• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Environmentalism speech by Michael Crichton and second hand smoking

varwoche said:
I can't resist getting these two statements together in one post, colored text added...
Click to expand...
[an unheard of Spanish language, fee-based site]

It is unheard by you, of course. There are so many things you haven’t heard about! but it doesn’t mean that if you don’t hear about something it doesn’t exist or it is worthless. It just means you are not the centre of the universe. :jaw-dropp

Unfortunately, because I cannot post links or images until my 15th post (rules of the board) I would recommend you to go to that website and look at the bottom of every page for the counter (about 1,890,000+ visitors) and then click on the little blue square by Nedstat and see the stats for every country, especially English speaking countries. :D
 
BobK said:
I assume you're alluding to tobacco interests. Well, it seems they only funded the last 11-12 years of the 40 year study.

Do you think it's possible the American Cancer Society and the Tobacco-Related Disease Research Program might have stopped their funding because the study data wasn't showing what they expected? It's something you might want to consider.

I don't really care one way or the other. I only posted it because that's what Lucifuge Rofocale was looking for.
Click to expand...
I appreciate that. Did you note that it was very hard to find this stuff ? I wonder why. For any other thing I usually google for, scientific data and studies apeear almost inmediatly.
 
I agree. Michael Crichton is a great writer, but he has shown the greens the hogwash they speak and believe in. And that is an unforgivable sin. Succesful people are always envied by lower spirits.
 
a_unique_person said:
Michael Crichton is a very poor writer, who has demonstrated nothing, except that he is gullible. There are so many LOL moments in "State of Fear", they should call the book a comedy.
Click to expand...
And your birth certificate should be called a tragedy... :jaw-dropp

Cheers!!
 
jj's signature said:
Some of us prefer to see others suffer before they finally die.
Cain 2-14-06
Click to expand...

Oh, you're too funny for words. Remember when I quoted you (in full) in my signature and you went crying to the admins? Do you recall your recent accusation of my "blatant" dishonesty (subsequently -- quite easily, I might add -- disproven)?

Notice here I don't need to summon that kind of faux outrage at this bit of context dropping, nor do I need to go running to an a nanny administrator. It's really just silly nonsense; it helps that the hyperlink clearly demonstrates my sarcastic intentions. I'm pleased to see this is the best you can do. :)
 
Lucifuge, debating with you is like playing whack-a-mole. You ditch this thread, having relied on the expertise of pulp writer Michael Cretin, and start a new thread where you cite gibbering idiots who can't tell a degree from a radian (oops!) and who don't know thing one about climatology. And when this is exposed, then you hop back over here.
 
varwoche said:
Lucifuge, debating with you is like playing whack-a-mole. You ditch this thread, having relied on the expertise of pulp writer Michael Cretin, and start a new thread where you cite gibbering idiots who can't tell a degree from a radian (oops!) and who don't know thing one about climatology. And when this is exposed, then you hop back over here.
Click to expand...
I started a new thead because this one was for the linkage between cancer and SHS.
I haven't relied in nobody's expertise, If you read the OP I was looking for confirmation for a single statement. I haven't said even that the statement is true!.
I can accept that Makintyre was wrong about those danm radians, but so far I haven't seem any flaw in his paper abut global temperature and plenty of that in Mann's. Then, I started another thread to discuss GW and you complain?
Is that a scientific way?
 
Lucifuge Rofocale said:
But, is that GW caused by human activity?
Click to expand...
Yes. The more humans, the more farms. Fewer carbon sinks like trees and more carbon emitters like methane from cows. Look at the Black Death, the decine in population, falling temeratures. Likewise the invasion of the America's in the 1500's, a decline in population, falling temeratures.
 
Solitaire said:
Yes. The more humans, the more farms. Fewer carbon sinks like trees and more carbon emitters like methane from cows. Look at the Black Death, the decine in population, falling temeratures. Likewise the invasion of the America's in the 1500's, a decline in population, falling temeratures.
Click to expand...
hmmm please look ath the GW thread. There are papers who apparently shows that in the middle ages we had more temperature than now
 
varwoche said:
Er, I guess someone hacked your account...
Click to expand...
Your guess is wrong.

Varwoche, let’s make some things clear, so you will be able to spare your “clever” remarks.

1) I don’t deny global warming, as it has happened many times over during several millions years since Earth was created.

2) I deny that the warming experienced since 1860 until 1998 is of a catastrophic nature.

3) I claim that temperatures have risen and gone down several times from 1860 to present days, and will keep doing just that in the future –with more going down in the very near future, as we get closer to the incoming Gleissberg Solar Double Minimum by 2030, also called the Landscheidt Minimum.

4) This solar event will have the same characteristic and consequences as the Maunder Minimum of the 1600s, when sunspots disappeared from the Sun’s surface from 1641 until 1717. This time span correspond the coldest part of the Little Ice Age.

The rest you can imagine. I said (and will keep saying) that “catastrophic global warming” scenarios, as presented by the IPCC and their accomplices is one of the biggest scientific frauds in Earth’s history –along with the ozone Hoax and the DDT ban.
 
Edufer said:
The rest you can imagine. I said (and will keep saying) that “catastrophic global warming” scenarios, as presented by the IPCC and their accomplices is one of the biggest scientific frauds in Earth’s history –along with the ozone Hoax and the DDT ban.
Click to expand...


The "ozone hoax?"

You do, of course, then, have a solution for the actual testable, measurable, verifiable evidence of ozone depletion?

Oh, no, you didn't cite any of that, you just called it a "hoax" but you didn't support the extraordinary accusation with even ordinary evidence.

I really hope that you look both ways before you cross the road.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom