drnykterstein

Lies. At least be realistic in your fantasy land arguments. I'll assume you have a more realistic number, such as 5% rise in costs and I'll respond to that. I don't love the HC bill, but the mandate was the thing that tries to address these cost problems. In 2014 when the full bill is in effect if the mandate works as advertised, costs should go down. .. but if not, you live in a society. Deal with it. You can't kill people just because it's not profitable for you.

Probably this is partially true. However, there does in fact exist people who now have health insurance who could literally not get insurance before at any price. They just could not get insured, no company would take them. That is health insurance they could not get, you know, health being the thing that keeps you from being dead. Your ideologies are messing with peoples lives, and killing them literally.

When family XYZ was not able to acquire insurance because they would cut into the insurance companies profit margin.

In addition to the ambiguities, you tard, there are many thing that are not-ambiguous. For example the greenhouse effect is not ambiguous at all, it's extremely sound science. The measure of the carbon levels in the ice cores is accurate. The Short term assessments from the last 1000 years is very reliable and accurate. There is very little guessing involved here, and the fact that you've managed to convince yourself that scientists just spend their time making guesses and claiming them as fact would explain why you hate science so much. Are you sure you don't have a sharp object lodged in your brain that you are not aware of? Go see a doctor. Unrelated things are unrelated. OC's posting was so ridiculously based in an alternate reality that I did not and would not consider giving it a serious response. I've given the "cleaning a sewer" analogy before regarding this guy. That analogy holds true again for his post in this thread. I'll assume you want this information in order to make ad hominem arguments against me.

With an intro like this, how can I resist? 1. Insurance rates were going to go up no matter what. They've been sky rocketing for a while now. 2. Things will settle down, various stages of the bill come into effect. 3. I still think we should do universal HC, personally 4. The article does not seem to mention benefits of the bill, such as people actually having health insurance now.

http://www.nostate.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/votefornobody.jpg

The worst part of this post is that I'm well aware you are not trolling. You are actually serious. You have however managed to stand by your standard posting format. Your first sentence is just a pile of absolute bull ****. You then build on this bull **** to form more bull ****. You make a ton of assumptions throughout your post that are not even close to true. You demonize the left, as you have been mentally conditioned to do.

I think the real story behind your posting here is that... well damn, you made it through a whole sentence without calling me a moron.

Yep

Here is 1000 years, this is a bit easier to claim. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temperature_record_of_the_past_1000_years http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/tar/wg1/069.htm#fig220 And then the ice core data (as I said above)is going to be a bit more circumstantial. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/07/070705-antarctica-ice.html http://oceanworld.tamu.edu/resources/oceanography-book/evidenceforwarming.htm http://www.grida.no/publications/vg/climate/ (if anyone has access) http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v453/n7193/abs/nature06949.html http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v453/n7193/abs/nature06950.html http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v399/n6735/abs/399429a0.html

That kind of false assumption is the reason why PPP cannot have intelligent conversations.

Not true. There is a lot of evidence to suggest that it's the warmest decade in over 200,000 years. But there are some ambiguities in that data so you cannot say 200k years as a definite article of fact.

Ya. Each one of those was directly followed by an ice age. I disagree the on your C02 claim. CO2 levels have not been this high in at least a half million year, but likely much more than that.

There are a few sure ways to tell if someone is a grade A moron. When someone burns a book, it's pretty much a badge on their chest that says "I'm ignorant and proud of it".

There is a lot of truthiness in this posting.

Actually, I have more to add to my post above.... Science may not get everything right on the first try, but it is a system that corrects itself and tries it's best to achieve perfection. Despite it's imperfections it is the best device mankind has for predicting the future. We would be wise to heed it's best advice. I view the various errors in Global Warming science in the same light that the Piltdown man is viewed in evolutionary science. The Piltdown man even does not disprove evolution, but critics of evolution jumped all over it and made every effort to use that to claim they were correct. Despite that one event, the evidence for evolution is just overwhelming, to the point where it's a very safe assumption to believe it's true. Evolution is predictive, and these predictions have been used to create medicines to help man. Global Warming's theory is also predictive, and so far at least some of the predictions have been true. Since the theory was first formulated in the 60's, the average temperate of the planet has continued to rise.

Since my name was mentioned... To be clear, there are a few things I differ with mainstream Democrats with. Gun laws are one such item. I own guns, and I think it's one of our most fundamentally important rights that citizens be able to own/carry firearms. Taking away the right to carry a weapon at the point when you would need it most kind of defeats the purpose of being able to carry a weapon.

Alright, so after reading this InterAcademy Council I have to conclude it's a beautiful recommendation and it represents everything that is to be loved about the scientific community. I have no disagreements with it, not that I think I would be qualified to do so in the first place. It praises the IPCC, yet points out areas where improvements can be made. In my view it is in complete agreement with the letter from the US Scientists, as that letter also praises the IPCC, yet points out areas that need improvement. None of these items disagree with the IPCC's assessment on anthropogenic global warming. In the case of the IAC, I don't think they were going for criticism of the results, only the processes and organization used to obtain the results. I think it was an extremely well executed recommendation. Dave is right, there are many parallels between the tobacco lobby of the 60's and the energy lobby of today. Much has been written about that. (example)

There are two kinds of global warming deniers. There are the types who can at least understand that world is warming, and will disagree on the cause, and it's almost a reasonable discussion. Then there there are batshit insane fact-deniers like yourself who just make complete fabrications and tout them as truth. The fact that the average temperature of the earth is at record highs in measurable history just cannot be argued. We have tangible measurable data going back a few hundred thousand years. By "on record" we are talking at least since 1880. Given how accurate data gathered from ice cores is, very likely we are talking about more than 200,000 years of data. The 2000's were the warmest decade on record. 2010 is on track to be the warmest year on record. 14 of the warmest 15 years on record have been experienced between 1995 and 2009. There is a 0.8 degrees C warming since mid-19th century. You cannot deny these any more than you can claim (to steal from AD) the earth is flat and the sun revolved around the earth. Glaciers are melting, you cannot claim otherwise and consider yourself educated at the same time. DC Tom your lack of faith the scientific process itself is astounding given how much you espouse to know about science. Now read the !@#$ing letter, as it is way more elegant and accurate than I could ever be. http://www.openletterfromscientists.com/ I should hate to have any of you tards keep on believing your denier religion due to !@#$ ups on my part. Yes I've made plenty of errors in my arguments. Al Gore is a cocksucking profiteer, Nancy Pelosi is as ugly as a warthog, yes. Global warming is real though and back up by extremely strong and sound science.

Ok, well if I had to make you read just one of those, it would be the letter.

And the last link? The letter.

There is a different between "worship" and "respect the opinion of".

+1. Agreed. A+++++ WOULD READ AGAIN

Of course. Some are, but then again some CEO's are going to be schmucks who don't deserve the job they hold. Where are we going with this? After you reach a certain wealth threshold, in my opinion it is just human nature to care less an less about this earth that we all share. You've got yourself and your family taken care of, it's easy to stop caring about the rest of mankind as much.

I love you Republicans, in a ROFL sort of way.