at an other article written by anyone ever.

For example, what is this article about? She appears to talk about how liberals, who apparently are one unified group that have breakfast together on Sundays while conservatives are at church to plan their evil strategies, are treating DeLay unfairly, by, well, saying that over and over, then making jokes, saying it some more, more jokes, mentioning people that call into radio shows, one other person in existence, and.. uh, changes the subject. She doesn't go back to DeLay. She takes a moment to deny scientifically accepted global warming, then goes on to Bolton.

I can't write any more about this krap. I'm not an eighth grade teacher explaining to my kids how they need more evidence in their literary analysis.


And bitching about pseudo-Republicans? Did she watch the Republican National Convention?


 
ifihadahif Posted: Mon May 9 21:01:51 2005 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Zacq said:
>
>For example, what is this article about? She appears to talk about how liberals, who apparently are one unified group that have breakfast together on Sundays while conservatives are at church to plan their evil strategies, are treating DeLay unfairly, by, well, saying that over and over, then making jokes, saying it some more, more jokes, mentioning people that call into radio shows, one other person in existence, and.. uh, changes the subject. She doesn't go back to DeLay. She takes a moment to deny scientifically accepted global warming, then goes on to Bolton.
>
>I can't write any more about this krap. I'm not an eighth grade teacher explaining to my kids how they need more evidence in their literary analysis.
>
>
>And bitching about pseudo-Republicans? Did she watch the Republican National Convention?
>
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
hee hee hee hee hee hee hee hee hee
You just don't get it Zacq, do you ?
It's because of guys like you that Ms. Coulter is so successful.
She is a multi-milionaire just because she can get under your skin.


 
Mesh Posted: Mon May 9 21:37:37 2005 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Hif is partly right with that one, though I wouldnt say ALL her success is due to people who hate her. I know people who say shes their hero as well, And buy all her books.


Personally, I dislike her as much as I dislike Michael Moore.


 
Posted: Mon May 9 21:44:02 2005 Post | Quote in Reply  
  One day I'm going to cut that bitch into four.


 
Zacq Posted: Mon May 9 22:36:23 2005 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ifihadahif said:
>You just don't get it Zacq, do you ?
>It's because of guys like you that Ms. Coulter is so successful.

So you recant the many, many times you've used her in defense of your political beliefs because she's not a serious person, she's just making money by making me angry?

If what you say about her is true, it makes her and people who quote her horrible and annoying people, respectively.


 
Mesh Posted: Mon May 9 22:55:32 2005 Post | Quote in Reply  
  http://www.foxnews.com/alancolmesradio/vidPlayer/player.html?colmes/050605/colmes_neal_horsley_050505&Alan_Colmes_Audio&Alan%20Colmes%20Radio&acc&Radio&-1&wvx-300


WHAT.THE.FUCK!?!


 
Silentmind Posted: Mon May 9 23:08:05 2005 Post | Quote in Reply  
 
>But we're not getting much in the way of details which is odd because the devil is usually found in the details.

I sigh at this. This coming from the person that has stated that Canadian troops, sanctioned by the Canadian gov't, fought in Vietnam. Sigh, the devil really is in the details. I don't agree with either extreme, frankly. Esp. the ones like Al Franken, and Ann Coulter who use opinions as fact, and just blather on. They can find no fault in "their own side." Its annoys me to no avail, as they do little but scream at one anothers faults {and most of the time the most minor and petty ones}, and make money off of it. Its like playground politics all over again.


 
DanSRose Posted: Mon May 9 23:56:41 2005 Post | Quote in Reply  
  meshuggah said:
>WHAT.THE.FUCK!?!

If I wasn't laughing so hard, I'd been scared.

What scares me about Coulter is that she takes herself and her 'jokes' seriously. Comedy is one thing, but her writing is something else, bordering on self-delusional, which always dangerous.


 
ifihadahif Posted: Tue May 10 06:44:52 2005 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Zacq said:
>
>So you recant the many, many times you've used her in defense of your political beliefs because she's not a serious person, she's just making money by making me angry?
>
>If what you say about her is true, it makes her and people who quote her horrible and annoying people, respectively.
>
I recant nothing and I don't find her annoying. I like her style of writing and find her to be quite humorous.



 
addi Posted: Tue May 10 07:53:58 2005 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Too many people take her as a serious journalist. Are these right wingers that hang on to her every word as gospel truth gullible?
Yes
Is it irresponsible of her to preach the message she does when so many take her "entertaining" opinions as facts?
Yes
Is it merely harmless entertainment and humor?
Not to me.

Anyone, conservative or liberal, that espouses dislike and mistrust for another culture or country because their goverments don't buy into the current political policy of America is dangerous to me...precicely because there are so many dumb people that are unable to discern between humorous hyperbole for a laugh, and the truth. So we get people that start believing all the French are evil, and that Canada is our enemy now, and so on. It's a sad fact, but there are millions of ignorant people voting here that let the talk show pundits (and their pastors) do their thinking for them.

I suggest Ann gets behind a mic and hits the stand up comedy club circuit if she's nothing more than a humor writer. Perhaps more naive Americans would see her for what she is then.

You enjoy her humor and writing style only because she happens to agree with your political outlook, hif. And that's cool, but let's call a spade a spade here. If Ann was using her same writing style and sense of humor, except from a liberal viewpoint, you'd be on here calling her an ignorant dumb cunt.




 
ifihadahif Posted: Tue May 10 11:42:51 2005 Post | Quote in Reply  
  addi said:
>You enjoy her humor and writing style only because she happens to agree with your political outlook, hif. And that's cool, but let's call a spade a spade here. If Ann was using her same writing style and sense of humor, except from a liberal viewpoint, you'd be on here calling her an ignorant dumb cunt.
>
Probably not Addi, I certainly have not gone on too many rants against Al Franken have I ?
Maybe I spoke against him a time or two during the election, but nothing like the crap that's been slung at Ms. Coulter.
Also I'm very much against censorship just to protect stupid people from themselves.


 
beetlebum Posted: Tue May 10 12:12:51 2005 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ifihadahif said:
>addi said:
>>You enjoy her humor and writing style only because she happens to agree with your political outlook, hif. And that's cool, but let's call a spade a spade here. If Ann was using her same writing style and sense of humor, except from a liberal viewpoint, you'd be on here calling her an ignorant dumb cunt.
>>
>Probably not Addi, I certainly have not gone on too many rants against Al Franken have I ?
>Maybe I spoke against him a time or two during the election, but nothing like the crap that's been slung at Ms. Coulter.
>Also I'm very much against censorship just to protect stupid people from themselves.

I wish Ms. Coulter would choke to death on her own vomit, but at the same time, I have to agree with Hif. She may spew lies, but so does every other politician... we rarely get the truth these days (it seems). Just the same, regardless of what Addi said, I have to say that I value freedom of speech over its possible negative influence on stupid people. That said, Ann Coulter can say all she wants so long as I'm allowed to call her a liar. : )


 
Zacq Posted: Tue May 10 17:35:27 2005 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ifihadahif said:
>Maybe I spoke against him a time or two during the election, but nothing like the crap that's been slung at Ms. Coulter.

This article would not have gotten a passing grade in an eighth grade english class just because she doesn't seem to understand topics or essay structure or anything apparently at all.

And if many conservatives do believe in what Ann Coulter says, and buy her books and etc..., then I guess her success isn't because of many leftists and sane people disliking her.

You say the right doesn't go after Franken as much as Coulter, and he's successful as well.


And I don't like to use all caps, but...

GLOBAL WARMING IS AN ACCEPTED SCIENTIFIC FACT, BESIDES COMMON SENSE YOU IDIOT. Coulter is by no means the only delusional conservative trying to pretend global warming doesn't exist though.


 
ifihadahif Posted: Tue May 10 17:49:10 2005 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Zacq said:
>This article would not have gotten a passing grade in an eighth grade english class just because she doesn't seem to understand topics or essay structure or anything apparently at all.
>
So what, how many bestselling books have you published ?
She is far more educated than you will probably ever be, and certainly learned all the grammatical rules you seem to think she doesn't know about.
In the real world those rules do not necessarily apply. She is no longer in the eighth grade.

>And if many conservatives do believe in what Ann Coulter says, and buy her books and etc..., then I guess her success isn't because of many leftists and sane people disliking her.
>
If the left completely ignored her, she would not sell a lot of books or speeches.

>You say the right doesn't go after Franken as much as Coulter, and he's successful as well.
>
Exactly where did I say the right doesn't go after Al Franken.
READ IT AGAIN ! I NEVER SAID THAT !

>And I don't like to use all caps, but...
>
>GLOBAL WARMING IS AN ACCEPTED SCIENTIFIC FACT, BESIDES COMMON SENSE YOU IDIOT. Coulter is by no means the only delusional conservative trying to pretend global warming doesn't exist though.
>
True, there are millions of people who don't believe global warming exists, including me.
In fact, there are enough people who don't believe it exists to make it correct to say that it is not an accepted scientific fact.
And why are you calling me an idiot, you annoying puss filled pustule ?


 
beetlebum Posted: Tue May 10 18:32:19 2005 Post | Quote in Reply  
 
>I wish Ms. Coulter would choke to death on her own vomit, but at the same time, I have to agree with Hif. She may spew lies, but so does every other politician... we rarely get the truth these days (it seems). Just the same, regardless of what Addi said, I have to say that I value freedom of speech over its possible negative influence on stupid people. That said, Ann Coulter can say all she wants so long as I'm allowed to call her a liar. : )

To clarify for my own benefit, I believe that Addi was implying that Ms. Coulter's rhetoric is dangerous. So perhaps my statement should have read:
Regardless of the fact that Ms. Coulter's rhetoric may be dangerous as it perhaps harmfully influences dumb people, I have to say that I value freedom of speech over its possible negative influence on aforementioned stupid (dumb) people.

No where did I mean to imply that Addi is against free speech.

Ya happy?!

GAWSH.


 
addi Posted: Tue May 10 19:02:07 2005 Post | Quote in Reply  
  beetlebum said:

>Ya happy?!
>
>GAWSH.

LOL!

I'm happy..relatively speaking : )


*your mother goes to college


 
Mesh Posted: Tue May 10 19:17:44 2005 Post | Quote in Reply  
  addi said:
>
>*your mother goes to college

*runs off, leaving his kit'n'kaboodles behind*


 
Silentmind Posted: Tue May 10 19:33:31 2005 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Global warming does happen in cycles. So the earth does go through warming and cooling cycles. HOWEVER, the warming process that has occured after the industrial revolution has greatly spead up the process. That is the dangerous thing. The environment cannot handle quickened heating rates.


 
Zacq Posted: Tue May 10 19:45:30 2005 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ifihadahif said:
>She is far more educated than you will probably ever be, and certainly learned all the grammatical rules you seem to think she doesn't know about.
>In the real world those rules do not necessarily apply. She is no longer in the eighth grade.

Ann Coulter supported the main point of her article with assumptions and jokes, and after finally coming up with an actual example of someone that was unfair to DeLay, assuming of course that he didn't do anything wrong which she never proves, she changes topic rapidly and talks about something unrelated for the rest of the article. There was nothing in that at all that indicated Tom DeLay has not committed ethics violations, and without that none of what she says meant anything. And I never said grammatical mistakes.


>Exactly where did I say the right doesn't go after Al Franken.
>READ IT AGAIN ! I NEVER SAID THAT !

Whoa. Sorry. You said that you didn't go after him as much as we go after her. However, it is plain to see that nowhere near the amount of energy spent complaining about Coulter is spent on Franken, maybe because the stuff about Coulter is actually true or maybe because the Republicans don't need to be on the offensive right now. Whatever.


>True, there are millions of people who don't believe global warming exists, including me.
>In fact, there are enough people who don't believe it exists to make it correct to say that it is not an accepted scientific fact.
>And why are you calling me an idiot, you annoying puss filled pustule ?

Okay. I don't care if a lot of people don't believe in global warming. Something is a scientific fact when the majority of scientists accept it, not the rest of the population. It's a pretty simple concept - the temperature of the earth has been increasing. There is basically indisputable evidence it is caused at least partially by green house gases building up. When the air gets hotter, more ice mlets. Duh. That water needs somewhere to go. And I never called you an idiot, just Ann Coulter. And she's not really an idiot if she, which I believe she does, knows that much of what she says is lies and distortions. Good job for her for taking advantage of people's ignorance to make money. The best I could say for her is that maybe she believes her lies and distortions are necessary to help a cause she sees as just.

Eh. Maybe she's just an idiot.

In summary:
poorly structured argument distracts from severe lack of evidence
global warming: real and obvious
Coulter: stupid or evil or both

I think Limbaugh denies global warming to. He also denied the harmful effects of smoking in the early nineties. He's probably right.


 
Zacq Posted: Tue May 10 20:01:24 2005 Post | Quote in Reply  
  addi said:
>*your mother goes to college

Damn you.

Just out of curiosity, how much education does one require to have more than Ann Coulter, ignoring the fact that most real education comes out of schools, and that apparently college professors are evil?

Guess I should have something to shoot for.


 
Zacq Posted: Tue May 10 20:06:19 2005 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Zacq said:
>, ignoring the fact that most real education comes out of schools,

outside of school


 
ifihadahif Posted: Tue May 10 20:51:55 2005 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Zacq said:
>addi said:
>>*your mother goes to college
>
>Damn you.
>
>Just out of curiosity, how much education does one require to have more than Ann Coulter, ignoring the fact that most real education comes out of schools, and that apparently college professors are evil?
>
Coulter graduated with honors from Cornell University School of Arts & Sciences, and received her J.D. from University of Michigan Law School, where she was an editor of The Michigan Law Review.
Coulter clerked for the Honorable Pasco Bowman II of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit and was an attorney in the Department of Justice Honors Program for outstanding law school graduates.

After practicing law in private practice in New York City, Coulter worked for the Senate Judiciary Committee, where she handled crime and immigration issues for Senator Spencer Abraham of Michigan. From there, she became a litigator with the Center For Individual Rights in Washington, DC, a public interest law firm dedicated to the defense of individual rights with particular emphasis on freedom of speech, civil rights, and the free exercise of religion.
>
Would you say that is the resume of an idiot ?

>Guess I should have something to shoot for.
>
Forget it, you don't have the chops !


 
Zacq Posted: Tue May 10 21:01:52 2005 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ifihadahif said:
>Would you say that is the resume of an idiot ?

Reasonable argument. So she knows what's she's doing. I guess I'll accept that she's just evil.

Okay everyone, great thread, let's shift over to the relevant one at the top of the list please.


 
ifihadahif Posted: Tue May 10 21:02:24 2005 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Zacq said:
>ifihadahif said:
>>She is far more educated than you will probably ever be, and certainly learned all the grammatical rules you seem to think she doesn't know about.
>>In the real world those rules do not necessarily apply. She is no longer in the eighth grade.
>
>Ann Coulter supported the main point of her article with assumptions and jokes, and after finally coming up with an actual example of someone that was unfair to DeLay, assuming of course that he didn't do anything wrong which she never proves, she changes topic rapidly and talks about something unrelated for the rest of the article. There was nothing in that at all that indicated Tom DeLay has not committed ethics violations, and without that none of what she says meant anything. And I never said grammatical mistakes.
>
So you want her to prove a negative where Mr. DeLay is concerned ?
The burden of proof is on the accusers is it not ?
Again I will say Ms. Coulter is not bound by your rules as far as her writing style is concerned, she is a professional not a student.
You can't really say it doesn't work for her.
>>Exactly where did I say the right doesn't go after Al Franken.
>>READ IT AGAIN ! I NEVER SAID THAT !
>
>Whoa. Sorry. You said that you didn't go after him as much as we go after her. However, it is plain to see that nowhere near the amount of energy spent complaining about Coulter is spent on Franken, maybe because the stuff about Coulter is actually true or maybe because the Republicans don't need to be on the offensive right now. Whatever.
>
Most probably is because no one pays attention to Franken. He doesn't have nearly the impact that Coulter does.

>>True, there are millions of people who don't believe global warming exists, including me.
>>In fact, there are enough people who don't believe it exists to make it correct to say that it is not an accepted scientific fact.
>>And why are you calling me an idiot, you annoying puss filled pustule ?
>
>Okay. I don't care if a lot of people don't believe in global warming. Something is a scientific fact when the majority of scientists accept it, not the rest of the population. It's a pretty simple concept - the temperature of the earth has been increasing. There is basically indisputable evidence it is caused at least partially by green house gases building up. When the air gets hotter, more ice mlets. Duh. That water needs somewhere to go. And I never called you an idiot, just Ann Coulter. And she's not really an idiot if she, which I believe she does, knows that much of what she says is lies and distortions. Good job for her for taking advantage of people's ignorance to make money. The best I could say for her is that maybe she believes her lies and distortions are necessary to help a cause she sees as just.
>
>Eh. Maybe she's just an idiot.
>
>In summary:
>poorly structured argument distracts from severe lack of evidence
>global warming: real and obvious
>Coulter: stupid or evil or both
>
>I think Limbaugh denies global warming to. He also denied the harmful effects of smoking in the early nineties. He's probably right.
>
Actually I thought that a scientific theory became a fact when it is proven, not when a majority of scientists believe in it. Even still you're a long way from that.

http://www.globalwarming.org/

More to the point, it hasn't been all that long ago in our history that it was accepted scientific fact that the earth was flat and the center of the universe.



 
addi Posted: Tue May 10 21:23:31 2005 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ifihadahif said:

>Would you say that is the resume of an idiot ?

apparantly it is

: )





 
Zacq Posted: Tue May 10 22:15:05 2005 Post | Quote in Reply  
  ifihadahif said:
>So you want her to prove a negative where Mr. DeLay is concerned ?
>The burden of proof is on the accusers is it not ?

The main point of her article for the beginning paragraphs is that liberals are making up things and twisting the truth about Tom DeLay. This is an accusation. Her evidence for this being true requires the reader to automatically accept that DeLay hasn't done anything wrong, which is a very controversial topic in the news at the moment. She provides no evidence she's correct DeLay is innocent, which makes her entire point about liberals misconstruing based on nothing.

Jokes about lame accusations made by liberals are meaningless when Coulter has not made any actual case in support of DeLay. This article is meaningless.


(it's his grandson)


 
Zacq Posted: Tue May 10 22:18:39 2005 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Zacq said:

>by Ann Coulter


>We keep hearing Tom DeLay's name uttered in angry, accusatory tones, but I still don't know what law he's supposed to have broken.

Whether or not they're true, a simple google search provides many different accusations against Tom DeLay. Coulter's article is only valid if no such accusations exist, because otherwise she does not have the necessary assumption that liberals against DeLay are making things up.


 
Mesh Posted: Wed May 11 00:25:58 2005 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Anne Coulter is on Jay Leno.


 
Mesh Posted: Wed May 11 00:27:59 2005 Post | Quote in Reply  
  meshuggah said:
>Anne Coulter is on Jay Leno.

She made me laugh a couple of times. She should stick to comedy related shows. Where her humourus speech belongs.


 
Silentmind Posted: Wed May 11 00:51:04 2005 Post | Quote in Reply  
 
>>
>Actually I thought that a scientific theory became a fact when it is proven, not when a majority of scientists believe in it. Even still you're a long way from that.
>
>http://www.globalwarming.org/
>

Again, I shall point about to the point I made above about global warming.

>More to the point, it hasn't been all that long ago in our history that it was accepted scientific fact that the earth was flat and the center of the universe.
>


Ahahahahahha. please don't quote that again as a reason for accepted scientific fact. That was only believed by a tiny section of the population, and due to the catholic church at the time, their stuff got published. Recent research has actually shown that that was not a pervasive thought amongst society at the time.


 
ifihadahif Posted: Wed May 11 06:42:17 2005 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Silentmind said:
>
>Ahahahahahha. please don't quote that again as a reason for accepted scientific fact. That was only believed by a tiny section of the population, and due to the catholic church at the time, their stuff got published. Recent research has actually shown that that was not a pervasive thought amongst society at the time.
>
WTF are you talking about ?
Are you actually saying that as recently as medieval times that most folks other than Catholics actually believed the earth was not flat ?


 
addi Posted: Wed May 11 07:49:20 2005 Post | Quote in Reply  
  addi said:

>*your mother goes to college

Correction:

your MOM goes to college.



Hif: Hey, Addison. What did you do last summer again?
Addison Fireball: I told you! I spent it with my Step-mom in Nebraska hunting albino squirrels!
Hif: Did you shoot any?
Addison Fireball: Yes, like 50 of 'em! They kept trying to attack my blue clogs, what the heck would you do in a situation like that?
Hif: What kind of gun did you use?
Addison Fireball: A freakin' B B gun, what do you think?


 
Silentmind Posted: Wed May 11 11:33:42 2005 Post | Quote in Reply  
 
>WTF are you talking about ?
>Are you actually saying that as recently as medieval times that most folks other than Catholics actually believed the earth was not flat ?


Yep, I am. And I didn't say all catholics. I said a small section of society that got their works published. Which needed catholic church approval. Its one of those myths that exists out there.


 
Silentmind Posted: Wed May 11 11:36:28 2005 Post | Quote in Reply  
  I shall quote from the Wikipedia article on teh matter: "Today essentially all professional mediaevalists agree with Russell that the "mediaeval flat earth" is a nineteenth-century fabrication, and that the few verifiable "flat earthers" were the exception."


 
ifihadahif Posted: Wed May 11 13:24:42 2005 Post | Quote in Reply  
  You may be correct.
This is the total opposite of what was taught in public schools when I went, so you will forgive me if I'm skeptical.
When history is revised every so often, it's bound to get fucked up.
Is this revisionist history or is it something that has been corrected ?

Either way, I won't budge on the global warming theory until it has been proven.
So far it's still just a theory.


 
Silentmind Posted: Wed May 11 15:09:42 2005 Post | Quote in Reply  
 
>Is this revisionist history or is it something that has been corrected ?

Its been corrected. It was mostly based on the fact that the documents that were published were published by a small section of society. New finds ect. disproved that assertion.


 
Zacq Posted: Wed May 11 17:48:18 2005 Post | Quote in Reply  
  I'm curious as to what part of the common sense of global warming is being disagreed with. More importantly, or should I say humorously, I found this on the site you posted.

The Inuit of Baffin Island are finding their ancient way of life under threat as their snowmobiles fall through the ice.


 
Zacq Posted: Wed May 11 17:51:08 2005 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Almost forgot to mention:

"Until we can completely prove global warming, which will of course require it to have already done a large amount of permanent damage, there is no reason to, you know, reduce pollution. It's not like there's anything bad about pollution. It makes companies run cheaper! Hooray unregulated capitalism!"


 
ifihadahif Posted: Wed May 11 18:35:29 2005 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Zacq said:
>Almost forgot to mention:
>
>"Until we can completely prove global warming, which will of course require it to have already done a large amount of permanent damage, there is no reason to, you know, reduce pollution. It's not like there's anything bad about pollution. It makes companies run cheaper! Hooray unregulated capitalism!"
>
Nobody said anything about pollution being bad or good. But as long as you bring it up, where is the pressure for India and China to reduce their emissions ?
Also why are you still here ? I thought you declared an end to this thread and moved on.


 
Zacq Posted: Wed May 11 18:56:25 2005 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Yesterday I wanted people to help give Cherry Moon advice. I don't think at the moment she's going to be online checking GT, so I decided to point out the stupidity of the phrases 'ancient way of life' and 'snowmobiles' in the same sentence.

And what was your point about pressure on India and China? I don't think me waving a fist at them would do much good. We would need the U.S. government to try. I wonder if Bush will be working on that with his Mandate From God.


 
Mesh Posted: Wed May 11 19:40:08 2005 Post | Quote in Reply  
  Zacq said:
>Mandate From God.


When the president talks to god
Do they drink near beer and go play golf
While they pick which countries to invade
Which Muslim souls still can be saved?
I guess god just calls a spade a spade
When the president talks to god



 



[ Reply to this thread ] [ Start new thread ]