Guthrie

you want to know why lower crop production is bad? and do you also want people to take you as serious?? get real

What makes that BAD on a global scale? That can only make sense if it is physically impossible to grow crops otherwise. The North American automobile market is dropping too. Does that make it BAD on a global scale??? Your logic says it would. That is not what I said. I said it is possible. That possibility alone is enough to make your association between crop yields and BAD to be wrong on a global scale. what you said was, - and you never defended that claim either --- so, if you have no source that allows you to claim arable land is being opened, then how do you defend saying that a, "drop in crop yield," is not, "intuitively a bad thing." -- you have made the claims and now you wish to be excused from defending them. Sorry, you lose.

I looked up Dolphins. So, is your story now that you were a squid in tin a can? and just how does that make you a spy? as noted, it seems nothing but a pathetic fraud you present - shame on you 'sanctioned protocol' - hahahahahahha

I've already met your challenge. The headline proclaimed, ".Global warming causing drop in crop yield" and no, you never supported your claim that arable land is being opened by global warming -- claiming to have supported it, is a lie

Obfuscate? Quite the contrary: I have clarified my position. Let me be blunt with the following short challenge to you: ignore EVERYTHING I said, discard EVERYTHING I said as being the ravings of a lunatic and prove that Climate Change is BAD. Can you prove that Climate Change is BAD? I bet you can not even meet my challenge to ignore everything I said. Oh and before you try, I would like to remind you of the title of this thread: Is Climate Change is BAD? Big deal. Those minute details are irrelevent to the principle at hand. I am suggesting that people always pick and choose what aspects of the environment to sacrifice and sometimes that involves destroying arable land. The onus is not on me to prove what changes are GOOD or BAD or BEST but rather on the politicians who insist on judging it to be only one way. I was faced with "decreasing crops" as a feeble attempt to prove that Climate Change is BAD! when it is not automatically logical on a global scale. In that case, what do you suggest we do in the face of Climate Change? unconditionally follow the orders of politicians who can not justify their commands??? "Quite the contrary: I have clarified my position. " -- I didn't ask you to clarify your position, I asked you to defend it. You failed.

Nope...I have gold dolphins to prove it. You will pay me this month and every month thereafter (until I die) for those "criminal" activities. I get Social Security checks on top of that. I plan to live a very long time, laughing all the way to the bank. Gold Dolphins? who gives those as a reward for criminal spook activities involving submarines?

so, you can't support your claims -- better to give the short answer than obfuscate

The scariest guys are in them Vietnamese gangs

I got 'A's in History. Your tortured logic has not improved. and have you even considered giving up that joke about you being a spook who engaged in criminal activities somehow involved with submarines? I mean ...

Repeat after me: My electricity comes from the flooding of land. Do you really? Can you recognize when YOU twist an argument? I beg your pardon???!!??? Where did I claim that reduced crop production was good? Just because crops are reduced does not mean that crops can not be grown elsewhere in the world. Climate change can possibly expose previously unused arable land. Just in case the title is not more than obvious at the top of every page, permit me to re-align this thread. The question happens to be: Is climate change BAD? Evidence of reduced crop production does not substantiate the claim that it is BAD unless evidence can also be provided that crops can not be grown elsewhere in the world. The onus to provide proof is on the person who says climate change is BAD not the person who asks for proof. why don't you show us all a map. One that shows where arable land has been exposed. and don't parse arguments with me, if I get pissed off I can rip out your lungs without raising a sweat. ---- but first, that map - where is this arable land? who declares it such? finally, what studies support your claims that:

And your Pollyanna view of the world needs a reality check. Eisenhower (West Point graduate) presided over a huge Cold War build-up despite smarmy speeches about the military industrial complex. Eisenhower Doctrine = military force to counter communism. Eisenhower VP = Richard Nixon and still, that doesn't defend your claim, "'war,' that's what we do" sorry, my view of the world comes from reality. You should check in some time. Don't let the light hurt your eyes.

You "agree" that "my" history is correct? Sir, you were just handed your ass. Ike also said that there were no overflights of the Soviet Union until Gary Powers showed up on Rusky TV. Yes, as I noted, the morons pushed Ike around a lot, when he was president. It doesn't mean he considered himself a god of war. Quit kidding yourself. Your shallow view of the world needs work.

Your logic is pathetic and tortured. I am sure, in the dim light of your mom's basement you think you hit a homerun. Unfortunately you bunted foul and were called out. Get over it. maybe you need to read ALL of the history and stop going for your Rush Bimbaugh sound bites bush_cheney2004, honestly, if you'd like to give up that joke you were making about a spy who used to engage in criminal acts somehow involved with submarines, I'll understand. You like to kid around and thought you could yank my chain a little. It's ok, we can start over, maybe we'll be friends. I've done a variety of things in my life. How about you? I did start, as a kid, working in an opthalmic optic laboratory. I used to grind lenses and cetera. I'm from the midwest, how about you?

This is too easy.....game, set, and match: US military advisors poured into Vietnam under President Eisenhower. Eisenhower's Letter of Support to Ngo Dinh Diem, October 23, 1954. Dear Mr. President: I have been following with great interest the course of developments in Viet-Nam, particularly since the conclusion of the conference at Geneva. The implications of the agreement concerning Viet-Nam have caused grave concern regarding the future of a country temporarily divided by an artificial military grouping, weakened by a long and exhausting war and faced with enemies without and by their subversive collaborations within. Your recent requests for aid to assist in the formidable project of the movement of several hundred thousand loyal Vietnamese citizens away from areas which are passing under a de facto rule and political ideology which they abhor, are being fulfilled. I am glad that the United States is able to assist in this humanitarian effort. We have been exploring ways and means to permit our aid to Viet-Nam to be more effective and to make a greater contribution to the welfare and stability of the government of Viet-Nam. I am, accordingly, instructing the American Ambassador to Viet-Nam to examine with you in your capacity as Chief of Government, how an intelligent program of American aid given directly to your government can serve to assist Viet-Nam in its present hour of trial, provided that your Government is prepared to give assurances as to the standards of performance it would be able to maintain in the event such aid were supplied. The purpose of this offer is to assist the Government of Viet-Nam in developing and maintaining a strong, viable state, capable of resisting attempted subversion or aggression through military means. The Government of the United States expects that this aid will be met by performance on the part of the Government of Viet-Nam in undertaking needed reforms. It hopes that such aid, combined with your own continuing efforts, will contribute effectively toward an independent Viet-Nam endowed with a strong government. Such a government would, I hope, be so responsive to the nationalist aspirations of its people, so enlightened in purpose and effective in performance, that it will be respected both at home and abroad and discourage any who might wish to impose a foreign ideology on your free people. Sincerely, Dwight D. Eisenhower SOURCE: Department of State Bulletin. November 15, 1954, pp.735-736. Yes, Ike let a lot of horriffic crap go on - he was a great manager as a general, as president he wimped out way too often. At first, Kennedy let them get away with crap as well. After Bay of Pigs, which showed his courage as he stepped up and took the hit for the fiasco, he knew these clowns for what they were. When he was finally asassinated, he was planning to pull ALL Americans out of Viet Nam. Ike, I'd like to think, would heartily approve, once the truth of the matter was finally explained to him. Yes, I agree that your history is correct. The question remains, so what? Ike was suckered. A lot of people have been suckered. Mostly by the same group. The same group that suckered us into Iraq.

not to waste too much time with you - but you might want to read some historical documents http://usinfo.state.gov/usa/infousa/facts/democrac/demo.htm "We seek peace, knowing that peace is the climate of freedom." -Dwight D. Eisenhower

...The US is also fighting a war....it's what we do...win some...lose some. ... No, it isn't what we do.

Nixon pissing off North Vietnam didn't do any good -- Nixon lost the Vietnam war in the end along with all his other losses Germany and Japan were fighting a war. Laughing at revenge is not a real smart posture --- even dust bunny spies should know that

I don't think they died out. http://english.pravda.ru/science/19/94/377..._autotroph.html your source is the best I've seen from a right winger - congrats

nor does one denial make them anything but chemical weapons, the excuses are getting just so very pathetic

Do you have any clue how YOU get the electricity you so enjoy? I do indeed know where my electricity comes from. I also know when a right winger is dancing away from answering questions or (worse yet) defending previously made outrageous and moronic claims. Do you intend to ever support your claim that reduced crop production is good? or are you off to the next dumbass claim in support of planet destruction by way of corporate greed?

return the Caliphate???? hahahahahhahahahahahahhahaha there is not a serious discussion anywhere but right wing nutcase blog sites, like freeper or that drudge guy no, there is no Caliphate being sought and anyone who thinks there is got it from a 5 minute lesson in Shiism produced by the 700 Club again, not sufficient for making it to Davey and Goliath

The only Iranians who should be pissed are the ones who failed to get a refund from ticket purchases to this movie.

hitting children is criminal - children need good models - brutality breeds only more brutality, that much is certain - people who beat children harm those children and harm society at large if you suggest hitting children is good discipline you are a 'criminal'

how is that a change in the term, 'appeasement?' why is the middle east pissed at the US? well, the Muslims are pissed off because of the US policy of blind support for Israel --- and the invasions, use of chemical warfare, torture, rape, pederasty and murder at Abu Ghraib et al ---- it seems to me, they've taken physical, political and emotional insult sufficient to piss off a gay pope

This kind of broad silliness wouldn't make a script for Davey and Goliath Exterminate???? No, Darwin never predicted any extermination nor any particular method of extinction --- only adaptation to evolving habitats -- this hollywood script you use to replace science can only be of service by having it's printout line the bottom of, perhaps, a Finch's cage