You are mixing two very different things. One is backed by years of data. The other is a mindset with little if any data to back it. How stupid do you have to be to lump the two together? Or are you just trying to stack the deck, the way some people in R&S claim that atheists are by definition communists?
Stupid isn't the word for it. It goes beyond that. They have an agenda and they will not let anyone interfere with it, No matter how bad it makes them look. For example, I caught Trevor outright lying several times. He has no shame and keeps coming back spewing his nonsense as though he was the greatest expert in the world.
They have an agenda and nothing icluding facts will deter that. That is sick and beyond stupid.
I believe it will warm up today and melt some of this mountain of snow we have.
I also believe deer aren't smart enough to use the deer crossing signs where they are placed on the highway, no more than I believe alligators will use the stretch of highway marked for their crossing down in Florida.
I believe birds aren't smart enough to stay out of the way of those propellers on the wind turbines.
Hard to tell but it is off the charts. Pretty soon they will tell you that snow is hot and animals need the right to vote.
This is the inherent problem with politics and other such divisive issues.
There is some global warming caused by man, but the amount is more debatable.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Instru...
Note from 1910 to 1940, there was about a 0.5 degree increase, that is not really attributable to man.
Note from 1970 to 2000 there was about a 0.6 degree increase that is partially attributable to man.
We are coming out of the Little ice age, so we should expect some warming, but man has probably added to that warming by about 0.5-0.7 degrees in the lastt 100 years. Assuming a linear increase of temps by about 0.1-0.15 degrees per decade, we are not really in a scary position. We shoud work towards limiting CO2 production, but no need to panic.
The warmers are claiming we are going to have runaway warming and exponential temp increases. They have no real science to defend this garbage. They have broken models based upon surrogate of surrrogates. Ice core data in one location become the climate sensitivity for the world, which becomes to runaway global warming in models that can't accurately predict 20 years.
So the extremes of no warming and exponential warming are both really silly positions.
Same with animal rights. You go to either no rights or rights of a human. Both are silly. Don't unnecessarily hurt animals. Clearly we need to kill chickens and cows for food, but there is no reason to torture them.
I am not sure why people turn of their brains when it comes to political issues and take the certainly wrong extremes in so many cases.
I thought you liked animals, particularly reptiles. Your question therefore seems to be a contradiction as I’m assuming that you don’t mistreat your family pets. Perhaps expand more on what precisely you mean by “animal rights”.
As for global warming, it’s governed by the most powerful and successful set of scientific laws, it’s a more robust theory than that of gravity. Stupidity would be accepting that gravity is real whist rejecting global warming.
when things seem too sciency for ya, they must seem stupid to ya, but you can still learn;
http://www.skepticalscience.com/
and, claiming superiority does not justify acting without thinking
what right do you have to abuse animals?
I enjoyed my roast lamb last night and I think animals have the right not to be tortured.
So are you a vegetarian, do you like to see animals tortured, or are you stupid like me?
You don't have to be stupid at all, as long as you are smart, but brainwashed, that would be enough... :D
At least as stupid as me. Maybe not as stupid as you.
Not as stupid as you
.svg){kind=link}