GLOBAL WARMING: Gore & Other Nervous Nellies Got Ya Scared? RELAX!
#256
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: GLOBAL WARMING: Gore & Other Nervous Nellies Got Ya Scared?
On Wed, 05 Jul 2006 19:13:56 -0400, "Deck" <decan9@yahoo.com> wrote:
>all that c02 coming out of Gore's mouth is causing globaL warming....
And all the yawning it causes could result in a massive chain reaction.
--
Bob
>all that c02 coming out of Gore's mouth is causing globaL warming....
And all the yawning it causes could result in a massive chain reaction.
--
Bob
#260
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: The debate is over.
Matt Whiting wrote:
> grinder wrote:
>> "nothermark" <nothermark@not.here> wrote in message
>> news:gv1ra2dk2tgpkpk6d0fiv91k30r56odvq0@4ax.com...
>>
>>> On Thu, 06 Jul 2006 15:07:10 GMT, "grinder" <seagle@earthlink.invalid>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Global warming is over and the 77 million tons of carbon dioxide man
>>>> injects
>>>> into the atmosphere every DAY contributes to it. To say there is no
>>>> way
>>>> that amount can be reduced is laughable.
>>>>
>>>
>>> You are correct. However, no one has the guts to depopulate Asia and
>>> the Indian sub continent. If you aren't willing to do that the little
>>> we can do in this country is negligible.
>>
>>
>> U.S. accounts for 30% of the CO2 pollution. That is hardly negligible.
>>
>
> Except that CO2 isn't pollution. Just ask a tree.
>
> Matt
ok, I went and asked a tree. He wouldn't tell me anything! Just stood
there like a log or something.
> grinder wrote:
>> "nothermark" <nothermark@not.here> wrote in message
>> news:gv1ra2dk2tgpkpk6d0fiv91k30r56odvq0@4ax.com...
>>
>>> On Thu, 06 Jul 2006 15:07:10 GMT, "grinder" <seagle@earthlink.invalid>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Global warming is over and the 77 million tons of carbon dioxide man
>>>> injects
>>>> into the atmosphere every DAY contributes to it. To say there is no
>>>> way
>>>> that amount can be reduced is laughable.
>>>>
>>>
>>> You are correct. However, no one has the guts to depopulate Asia and
>>> the Indian sub continent. If you aren't willing to do that the little
>>> we can do in this country is negligible.
>>
>>
>> U.S. accounts for 30% of the CO2 pollution. That is hardly negligible.
>>
>
> Except that CO2 isn't pollution. Just ask a tree.
>
> Matt
ok, I went and asked a tree. He wouldn't tell me anything! Just stood
there like a log or something.
#261
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: The debate is over.
Matt Whiting wrote:
> grinder wrote:
>> "nothermark" <nothermark@not.here> wrote in message
>> news:gv1ra2dk2tgpkpk6d0fiv91k30r56odvq0@4ax.com...
>>
>>> On Thu, 06 Jul 2006 15:07:10 GMT, "grinder" <seagle@earthlink.invalid>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Global warming is over and the 77 million tons of carbon dioxide man
>>>> injects
>>>> into the atmosphere every DAY contributes to it. To say there is no
>>>> way
>>>> that amount can be reduced is laughable.
>>>>
>>>
>>> You are correct. However, no one has the guts to depopulate Asia and
>>> the Indian sub continent. If you aren't willing to do that the little
>>> we can do in this country is negligible.
>>
>>
>> U.S. accounts for 30% of the CO2 pollution. That is hardly negligible.
>>
>
> Except that CO2 isn't pollution. Just ask a tree.
>
> Matt
ok, I went and asked a tree. He wouldn't tell me anything! Just stood
there like a log or something.
> grinder wrote:
>> "nothermark" <nothermark@not.here> wrote in message
>> news:gv1ra2dk2tgpkpk6d0fiv91k30r56odvq0@4ax.com...
>>
>>> On Thu, 06 Jul 2006 15:07:10 GMT, "grinder" <seagle@earthlink.invalid>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Global warming is over and the 77 million tons of carbon dioxide man
>>>> injects
>>>> into the atmosphere every DAY contributes to it. To say there is no
>>>> way
>>>> that amount can be reduced is laughable.
>>>>
>>>
>>> You are correct. However, no one has the guts to depopulate Asia and
>>> the Indian sub continent. If you aren't willing to do that the little
>>> we can do in this country is negligible.
>>
>>
>> U.S. accounts for 30% of the CO2 pollution. That is hardly negligible.
>>
>
> Except that CO2 isn't pollution. Just ask a tree.
>
> Matt
ok, I went and asked a tree. He wouldn't tell me anything! Just stood
there like a log or something.
#262
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: The debate is over.
Matt Whiting wrote:
> grinder wrote:
>> "nothermark" <nothermark@not.here> wrote in message
>> news:gv1ra2dk2tgpkpk6d0fiv91k30r56odvq0@4ax.com...
>>
>>> On Thu, 06 Jul 2006 15:07:10 GMT, "grinder" <seagle@earthlink.invalid>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Global warming is over and the 77 million tons of carbon dioxide man
>>>> injects
>>>> into the atmosphere every DAY contributes to it. To say there is no
>>>> way
>>>> that amount can be reduced is laughable.
>>>>
>>>
>>> You are correct. However, no one has the guts to depopulate Asia and
>>> the Indian sub continent. If you aren't willing to do that the little
>>> we can do in this country is negligible.
>>
>>
>> U.S. accounts for 30% of the CO2 pollution. That is hardly negligible.
>>
>
> Except that CO2 isn't pollution. Just ask a tree.
>
> Matt
ok, I went and asked a tree. He wouldn't tell me anything! Just stood
there like a log or something.
> grinder wrote:
>> "nothermark" <nothermark@not.here> wrote in message
>> news:gv1ra2dk2tgpkpk6d0fiv91k30r56odvq0@4ax.com...
>>
>>> On Thu, 06 Jul 2006 15:07:10 GMT, "grinder" <seagle@earthlink.invalid>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Global warming is over and the 77 million tons of carbon dioxide man
>>>> injects
>>>> into the atmosphere every DAY contributes to it. To say there is no
>>>> way
>>>> that amount can be reduced is laughable.
>>>>
>>>
>>> You are correct. However, no one has the guts to depopulate Asia and
>>> the Indian sub continent. If you aren't willing to do that the little
>>> we can do in this country is negligible.
>>
>>
>> U.S. accounts for 30% of the CO2 pollution. That is hardly negligible.
>>
>
> Except that CO2 isn't pollution. Just ask a tree.
>
> Matt
ok, I went and asked a tree. He wouldn't tell me anything! Just stood
there like a log or something.
#263
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: The debate is over.
"Bob Adkins" <bobad@charter.net> wrote in message
news:s5gva29661kqvf90q5v0kpdnavu2oh017a@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 7 Jul 2006 09:40:57 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
<mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net>
> wrote:
>
>
> >> On the bright side, when CO2 increases, so do plants and organisms that
> >> consume it. Vast forests and grasslands, and especially vast expanses
of
> >> ocean have enough organisms to have a real effect on reducing CO2.
> >
> >Well, there you have it. We just need more oceans. I nominate Iraq as
an
> >appropriate site.
>
> I'll see your Iraq, and raise you Iran and N. Korea.
> --
> Bob
ROFLMAO
Isrial will do Iran for us. They're more afraid of them than we are.
#264
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: The debate is over.
"Bob Adkins" <bobad@charter.net> wrote in message
news:s5gva29661kqvf90q5v0kpdnavu2oh017a@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 7 Jul 2006 09:40:57 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
<mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net>
> wrote:
>
>
> >> On the bright side, when CO2 increases, so do plants and organisms that
> >> consume it. Vast forests and grasslands, and especially vast expanses
of
> >> ocean have enough organisms to have a real effect on reducing CO2.
> >
> >Well, there you have it. We just need more oceans. I nominate Iraq as
an
> >appropriate site.
>
> I'll see your Iraq, and raise you Iran and N. Korea.
> --
> Bob
ROFLMAO
Isrial will do Iran for us. They're more afraid of them than we are.
#265
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: The debate is over.
"Bob Adkins" <bobad@charter.net> wrote in message
news:s5gva29661kqvf90q5v0kpdnavu2oh017a@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 7 Jul 2006 09:40:57 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
<mmarlowREMOVE@alltel.net>
> wrote:
>
>
> >> On the bright side, when CO2 increases, so do plants and organisms that
> >> consume it. Vast forests and grasslands, and especially vast expanses
of
> >> ocean have enough organisms to have a real effect on reducing CO2.
> >
> >Well, there you have it. We just need more oceans. I nominate Iraq as
an
> >appropriate site.
>
> I'll see your Iraq, and raise you Iran and N. Korea.
> --
> Bob
ROFLMAO
Isrial will do Iran for us. They're more afraid of them than we are.
#266
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: The debate is over.
On Sat, 08 Jul 2006 19:29:03 GMT, "William Dryden"
<william_dryden@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>Isrial will do Iran for us. They're more afraid of them than we are.
We fought in Iraq so Israel wouldn't have to.
As bad as the Iraq war is, it is better than an Israeli Iraq (or Iran)
war.
If we supported Israel we would lose any support we ever had in the
Muslim community and if we didn't they would end up nuking someone.
That would probably bring Pakistan in and it could really get nasty.
World war III is going to staer in the middle east and it may end with
the destruction of civilization as we know it ... at least as 20th
century people know it.
In the 60s someone said that if the next war was fought with nuclear
weapons the war after that would be fought with clubs.
<william_dryden@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>Isrial will do Iran for us. They're more afraid of them than we are.
We fought in Iraq so Israel wouldn't have to.
As bad as the Iraq war is, it is better than an Israeli Iraq (or Iran)
war.
If we supported Israel we would lose any support we ever had in the
Muslim community and if we didn't they would end up nuking someone.
That would probably bring Pakistan in and it could really get nasty.
World war III is going to staer in the middle east and it may end with
the destruction of civilization as we know it ... at least as 20th
century people know it.
In the 60s someone said that if the next war was fought with nuclear
weapons the war after that would be fought with clubs.
#267
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: The debate is over.
On Sat, 08 Jul 2006 19:29:03 GMT, "William Dryden"
<william_dryden@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>Isrial will do Iran for us. They're more afraid of them than we are.
We fought in Iraq so Israel wouldn't have to.
As bad as the Iraq war is, it is better than an Israeli Iraq (or Iran)
war.
If we supported Israel we would lose any support we ever had in the
Muslim community and if we didn't they would end up nuking someone.
That would probably bring Pakistan in and it could really get nasty.
World war III is going to staer in the middle east and it may end with
the destruction of civilization as we know it ... at least as 20th
century people know it.
In the 60s someone said that if the next war was fought with nuclear
weapons the war after that would be fought with clubs.
<william_dryden@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>Isrial will do Iran for us. They're more afraid of them than we are.
We fought in Iraq so Israel wouldn't have to.
As bad as the Iraq war is, it is better than an Israeli Iraq (or Iran)
war.
If we supported Israel we would lose any support we ever had in the
Muslim community and if we didn't they would end up nuking someone.
That would probably bring Pakistan in and it could really get nasty.
World war III is going to staer in the middle east and it may end with
the destruction of civilization as we know it ... at least as 20th
century people know it.
In the 60s someone said that if the next war was fought with nuclear
weapons the war after that would be fought with clubs.
#268
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: The debate is over.
On Sat, 08 Jul 2006 19:29:03 GMT, "William Dryden"
<william_dryden@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>Isrial will do Iran for us. They're more afraid of them than we are.
We fought in Iraq so Israel wouldn't have to.
As bad as the Iraq war is, it is better than an Israeli Iraq (or Iran)
war.
If we supported Israel we would lose any support we ever had in the
Muslim community and if we didn't they would end up nuking someone.
That would probably bring Pakistan in and it could really get nasty.
World war III is going to staer in the middle east and it may end with
the destruction of civilization as we know it ... at least as 20th
century people know it.
In the 60s someone said that if the next war was fought with nuclear
weapons the war after that would be fought with clubs.
<william_dryden@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>Isrial will do Iran for us. They're more afraid of them than we are.
We fought in Iraq so Israel wouldn't have to.
As bad as the Iraq war is, it is better than an Israeli Iraq (or Iran)
war.
If we supported Israel we would lose any support we ever had in the
Muslim community and if we didn't they would end up nuking someone.
That would probably bring Pakistan in and it could really get nasty.
World war III is going to staer in the middle east and it may end with
the destruction of civilization as we know it ... at least as 20th
century people know it.
In the 60s someone said that if the next war was fought with nuclear
weapons the war after that would be fought with clubs.
#269
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: The debate is over.
Two cannibals were eating a comedian who fell off a cruse ship. One says;
Does he taste funny to you?'
mike hunt
"F. H." <connectu2@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:ZvPrg.2893$bd4.1459@trnddc01...
> Father Guido wrote:
>
>> The answer to over population and starving people is one in the same.
>> Cannibalism.
>
> That reminds me, I'm late for breakfast.
Does he taste funny to you?'
mike hunt
"F. H." <connectu2@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:ZvPrg.2893$bd4.1459@trnddc01...
> Father Guido wrote:
>
>> The answer to over population and starving people is one in the same.
>> Cannibalism.
>
> That reminds me, I'm late for breakfast.
#270
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: The debate is over.
Two cannibals were eating a comedian who fell off a cruse ship. One says;
Does he taste funny to you?'
mike hunt
"F. H." <connectu2@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:ZvPrg.2893$bd4.1459@trnddc01...
> Father Guido wrote:
>
>> The answer to over population and starving people is one in the same.
>> Cannibalism.
>
> That reminds me, I'm late for breakfast.
Does he taste funny to you?'
mike hunt
"F. H." <connectu2@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:ZvPrg.2893$bd4.1459@trnddc01...
> Father Guido wrote:
>
>> The answer to over population and starving people is one in the same.
>> Cannibalism.
>
> That reminds me, I'm late for breakfast.