and clearly the link is bogus
-
“There is nothing government can give you that it hasn’t taken from you in the first place”
Sir Winston Churchill -
Insert "Anything from a "news" site run by G. Beck is bogus" here.Comment
-
LOL and you believe them? How gullible are you?
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/16/sc...hing.html?_r=1
Comment
-
time for a little
Yes and there is no bias and agenda from any of those links you have just posted either
The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money. -Alexis de TocquevilleOriginally posted by Fusion
The Desire to Save Humanity is Always a False Front for the Urge to Rule it- H. L. Mencken
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants.
William Pitt-Comment
-
I never quite understood why AGW denial has become a position amongst the majority of conservatives. Perhaps it's the same reason many of them think the Earth is less than 10,000 years old. Whether you agree or disagree with the AGW science, I think we can all agree that fossil fuel supply is finite, probably within this century, and we should step up efforts to determine better forms of alternate energy.
Google "Integral Fast Reactor". Supposedly, we have the ability to produce all of the world's energy needs with current nuclear supplies for the next 10,000 years. But thanks to the Clinton administration and specifically John Kerry, the development of the IFR was abandoned due to the nuclear paranoia that developed from the Cold War and Chernoble incident.sigpicComment
-
I feel bad for the "conservatives" that think the bible says the earth is 10,000 years old anywhere. Obviously they are not reading the same bible I am. For further reading, see Gap Theory.
Comment
-
The link isn't bogus. Right at the beginning of the article:
Furthermore, just because they say it's fake doesn't mean it is or isn't--they have all the incentive to do damage control for their donors being exposed.Update: The Heartland Institute has acknowledged that some of the documents were theirs, but claims that a strategy document is fraudulent. This document is the sole source of information that suggests that an educational program was in preparation.Comment
-
I wonder at which point in that article the choreographed tears make an appearance.Comment
-
so now we get to the bottom of the Heartland Institute mess
it turns out the whole thing was a fake, made up and confessed by, get this, Peter Gleick, the warmist scientist mentioned in the Heartland memo and also chairman of the American Geophysical Union's Task Force on Scientific Ethics. ON ETHICS!!
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/art...ne_113225.html
and you wonder why the public is starting to realize its all BS?
and the bad part about all this is this, what if the warmist crowd IS correct, that warming is a result of man, and now they've destroyed any credibility they may have had left. nobody will believe them any longer.
you cannot make this stuff up“There is nothing government can give you that it hasn’t taken from you in the first place”
Sir Winston ChurchillComment
-
I don't understand why you don't read the articles you post...or if you read them you mischaracterize them to others here. Or perhaps you're just willing to believe anything someone writes on their blog?
It's difficult otherwise to make sense of you claiming this article is evidence of Gleick forging a document when his "confession" is how he acquired the document and not that he created it. Then the article argues it doesn't matter because he's just confessing to that irrelevant detail in the hopes no one will make an issue out of what he really did.Das ist nicht nur nicht richtig, es ist nicht einmal falsch!Comment
-
quote
"fter he was caught, Gleick confessed, but he's still trying the "modified limited hangout": confess to a small crime in the hope that this will mollify investigators and they won't dig up evidence of your big crime. So Gleick has confessed to obtaining the genuine Heartland documents through deceptive means. (He called Heartland posing as a member of the institute's board and talked a gullible junior staffer into sending him the handouts for an upcoming board meeting.) But he still maintains that the fake "confidential strategy memo" was sent to him by an anonymous source, and that he only obtained the Heartland documents in an attempt to verify the memo.
This won't hold up, because Gleick still doesn't understand the meta-data that tripped him up. The fake strategy memo was created about a day before the documents were released, which appears to be well after Gleick pilfered the genuine documents. That fits with McArdle's impression that the fake memo was created by cutting and pasting facts from the other documents. Which implies that Gleick was the forger."
Gleick's response
"i don't know what you're talking about"
seems like i jumped to a conclusion“There is nothing government can give you that it hasn’t taken from you in the first place”
Sir Winston ChurchillComment
-
Fair enough.
Hey did you read the hyper linked articles in that write up? The WSJ OP-eds are more interesting to read imo
Sent from my SGH-I897 using TapatalkDas ist nicht nur nicht richtig, es ist nicht einmal falsch!Comment
Comment