OT: The Great Global Warming Swindle

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...65474899458831

It's a documentary made by Channel 4 about Global Warming. Over an
hour long (but judging from a sample I've already seen, it might be
worth it).

http://www.channel4.com/science/micr...dle/index.html

#v+
Channel 4, Thursday 8 March, 9pm

Are you green? How many flights have you taken in the last year?
Feeling guilty about all those unnecessary car journeys? Well, maybe
there's no need to feel bad.

According to a group of scientists brought together by
documentary-maker Martin Durkin, if the planet is heating up, it isn't
your fault and there's nothing you can do about it.

We've almost begun to take it for granted that climate change is a
man-made phenomenon. But just as the environmental lobby think they've
got our attention, a group of naysayers have emerged to slay the whole
premise of global warming.
#v-

--
Andrzej Rosa 1127R

On Mar 25, 9:27 am, Andrzej Rosa <bakt...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...65474899458831
>
> It's a documentary made by Channel 4 about Global Warming. Over an
> hour long (but judging from a sample I've already seen, it might be
> worth it).
>
> http://www.channel4.com/science/micr...al_warming_swi...
>
> #v+
> Channel 4, Thursday 8 March, 9pm
>
> Are you green? How many flights have you taken in the last year?
> Feeling guilty about all those unnecessary car journeys? Well, maybe
> there's no need to feel bad.
>
> According to a group of scientists brought together by
> documentary-maker Martin Durkin, if the planet is heating up, it isn't
> your fault and there's nothing you can do about it.
>
> We've almost begun to take it for granted that climate change is a
> man-made phenomenon. But just as the environmental lobby think they've
> got our attention, a group of naysayers have emerged to slay the whole
> premise of global warming.
> #v-
>
> --
> Andrzej Rosa 1127R

On Sun, 25 Mar 2007, Andrzej Rosa wrote:

> http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...65474899458831
>
> It's a documentary made by Channel 4 about Global Warming.

It's also, allegedly, a piece of agit-prop by a quite scary British
communist organisation called the LM Group:

http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=7626

And cobblers to boot.

tom

--
if you can't beat them, build them

Tom Anderson wrote:
[...]

> It's also, allegedly, a piece of agit-prop
> by a quite scary British communist
> organisation called the LM Group:
>
> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=7626

Looks like the "quite scary organisation" has a sliiiiight bias. And a
ticked off professor of oceanography on their tail, as well.

> And cobblers to boot.

Peach? Because peach cobblers ROCK!

> tom
>
> <snip>
> if you can't beat them, build them

More killer robots?

--
Curt

Dnia 2007-03-25 Tom Anderson napisa³(a):
> On Sun, 25 Mar 2007, Andrzej Rosa wrote:
>
>> http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...65474899458831
>>
>> It's a documentary made by Channel 4 about Global Warming.
>
> It's also, allegedly, a piece of agit-prop by a quite scary British
> communist organisation called the LM Group:

For me, it's just a TV show, which means that one should always expect
that it was somehow tweaked to look more news-worthy.

> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=7626
>
> And cobblers to boot.

Maybe. Could they fabricate some facts? Troposphere isn't communist,
so it should warm up faster than the surface of Earth if greenhouse
gases based warming hypothesis is true. For me that would be the most
important piece of info from this show (I was not aware of it before).
If Global Warming is dependant on CO2, troposphere should warm up
quicker than the surface. It doesn't. They also bring up the series
of arguments against man made Global Warming of which I was aware
before, and which aren't known by the general public.

The show is obviously controversial, as it should be expected, but I
also doubt that there is no truth to most of the controversies. I expect
them to be exaggerated, but I don't expect them to be totally without
substance.

Regarding your link - these articles definitely aren't unbiased. They
never mention any data which TV show brings. They attack the author
personally, and try to discredit him (arguments ad personam are typical
sophistic tricks). They never say he was wrong!

Regarding Wunsch - how would you feel when a show you took part in
practically stated that you were using fear to get money from the
taxpayers? What Wunsch said, he said himself. There is not so much
context to be lost when a person says what he said (If I remember
correctly, he said that warmed up Ocean releases CO2 in large
quantities, that it may take a very long time before an Ocean will
react to changes, so what you see now could happen decades ago, and
that you may not get published if your prediction isn't at least a
little bit scary.) I believe he said what he thinks, but he wasn't
aware that this TV show will attack science, so now he regrets it.

The show is biased, but what Wunsch said, he said himself.

--
Andrzej Rosa 1127R

Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> wrote:

>On Sun, 25 Mar 2007, Andrzej Rosa wrote:
>
>> http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...65474899458831
>>
>> It's a documentary made by Channel 4 about Global Warming.
>
>It's also, allegedly, a piece of agit-prop by a quite scary British
>communist organisation called the LM Group:
>
>http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=7626

They're all a bunch of loons. Note that the article at that URL
quoted George Moonbat as an authority.

John M. Williams wrote:
> Tom Anderson wrote:
> > Andrzej Rosa wrote:
>
> >> http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...65474899458831

>
> >> It's a documentary made by Channel 4
> >> about Global Warming.
>
> > It's also, allegedly, a piece of agit-prop by a
> > quite scary British communist organisation
> > called the LM Group:
>
> > http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=7626
>
> They're all a bunch of loons. Note that the article
> at that URL quoted George Moonbat as an authority.

Nice try. ;o)

George *Monbiot*!

--
Curt

"Curt" <curtja...@gmail.com> wrote:
> John M. Williams wrote:
> > Tom Anderson wrote:
> > > Andrzej Rosa wrote:
>
> > >>http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...65474899458831
>
> > >> It's a documentary made by Channel 4
> > >> about Global Warming.
>
> > > It's also, allegedly, a piece of agit-prop by a
> > > quite scary British communist organisation
> > > called the LM Group:
>
> > >http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=7626
>
> > They're all a bunch of loons. Note that the article
> > at that URL quoted George Moonbat as an authority.
>
> Nice try. ;o)
>
> George *Monbiot*!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Monbiot#Miscellany

On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 04:27:31 +0000 (UTC), Andrzej Rosa
<bakters@yahoo.com> wrote:

>http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...65474899458831
>
>It's a documentary made by Channel 4 about Global Warming. Over an
>hour long (but judging from a sample I've already seen, it might be
>worth it).
>
>http://www.channel4.com/science/micr...dle/index.html
>
>#v+
>Channel 4, Thursday 8 March, 9pm
>
>Are you green? How many flights have you taken in the last year?
>Feeling guilty about all those unnecessary car journeys? Well, maybe
>there's no need to feel bad.
>
>According to a group of scientists brought together by
>documentary-maker Martin Durkin, if the planet is heating up, it isn't
>your fault and there's nothing you can do about it.
>
>We've almost begun to take it for granted that climate change is a
>man-made phenomenon. But just as the environmental lobby think they've
>got our attention, a group of naysayers have emerged to slay the whole
>premise of global warming.
>#v-

What bugs me about this stuff is they always blame the average joe.
If you take a look at how wasteful corporations and wealthy indviduals
are the average joe looks tiny in comparisons. They complain to us
the general public while they continue to fly around in helipcopors
and ride in limosines. Not to mention power up their 85 bedroom
houses.

On Sun, 25 Mar 2007, JMW wrote:

> Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 25 Mar 2007, Andrzej Rosa wrote:
>>
>>> http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...65474899458831
>>>
>>> It's a documentary made by Channel 4 about Global Warming.
>>
>> It's also, allegedly, a piece of agit-prop by a quite scary British
>> communist organisation called the LM Group:
>>
>> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=7626
>
> They're all a bunch of loons. Note that the article at that URL
> quoted George Moonbat as an authority.

Indeed. This is one of the things that makes the story so entertaining -
both sides are crazies!

I really don't know if this whole LM Group thing is true, a conspiracy
theory, a misunderstanding, or what. The evidence is all very
circumstantial and hearsayish, but it would be so easy for the accused to
show it was all hogwash if it was that the fact that they haven't makes me
think it's not. Anyway, quite a bit of their output is good stuff, so i
can't complain too much.

tom

--
or are they poststructuralist terrorists? perhaps we shall never truly
know.

On Sun, 25 Mar 2007, Curt wrote:

> Tom Anderson wrote:
>
>> if you can't beat them, build them
>
> More killer robots?

Actually, yes. There was a Robot Wars do-it-yourself magazine here a while
ago, and that was their motto.

tom

--
or are they poststructuralist terrorists? perhaps we shall never truly
know.

On Sun, 25 Mar 2007, Andrzej Rosa wrote:

> Dnia 2007-03-25 Tom Anderson napisa?(a):
>> On Sun, 25 Mar 2007, Andrzej Rosa wrote:
>>
>>> http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...65474899458831
>>>
>>> It's a documentary made by Channel 4 about Global Warming.
>>
>> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=7626
>>
>> And cobblers to boot.
>
> Maybe. Could they fabricate some facts? Troposphere isn't communist,

Wrong again! Yuri Gararin planted a flag there on his way up!

> so it should warm up faster than the surface of Earth if greenhouse
> gases based warming hypothesis is true.

Should it? I have to confess to not having come across this idea before -
what's the reasoning? And, if there is any, the evidence?

tom

--
or are they poststructuralist terrorists? perhaps we shall never truly
know.

Dnia 2007-03-25 Tom Anderson napisa³(a):
> On Sun, 25 Mar 2007, Andrzej Rosa wrote:
>
>> Dnia 2007-03-25 Tom Anderson napisa?(a):
>>> On Sun, 25 Mar 2007, Andrzej Rosa wrote:
>>>
>>>> http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...65474899458831
>>>>
>>>> It's a documentary made by Channel 4 about Global Warming.
>>>
>>> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=7626
>>>
>>> And cobblers to boot.
>>
>> Maybe. Could they fabricate some facts? Troposphere isn't communist,
>
> Wrong again! Yuri Gararin planted a flag there on his way up!

It looks like I was. I didn't remember how it went, so I checked out.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Atmosphere.png

It looks like troposphere is the lowest part of an atmospheric onion.
It could be Adam who planted a flag there. I assume that they must meant
some higher parts of troposphere, not simply air between surface and
tropopause.

>> so it should warm up faster than the surface of Earth if greenhouse
>> gases based warming hypothesis is true.
>
> Should it? I have to confess to not having come across this idea before -
> what's the reasoning? And, if there is any, the evidence?

I didn't google for anything more specific than a TV show, so I'll
simply render my understanding here, which can obviously be off here or
there. The basic principle of greenhouse gases effect is that they
disperse some amount of heat reflected from the surface, and reflect it
back. It looks like every model predicts that the higher parts of
atmosphere should warm up quicker than the surface (everywhere, except
polar regions). Data collected by satellites and weather balloons
rather show that it is the other way around. Surface of Earth warms up
quicker than higher up in atmosphere. The collected data were told to
be solid (two independent methods) and clearly not in accordance with CO2
based warming.

Here are the arguments used in the show.
http://www.channel4.com/science/micr...arguments.html

--
Andrzej Rosa 1127R

Tom Anderson wrote:
I scribbled:
> > Tom Anderson wrote:
>
> >> if you can't beat them, build them
>
> > More killer robots?
>
> Actually, yes. There was a Robot Wars
> do-it-yourself magazine here a while
> ago, and that was their motto.

Hey, do I know my Tomisms or what?

> tom
>
> <snip>
> or are they poststructuralist terrorists?
> perhaps we shall never truly know.

Otoh. S

--
Curt

"Shute" <Shute@nowhere.com> schreef:

> What bugs me about this stuff is they always blame the average joe.

As usual.

They are trying to shove those special energy saving lamps down are throat.
If a plane flyes 2000 miles, he will exhaust about the equivelant that
1000,000 lamps have "saved." Is a pile of shit.

Nuclear fusion is the future. There will an energy surplus, and no exhaust.

There are also people around here that complain about big TVs, 40 inch and
up. Fuck that.

> If you take a look at how wasteful corporations and wealthy indviduals
> are the average joe looks tiny in comparisons. They complain to us
> the general public while they continue to fly around in helipcopors
> and ride in limosines. Not to mention power up their 85 bedroom
> houses.

Fuck em.

I say we save the planet, and kill all the muslims. And i am not joking.

--
Pete

Pete wrote:
> "Shute" schreef:
>
> > What bugs me about this stuff is
> > they always blame the average joe.
^^^^^^^^^^^

> As usual.
>
> They are trying to shove those special
^^^^^^^^^^^
> energy saving lamps down are throat.
> If a plane flyes 2000 miles, he will exhaust
> about the equivelant that 1000,000 lamps
> have "saved." Is a pile of shit.
>
> Nuclear fusion is the future. There will an
> energy surplus, and no exhaust.
>
> There are also people around here that
> complain about big TVs, 40 inch and
> up. Fuck that.
>
> > If you take a look at how wasteful
> corporations and wealthy indviduals
> > are the average joe looks tiny in
> > comparisons.
> > They complain to us
^^^^^^^^^^^
> > the general public while they continue
> > to fly around in helipcopors and ride in
> > limosines. Not to mention power up
> > their 85 bedroom houses.
>
> Fuck em.
>
> I say we save the planet, and kill all
> the muslims. And i am not joking.

Pete, when Shute says "they" and mentions 85-bedroom houses, I picture
his aforementioned "wasteful corporations and wealthy indviduals" and
not "the muslims."

When it comes to greed and waste, well there's no, absolutely no "kill
all" ever going to take place. Furthermore (don't that sound fancy?),
furthermore, I don't believe that "wealthy" automatically equals
"wasteful," but certainly the contradictions and hypocritical examples
offered up in the news can be somewhat crazymaking.

Some sanity would be a nice occurrence, but that seems kinda doubtful
as well.

> Pete

Nuking one geographic location or killing all of one specific group
will (yeah, I'm guessing here, but, you know) NOT solve the world's
problems.

Uh, must I really write "no offense" in here somewhere? Fwiw, I do not
advocate against "40 inch and up" televisions.

--
Curt

"Curt" <curtjames@gmail.com> schreef:

>> I say we save the planet, and kill all
>> the muslims. And i am not joking.

> Pete, when Shute says "they" and mentions 85-bedroom houses, I picture
> his aforementioned "wasteful corporations and wealthy indviduals" and
> not "the muslims."

Oh, i know, i know!

That came from me! I just figured we can save the planet by killing the
"muslims."

> When it comes to greed and waste, well there's no, absolutely no "kill
> all" ever going to take place. Furthermore (don't that sound fancy?),
> furthermore, I don't believe that "wealthy" automatically equals
> "wasteful," but certainly the contradictions and hypocritical examples
> offered up in the news can be somewhat crazymaking.

I think its hilarious when people who are part of the Government complain
about the purchase of big TVs and then are driven home in 8 or 12 cilinder
cars. Hilarious.

> Some sanity would be a nice occurrence, but that seems kinda doubtful
> as well.

> Nuking one geographic location or killing all of one specific group
> will (yeah, I'm guessing here, but, you know) NOT solve the world's
> problems.

Global warming is a minor issue. We have other problems. By focussing on
global warming, we are led to believe there arent any other problems. My
dear friends are slowly taking over Europe. And Asia.

We can stop them. Still. We shouldnt wait to long, though. I am not kidding.
I have been doing a lot of reading the last 6 months.

> Uh, must I really write "no offense" in here somewhere? Fwiw, I do not
> advocate against "40 inch and up" televisions.

I like the 50 inch TVs.

--
Pete

Dnia 2007-03-26 Pete napisa³(a):
> "Curt" <curtjames@gmail.com> schreef:
>
>>> I say we save the planet, and kill all
>>> the muslims. And i am not joking.
>
>> Pete, when Shute says "they" and mentions 85-bedroom houses, I picture
>> his aforementioned "wasteful corporations and wealthy indviduals" and
>> not "the muslims."
>
> Oh, i know, i know!
>
> That came from me! I just figured we can save the planet by killing the
> "muslims."

Leave Sammy Farha alive, if it doesn't bother you much. He's a pro
poker player with a totally deserved nickname "King of Cool". He's
Lebanese, iirc.

>> Nuking one geographic location or killing all of one specific group
>> will (yeah, I'm guessing here, but, you know) NOT solve the world's
>> problems.
>
> Global warming is a minor issue.

I hope so. But even if it's not minor, it doesn't look like we did it.

> We have other problems. By focussing on
> global warming, we are led to believe there arent any other problems. My
> dear friends are slowly taking over Europe. And Asia.

I bet that Bin Laden thinks the same, just the other way around. And
to be honest, I think that he actually is closer to the truth.

> We can stop them. Still. We shouldnt wait to long, though. I am not kidding.
> I have been doing a lot of reading the last 6 months.

Last 6 months didn't look like the best time of your life. Don't get
too serious about what you happen to believe right now. I'm talking
from experience.

--
Andrzej Rosa 1127R

Andrzej Rosa <bakters@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Dnia 2007-03-26 Pete napisa³(a):
>> I have been doing a lot of reading the last 6 months.
>
> Last 6 months didn't look like the best time of your life. Don't
> get too serious about what you happen to believe right now. I'm
> talking from experience.

I've met some survivalist type of people in Russian Far East - the
ONLY thing they talk about is how they're going to live in taiga once
the Chinese take over (think of 21 century Genghis Khan kind of a
deal). They structure their lifes around preparations for that, like
building houses with stored food and stuff in the remote forest.
Traditionally, there have been many Koreans in that area, but those
are heavily russified. Once the USSR broke down, lots of Nothern
Chinese started to come to that area, some on legal visas, some not.
And there you have it!

On Sun, 25 Mar 2007, Shute wrote:

> On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 04:27:31 +0000 (UTC), Andrzej Rosa
> <bakters@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Are you green?
>
> What bugs me about this stuff is they always blame the average joe.

True dat. Most electricity is used by industry, ISTR, and one of the
biggest contributors to CO2 output, after burning fossil fuels, is making
concrete, which is something not many people do at home.

OTOH, by far the biggest use of fossil fuels is powering cars. The single
most effective thing we could do to reduce fossil fuel use to would be to
ban any car that's not maximally efficient (within 10% of the best
performer, for example - say a final farewell to the US motor industry!),
whack massive taxes on fuel, and use the proceeds to put high-quality
public transport in place wherever it's missing. Oh, and a similarly
swingeing tax on jet fuel, with the proceeds going to building a
high-speed rail network and as many dams and reactors as it takes to power
it.

tom

--
We don't contact anybody or seek anybody's permission for what we do. Even
if it's impersonating postal employees. -- Birdstuff

On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 23:09:11 +0100, Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> wrote:

>On Sun, 25 Mar 2007, Andrzej Rosa wrote:
>
>> Dnia 2007-03-25 Tom Anderson napisa?(a):
>>> On Sun, 25 Mar 2007, Andrzej Rosa wrote:
>>>
>>>> http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...65474899458831
>>>>
>>>> It's a documentary made by Channel 4 about Global Warming.
>>>
>>> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=7626
>>>
>>> And cobblers to boot.
>>
>> Maybe. Could they fabricate some facts? Troposphere isn't communist,
>
>Wrong again! Yuri Gararin planted a flag there on his way up!

No, Laika was there first, so I think technically speaking, the troposphere belongs
to communist dogs.

On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 17:52:29 +0100, Tom Anderson
<twic@urchin.earth.li> wrote:

>On Sun, 25 Mar 2007, Shute wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 04:27:31 +0000 (UTC), Andrzej Rosa
>> <bakters@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Are you green?
>>
>> What bugs me about this stuff is they always blame the average joe.
>
>True dat. Most electricity is used by industry, ISTR, and one of the
>biggest contributors to CO2 output, after burning fossil fuels, is making
>concrete, which is something not many people do at home.
>
>OTOH, by far the biggest use of fossil fuels is powering cars. The single
>most effective thing we could do to reduce fossil fuel use to would be to
>ban any car that's not maximally efficient (within 10% of the best
>performer, for example - say a final farewell to the US motor industry!),
>whack massive taxes on fuel, and use the proceeds to put high-quality
>public transport in place wherever it's missing. Oh, and a similarly
>swingeing tax on jet fuel, with the proceeds going to building a
>high-speed rail network and as many dams and reactors as it takes to power
>it.

I think we need to go back to rail and build a good cross country one.
They should be using this for both freight and passengers. Driving
trucks from coast to coast is very wasteful. We do need a better
public transportation in place and people need to stop buying gas
guzzling cars like SUVs. On the other hand most of these modern fuel
efficient cars are about the same as my 84 accord used to get. There
haven't been fuel efficiency improvements on cars in 27 years.

On 26 Mar 2007 03:14:11 -0700, "Curt" <curtjames@gmail.com> wrote:

>Pete, when Shute says "they" and mentions 85-bedroom houses, I picture
>his aforementioned "wasteful corporations and wealthy indviduals" and
>not "the muslims."

I thought all the Muslims lived in tents and caves anyway. Why do you
think they are so jealous of our 52" screen TVs. Plus their women
are so ugly they have to cover up their faces.

"Lucas Buck" <sbcpark@earthlink.NOSPAM.net> wrote
> Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> wrote:
>>On Sun, 25 Mar 2007, Andrzej Rosa wrote:
>>> Dnia 2007-03-25 Tom Anderson napisa?(a):
>>>> On Sun, 25 Mar 2007, Andrzej Rosa wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...65474899458831
>>>>>
>>>>> It's a documentary made by Channel 4 about Global Warming.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=7626
>>>>
>>>> And cobblers to boot.
>>>
>>> Maybe. Could they fabricate some facts? Troposphere isn't communist,
>>
>>Wrong again! Yuri Gararin planted a flag there on his way up!
>
> No, Laika was there first, so I think technically speaking, the
> troposphere belongs
> to communist dogs.

Laika was NOT a communist dog!!

Laika was an underground freedom fighter who helped many freedom loving dogs
escape to the West. She was betrayed by an double agent feline and sentenced
to death. In a last heroic act, she changed places with the dog originally
intended for the one way space trip, and died in space after four days in
orbit , when Sputnik 2 overheated.

The troposhere belongs to freedom loving capitalists!!

David

Shute wrote:
[...]

> I thought

Hey, at least you're thinking.

> all the Muslims lived in tents and caves
> anyway.

Hrmmmm. I don't think so.

Muhammad Ali, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Hakeem Olajuwon, Dave Chappelle,
and for the Oly lifters - Hossein Reza Zadeh. I suspect there are no
cave dwellers there!

> Why do you think they are so jealous
> of our 52" screen TVs.

And I don't believe that jealousy is limited to Muslims.

> Plus their women are so ugly they have
> to cover up their faces.

Can't verify that either. I've never had occasion to get behind a
burqa. Still, correct me if I'm wrong, Muslim is a religion and
therefore does not automatically alter a person's physique or facial
appearance, right? Although the no alcohol, etc. might actually be a
boon to beauty?

Regardless, It's a faith. It's not getting hit in the chops with a
brick. And, certainly, not all Middle Eastern women are created equal.
A guess. See also:

http://img.stern.de/_content/53/76/5...uropa7_326.jpg aka
http://tinyurl.com/2gglnm

--
Curt

In news:kikg039oupp4trefk94cakd7062bt8t11o@4ax.com,
Shute <Shute@nowhere.com> typed:
> On 26 Mar 2007 03:14:11 -0700, "Curt" <curtjames@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Pete, when Shute says "they" and mentions 85-bedroom houses, I
>> picture his aforementioned "wasteful corporations and wealthy
>> indviduals" and not "the muslims."
>
> I thought all the Muslims lived in tents and caves anyway. Why do you
> think they are so jealous of our 52" screen TVs. Plus their women
> are so ugly they have to cover up their faces.

Shute, you are truly enlightened.

--
Bully
Protein bars: http://www.proteinbars.co.uk

"A pessimist sees the difficulty in every opportunity; an optimist sees
the opportunity in every difficulty." Sir Winston Churchill

Bully wrote:
> Shute typed:
[...]

> > Plus their women are so ugly they
> > have to cover up their faces.
>
> Shute, you are truly enlightened.

Bully in a burqa?

--
Curt

"DZ" <17825@2016024475.1919032225.972.12683.21322> schreef:

> Andrzej Rosa <bakters@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Dnia 2007-03-26 Pete napisa³(a):
>>> I have been doing a lot of reading the last 6 months.

>> Last 6 months didn't look like the best time of your life. Don't
>> get too serious about what you happen to believe right now. I'm
>> talking from experience.

> I've met some survivalist type of people in Russian Far East - the
> ONLY thing they talk about is how they're going to live in taiga once
> the Chinese take over (think of 21 century Genghis Khan kind of a
> deal). They structure their lifes around preparations for that, like
> building houses with stored food and stuff in the remote forest.
> Traditionally, there have been many Koreans in that area, but those
> are heavily russified. Once the USSR broke down, lots of Nothern
> Chinese started to come to that area, some on legal visas, some not.
> And there you have it!

Are they procrating like rabbits while living on welfare?

Are they also trying to shove down the morals and values they have to the
other natives?

--
Pete

"Andrzej Rosa" <bakters@yahoo.com> schreef:

>> That came from me! I just figured we can save the planet by killing the
>> "muslims."

> Leave Sammy Farha alive, if it doesn't bother you much.

I also want Nora and Bouchra alive. Even if i didnt , i had to say because
they might read it.

> He's a pro poker player with a totally deserved nickname "King of Cool".
> He's
> Lebanese, iirc.

Exceptions more or less confirm the rule, and are therefore allowed.

Reza-zedah is also a very cool dude.

>>> Nuking one geographic location or killing all of one specific group
>>> will (yeah, I'm guessing here, but, you know) NOT solve the world's
>>> problems.

>> Global warming is a minor issue.

> I hope so. But even if it's not minor, it doesn't look like we did it.

Even if we did, we have other issues.

I wonder what a few millions of megaton from a hydrogen bomb will do to our
climate.

We can also fuck those guys bigtime by letting one explode severeal miles
deep in the sea, and cause a Tsunami. That way, it might look as just
another disaster of nature. Just thinking out loud..

>> We have other problems. By focussing on
>> global warming, we are led to believe there arent any other problems. My
>> dear friends are slowly taking over Europe. And Asia.

> I bet that Bin Laden thinks the same, just the other way around. And
> to be honest, I think that he actually is closer to the truth.

Are people from my country, or yours for that matter, live on welfare in
Afghanistan and procreate as if they are rabbits?

>> We can stop them. Still. We shouldnt wait to long, though. I am not
>> kidding.
>> I have been doing a lot of reading the last 6 months.

> Last 6 months didn't look like the best time of your life.

Last 2 were a bit grueling at times. Extremely tired is pretty fucked, but
tired AND anxious is even worse.

> Don't get too serious about what you happen to believe right now.

Well... what i read actually more or less confirmed what i suspected in the
first place. Its not as if i read anything new.

> I'm talking
> from experience.

I always trust your insight.

But i really think you should do some reading.

In Germany, a muslim guy was given a low penalty for physically abusing his
wife, because the judge, a woman and i suspect a left winger, said that in
those cultures, dictated by islam, its not a fellony to beat up your wife.
Or to kill homosexuals.

History teachers around here sometimes skip the holocaust, because they
afraid to get physically abused.

Nice people eh? Islam is the religion of peace...

And the nuclear program in Iran is also only to be used for peaceful
purposes. Ask the Israelians.

--
Pete

"Shute" <Shute@nowhere.com> schreef:

>>Pete, when Shute says "they" and mentions 85-bedroom houses, I picture
>>his aforementioned "wasteful corporations and wealthy indviduals" and
>>not "the muslims."

> I thought all the Muslims lived in tents and caves anyway. Why do you
> think they are so jealous of our 52" screen TVs. Plus their women
> are so ugly they have to cover up their faces.

Some of the Moroccon girls are extremely beautifull.

Before we exterminate them, i want 72 Moroccon virgins.

--
Pete

"Curt" <curtjames@gmail.com> schreef:

>> Plus their women are so ugly they have
>> to cover up their faces.

> Can't verify that either. I've never had occasion to get behind a
> burqa. Still, correct me if I'm wrong, Muslim is a religion and
> therefore does not automatically alter a person's physique or facial
> appearance, right?

The majority of muslim women live in the Middle East, and they have the
tendency tro be a bit hairy. Afghan women have more bodyhair then you and me
together.

Like i said in the other post, a lot of Arabic women are very pretty.

> Regardless, It's a faith.

No, its not only a faith. Its also a culture. When a faith dictate more or
less just about everything you do in your live, its a culture. And a way of
live. The sharia is part of the koran.

> It's not getting hit in the chops with a
> brick. And, certainly, not all Middle Eastern women are created equal.
> A guess. See also:

> http://img.stern.de/_content/53/76/5...uropa7_326.jpg aka
> http://tinyurl.com/2gglnm

Thats a beauty.

--
Pete

Dnia 2007-03-26 Shute napisa³(a):
> On 26 Mar 2007 03:14:11 -0700, "Curt" <curtjames@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Pete, when Shute says "they" and mentions 85-bedroom houses, I picture
>>his aforementioned "wasteful corporations and wealthy indviduals" and
>>not "the muslims."
>
> I thought all the Muslims lived in tents and caves anyway. Why do you
> think they are so jealous of our 52" screen TVs. Plus their women
> are so ugly they have to cover up their faces.

Definitely not. Prettiest women in Berlin were Turkish, and Polish, of
course.

--
Andrzej Rosa 1127R

Dnia 2007-03-27 Pete napisa³(a):
> "Andrzej Rosa" <bakters@yahoo.com> schreef:
>
>>>> Nuking one geographic location or killing all of one specific group
>>>> will (yeah, I'm guessing here, but, you know) NOT solve the world's
>>>> problems.
>
>>> Global warming is a minor issue.
>
>> I hope so. But even if it's not minor, it doesn't look like we did it.
>
> Even if we did, we have other issues.
>
> I wonder what a few millions of megaton from a hydrogen bomb will do to our
> climate.

It will cool it, of course. ;-)

> We can also fuck those guys bigtime by letting one explode severeal miles
> deep in the sea, and cause a Tsunami. That way, it might look as just
> another disaster of nature. Just thinking out loud..
>
>>> We have other problems. By focussing on
>>> global warming, we are led to believe there arent any other problems. My
>>> dear friends are slowly taking over Europe. And Asia.
>
>> I bet that Bin Laden thinks the same, just the other way around. And
>> to be honest, I think that he actually is closer to the truth.
>
> Are people from my country, or yours for that matter, live on welfare in
> Afghanistan and procreate as if they are rabbits?

No, but we do that to Americans. Minus procreation, but the rest more
or less can be said about any immigrants. They start from scratch,
so they have nothing, and if they can get some welfare, they will.

>>> We can stop them. Still. We shouldnt wait to long, though. I am not
>>> kidding.
>>> I have been doing a lot of reading the last 6 months.
>
>> Last 6 months didn't look like the best time of your life.
>
> Last 2 were a bit grueling at times. Extremely tired is pretty fucked, but
> tired AND anxious is even worse.
>
>> Don't get too serious about what you happen to believe right now.
>
> Well... what i read actually more or less confirmed what i suspected in the
> first place. Its not as if i read anything new.
>
>> I'm talking
>> from experience.
>
> I always trust your insight.

So you are better than me. I don't always trust my insight. ;-)

> But i really think you should do some reading.
>
> In Germany, a muslim guy was given a low penalty for physically abusing his
> wife, because the judge, a woman and i suspect a left winger, said that in
> those cultures, dictated by islam, its not a fellony to beat up your wife.
> Or to kill homosexuals.
>
> History teachers around here sometimes skip the holocaust, because they
> afraid to get physically abused.
>
> Nice people eh? Islam is the religion of peace...

Buddhism is the only religion of peace, if you can call it a religion.

> And the nuclear program in Iran is also only to be used for peaceful
> purposes. Ask the Israelians.

If Iran will have nukes, Israel will have some too. And we will have peace,
because even dictators don't start a war if they risk being a victim of one
themselves.

--
Andrzej Rosa 1127R