gunrutz

Yes, it is about as worthy as the, we register our cars, we register our dogs, etc. argument, but I doubt you see it that way.

While i agree, i dont feel like we should be doing this to these animals, I wonder if having some of them in aquariums is better for the wild population by allowing more people to see first hand how impressive they are.

The arguments against having some form of ID are so silly i can't imagine how anyone could seriously make them. The next election is more than a year away, anyone who seriously wants to vote and doesn't have one of the thirty something types of ID should get it now, if you can't be bothered, than you don't care and probably wouldn't vote anyway. The two largest provinces don't allow vouching in provincial elections, no one complains, there are no native people, or homeless people in Ontario that might want to vote in an election? Of course the conservatives don't want those people to vote, because of course the vast majority of people who live on the streets, or who don't have a job, or an adress, or bills, or a car, etc are probably not voting for the big bad cons. So of course the other parties want these peolple to vote, they need to be taken care of, and who better to do it than the liberals or the NDP. Having some type of ID, and there are many, is not too onerous a burden on the vast majority of people who want to vote, and for the vast majority of those people who might not have the ID now they could probably get it, if they cared to. If they do I can't imagine the vouching aspect of this act having any real impact on the vote, and i they don't get the ID they never tried very hard, some people will always fall through the cracks, no system is perfect, but ensuring you are who you say you are is not a lot to ask of anyone. "One of the following, issued by the responsible authority of a shelter, soup kitchen, student/senior residence, or long-term care facility: attestation of residence, letter of stay, admission form or statement of benefits" So a letter from the soup kitchen isn't lenient enough? Come on people, respect for our democracy is a two way street, if the individual wants to keep our democracy strong managing to have any of these very basic forms of identification is the least we can do.

I think this is a complicated problem, and while there is a relationship between what people are training for and what skills industry needs it isn`t a completely direct one. No doubt there are too many people in make believe University programs that have no business existing in the first place, but i also think there are just too many people in university in general, there are tons of kids who leave with a science or engineering degree that don`t find work in that field. When we talk about industry not finding laborers, that isn`t just skilled trades at the oil sands, that includes businesses like tim hortons, and that aspect of this bothers me more than the rest of it, here we have national and international billion dollar corporations that want to do business in some places with really hot economies while expecting they should be sheltered from the economic reality of that place. A lot of the foreign worker issues come out of that sort of business, which is simply ridiculous, pay what the market demands, raise your prices if need be, or dont open up shop there,dont expect that you can ignore the realities of that area. When labor is in demand wages should go up, when it is not, wages go down, unless of course you can ship in people from who knows where and pay them much less. So no, in that way there is no labor shortage, there is a refusal to pay what the market demands, capitolism for the corporations, not for the workers. If companies need more skilled labor they could provide the training as well, but why would they when there are opportunities to bring in much cheaper labor from elsewhere, i just dont buy the argument that foreign workers are the only choice they have, that is the choice they want to have.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-to-worry-about-after-fukushima-nuclear-disaster/

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/12/10/an-oopsie-in-the-doranzimmerman-97-consensus-claim/ I thought that was an interesting take on the numbers, looks like it might be at best a 94.9% 'consensus'. What i find amazing is the desperate need of some to defend a number that is obviously cherry picked form a survey of over 10,000, of whom a little over 3000 bothered to respond. If the real non bs consensus of the scientific coumminty was 75% in favor of agw and believed that the negative effects would be drastic would that not be good enough? If it was only 50%, would that still not be cause for alarm? Producing a number that can be so easily challenged from a survey within a survey amounting to only 77 or perhaps 75 actually used responses makes the whole thing look bad, even if it isn't. I believe that is bad, and that the survey is irrelevant, but, presuming it is relevant, the obvious vulnerabilities in the way the numbers came about should be enough to make someone who wants to honestly represent the opinions of scientists think twice about using them. The fact that the number has been touted far and wide says to me that what should be an absolute need to represent the real science in a way that is above reproach, takes a back seat to building believers, to propaganda. What better way to take advantage of people that have mostly grown up to believe that science should be our new religion, our new belief system, we will just tell them that 97% of scientists, or climate scientists, or climate scientists with a certain pecentage of recent peer reviewed papers on climate change, out of a survey of 10,000, of whom only 3000 responded, and of those only 77, or is it 75 that qualifed, agreed that it's happening and its our fault, O wait, only 97% agreed, or is it 95%. Nevermind we will just tell everyone that 97% of climate scientists believe, it is simpler and clearly more beneficial to the cause, it isn't exactly true, but it's for everyones own good, so the need to represent science in the most honest and straight foraward way can take a back seat on that one.

It is really strange that there has been no debris found yet, if the aircaraft exploded there should be debris all over, if it impacted with the ocean at speed there should be debris, if it went down one way or another it must not be where they think it is, but by now i would have expected the search to have been expanded enough to have found something. In aviation terms this isn't in the middle of nowhere.

What an enlightened attitude, there have been lots of articles about this, but perhaps no writer would meet with your lofty standards. Anyway, as an actual response to the op, the discussion has been taken over by extremists, and it is so strange to me that any woman who wants true equality with men would also want to allow the man to determine if she should be allowed to have sex with him. Anyway, the only way men are safe from this crazy idea is to have a signed consent form, witnessed by two people, and you must also carry a breathalyzer. I dont know if the courts put this sort of burden on males, but for someone that has sons, it's a bit frightening. I once took part in a discussion on rabble.ca where a significant number of women there considered pouting by a man when his wife wasn't interested in sex that day as rape, no bullshit, they completely beleive that it was coersion and therefore rape. That is the kind of people who are driving the bus on some of these arguments.

There are no circumstances, none, no joke of any kind, no matter how not so terrible it was, under which someone jokes about a situation where people are being killed by their government in another country, even if those people are our enemies, you don't laugh, you don't joke about it. You would have to be interminably immature or painfully unintelligent to think that could be acceptable from anyone, let alone someone who wants to be PM. It is so sad that people are so partisan that they will defend or brush off such a stupid act, that is what this is, incredibly stupid, he does want to get elected right? Despite that he is too stupid to know he shouldn't make that kind of joke? I dont like Harper, but he isn't stupid. Chretien wasn't stupid, i can respect that, Trudeau appears to be an empty suit, vacuous.

That is a pretty poor reason for ignoring reality, the belief in a survey without understanding it's methodology or lack there of is terribly unscientific, yet you and no doubt hordes of others think the financial post is anti science for pointing out what is already a known fact about that 'survey'. Sorry, who doesn't believe in science now? Hint, it isn't the people who question a cherry picked survey that is now a pillar of agw advertising.

Here you go sunshine http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/7-environmental-charities-face-canada-revenue-agency-audits-1.2526330, shove that up your arse.

Yep, you sure don't, btw, the oil that comes out of the ground that gets turned into CO2, that benefits you as much as anyone else, the difference being that in your imagination we can have the lives we do without it and the asociated pollution, and if right wingers are fooling themselves over climate change you are equally as foolish for thinking we can live like we do without it. You dont understand, the argument goes right past you and anyone else who thinks like you do, meanwhile the best alternative we have in nuclear has been vilified by another version of eco nut, even so far as forcing Germany to burn more very dirty coal.

Well then, you should find yourself a nice cave somewhere.

I see you're still using that oil extracted, and shipped over or brought in by super tanker oever someone else' land or coastline, stick to those high minded principles.

When you consider that his charitable organization is actually a lobby group we pay him with illegal tax breaks.

But your ok if the same happens in the bay of fundy, or have you stopped using all petroleum products? This is the worst kind of nimbyism.

No, he isnt right, he is a hypocrite, and so are you. Why don't you tell us, what is your personal risk factor for the extraction, refinement, and transport of the petroleum products that you use out of or over someone else's land, or along someone else's coastline? How much risk is ok for them to assume on your behalf? Since you clearly think your environment is too precious too risk, but like all of us you use these products, which leads to the only possible conclusion that you don't mind if someoone else takes the risk for you. This extremely small minded view seems to be prevalent in BC, a sort of collective narcissism, let me clue you in, you aren't special, your land isn't special, your water isn't special, if you want to live this modern life, and your existence on the internet would confirm that, then you need to take as much risk as the rest of us in maintaining that life. Your precious province is no better than those of the east coast, where oil tankers regularly visit, but then those people don't have an incredibly infalted sense of self importance, so they don't behave as though they should be untouched by all aspects of the world we all enjoy. Even after oil spills, but then it would be awfully stupid to swear off all of the enormous benefits of oil after an accident, or even before one happens, it would be even more stupid to swear off the risks associsted with it's production while still enjoying it's benefits. Sorry, wrong word, right word is hypocrite.

Tree rings are not accurate, trees grow at varying rate under a combination of circumstances, treee rings can't even be used to accurately model recent past weather for which we have very good accurately measured data, not useless, but far from precise. In any case, even if it was true, there have been major changes in precipitation patterns over North America in the recent past without any input from things like AGW, which even the ipcc admits wasnt a factor before the 1970's. The dust bowl for example, where farmers were encouraged to farm land that had in reality been seeing more rainfall than it normally did, when drought came the land abused by poor methods, turned to dust, droughts happen, and all on thier own. Of course some people like the posts above will of course blame the boogey man, and they could be right, but they just talk mostly, there is little of substance in blaming this drought on agw, maybe, maybe not. The drought's of the dustbowl era lasted the better part of a decade, all on thier own, droughts happen. There is evidence to suggest that at least in some areas, like the great plains, the last couple of centuries have been in fact wetter than normal, using the measure of salinity, this is one example of that research, http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/drought/drght_laird96.html, also there is evidence to suggest that the mayan civilization ended because of drought, So perhaps we will se more drought in the future, but clearly not all of it, or any of it, can be blamed on agw at this time, no matter how desperate some are to make it that. If you want to look at tree ring data http://iridl.ldeo.columbia.edu/SOURCES/.LDEO/.TRL/.NADA2004/.pdsi-atlas.html plenty of droughts to be seen, all the way back to two thousand years ago.

That is what i use as well.

The most difficult thing about cord cutting is for sports fans i think, im not sure you can get the same experience on the internet, now of course you can pay for streaming services for the sport of your choice, but then you have to consider the cost of your internet and the amount of download you have available, especialy for hd streaming, and the cost of the service. I would like to go without traditional tv, i find there is little on and what is worth watching is repeated constantly, and of course you can stream it an hour after it has been shown in many cases, and if you use a service like unblockus you can get access to american content right off of thier network sites. i currently use a htpc and xbmc for all of my internet and tv streaming, there is a ton of content available so long as you dont mind hitting bad links now and then, or some servers that are too slow, but free is free. i have tried other media players/streamers, but the htpc is so handy, it serves all of my music, my movies, of course the streaming services, and at the same time i can use it to browse the internet and play games. For anyone who is even a little bit computer savy i think it is the way to go. My only barrier to being cable free is my wife, and i understand the desire to sit and look for something to watch without any hassle, but it is an old way of thinking about tv. With a little effort you can watch almost anything on the internet without a cable bill. i should also mention i started using a voip service a couple years ago, some are virtually free with your own equipment, mine isn't quite free but it's been reliable, i spend about $25 a year on phone service.

Yes, because we all had hopes to get our water from sand completely saturated with bitumen.

I have lived all over this country, i have seen no such disaster, but i know a lot of people who have moved to Alberta and have made a good living and life for themselves and families. Of course you will argue, but it seems that your statement is utterly and demonstrably false.

I bet the people who want these plates don't put nearly the ideological thinking toward wanting them as the people who seem to think it is just so not Canadian. They proabably think hey, yea, those guys deserve some recognition for they hard and dangerous work they do, or i know someone in the military, i would like it to honor them. I highly doubt there are many with the plate that are consiously support global domination by western capitolist powers or some or such thing. But thankfully we have many, many more people on the other side of the equation with unused humanities degrees just desperate to tell everyone how horrible it is with all of the frustration and pent up fury of someone who's entire belief system is in conflict with reality. Thankgoodness for them, your sacficies to societal outcasts does not go unoticed, perhaps we need a support our broken leftist ideologues plate. or maybe you could get over yourselves for five minutes.

yes, you have no answers, it is obvious, but you did manage to toss in the environment there, good job, script followed.

It is pathetic, but it suits them.