Moonlight Graham

Well dang, its nice to hear you acknowledge Milankovitch cycles and their impact. But what about variations in solar output/solar cycles (ie: sunspots?)? Do you think they are a factor as well? Skeptics make a good case for them, but i haven't heard much about them from the msm AGW proponents. Months ago Michael Hardner gave a me a link to a scientific article looking at CO2 and temp over the past few hundred million years or so (actually, Phanerozoic era if i remember). It looked at CO2 + solar output and its links to global temps, and it found a very high link. Here's the weblink: https://wesfiles.wesleyan.edu/home/droyer/web/PhanCO2%28GCA%29.pdf. See page 5668.

i read about this. it's scary and stupid.

You try to blame everything on "race", and that's your problem. You do not understand or separate the difference between "race" and "culture". You have no understanding of psychology or sociology. At one time, my race, whities of European origin, used to routinely torture criminals by horrifying means, such as the infamous "rack". Used to take on slaves, but no more. It was not long ago in Canada that the law said that a man could legally rape a woman if they were married. In the nature vs nurture debate, you haven't a clue. You are a twisted racist who tries to rationalize these warped thoughts of yours with pseudo-intellectualism.

They'd probably say "i'm glad i live in Canada".

So you're saying world poverty is worse now than pre-WWII? Countless statistics say you are very wrong on that. Foreign aid/development is about a heck of a lot more than "feeding people". Some of it involves sexual education to males and females so they are aware about reproduction & the sexual diseases they are spreading. It also involves things like providing birth control so that severe overpopulation can be curbed. Tell me something i don't know. Aid is and has always been criticized by many, both by aid-giving and aid-receiving countries. International development is one of the most complex problems that the human mind has ever attempted to tackle. You can help one area, but it can cause havoc in two others. Development efforts have certainly caused a great deal of problems in many ways rather than help (especially during the "modernization theory" era in the couple of decades post-1945. However, overall, the statistics say we are helping. As i said to Toad, areas such life expectancy, literacy rates, materal health, child mortality rates, women's rights, access to clean water, proper sanitation etc. have all improved over the last few decades. And as time goes on, we learn more about what works and what doesn't, such as allowing people in developing countries to determine their own fate rather than the West shoving it down their throats, and when to intervene and when to leave well enough alone.

The number of permanent residents from Uganda (the activists in this video) Canada took in in 2008 totaled 221. So i don't think you have to worry about this particular activist gathering too much, whom i'm sure represent everyone in their country . The top 5 sources of permanent residents Canada takes in come from China, India, Philippines, USA, and the U.K., in that order. http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/pdf/research-stats/facts2008.pdf I have some best friends who are 2nd-generation Chinese and Filipino, as well as Jamaican and Vietnamese. They don't seem homophobic to me (well, no more than your typical sexually self-conscious male), nor do their siblings. I know a few of their 1st-generation parents quite well too and they are some of the nicest people i've ever met and i would be very surprised if they were extreme homophobes or more homophobic than your average white Canadian. BTW have yourself a found a good therapist yet?

...to be replaced by another authoritarian regime. Democracy doesn't just "happen". Yes dictators suck, and yes they suck some of the wealth from their countrymen. However, international development has overall had success over the past decades. The problems of the developing world are far from being solved, but areas such life expectancy, literacy rates, materal health, child mortality rates, women's rights, access to clean water, proper sanitation etc. have all improved since the decolonization after WWII. It's not like all foreign aid goes right into the pockets of dictators and is given without conditions. If a schoolhouse is build in rural Zimbabwe, does Mugabe tear it down and sell the lumber? If a well for clean water is dug, does he rip out of the ground and bring it to his house? As i've said, greedy and violent governments are a huge problem for international development, but its not like foreign aid is a direct money transfer from the Canadian gov't directly into the bank account of dictators with a yellow sticky-note attached with us asking them to "please spend this on the poor". Quite a bit more complicated than that. And also, as we've seen in Afghnaistan and Iraq, war against corrupt governments isn't exactly beneficial to the civilian population, at least as we've seen in the short-term.

You're right. But then why did we promise to give 0.7%? Pretty sure we're going to miss that by the 2015 target. All the Millenium Development Goals sounds great on paper and countries just sign on like its nothing, then forget about. Pretty typical.

I'm pretty sure Lictor would be unable to adopt children in Sicily then?

http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2010/06/08/canada-un-millenium-development-goals.html They say that during a global recession, the developing countries are affected the most. I believe it. 14th among 23 developed countries in GDP spent on foreign aid, that isn't very good. I think we are still at 0.33% of GDP towards aid. It would be great if Canada became one of the leaders in area of development. We have a lot of bright minds in this country that can help continue to try and help discover better ways to tackle this monumental problem. I suppose monumental is an understatement.

I think most people are outraged. I don't know, i still don't think it's enough to defeat them or really to gain a great number of seats. The Liberals and everyone else haven't had too many big reasons to call an election against the CPC, but maybe they have as good of a chance as any now. Proroguing + summit spending + Afghan detainees + booting Guergis for no reason. A lot of the momentum is gone from the proroguing issue and the detainee issue isn't quite understood yet. I think the Harper gov is still in a strong spot. The economy is on their side (even though they may have had relatively little to do with it) and they could easily run on that platform alone. Canadian voters don't seem to want change in gov if things overall are going fairly well and there isn't a major scandal. I'm not sure any of the recent scandals are quite enough to get the Liberals in power. A coalition is still probably their best bet.

That's a really stupid and confusing article. So is there alien life on Titan? Or the possibility? Or no life, but the possibility of it coming the in the future? wtf

Prove it.

The Bloc can suck it. So no.

True that. But are you talking Jack Nicholson or Heath Ledger's Joker? Just kidding. Actually they were both good but Ledger's was off the hook. Great acting and superb script.

Love Darth Vader. Ivan Drago from Rocky IV is also also the ultimate badass.

Oblivion was a great game. I've played the Elder Scrolls series since TES 2: Daggerfall back in the 90's. I liked the "100 ways to die" video haha.

Well, i think that system is called capitalism with socialist elements, which exists in pretty much every capitalist country. However, the taxing of the wealthy isn't done enough while the working poor suffer. Canada has a lot of social programs and high enough taxes, but taxing the rich and large businesses too much is detrimental because it drives business and brain-power away from the country (and the case is similar for many other countries). If Canada existed in a bubble we could do whatever we wanted, but unfortunately we must compete and trade in a global capitalist economy in an increasingly globalized world. This is one of the reasons why USSR and other communist countries collapsed, as they isolated themselves the global economy and suffered some of the consequences. Economic liberty and freedom blah blah blah. In my opinion, a few hundred million dollars is as much as any individual needs or even deserves to have. Can't afford to buy the New York Yankees without having a few partners? Cry me a river.

It's a channel for men. Maybe that's why you hate it. I'm a man, and i love it. Deadliest Warrior, UFC, MANswers...great stuff! Oh, and i dont see anything wrong with that midget wrestling show. Sounds hilarious, and nobody;s forcing any midgets to wrestle, they get a nice paycheck. But that "Toddlers in Tiaras" sounds morally horrific.

They should have had the meetings in the middle of nowhere in some big chalet on a lake, instead of freaking downtown Toronto! How stupid can you get? Next time move it to Moosejaw or something.

The worst kept secret in the world now has has some tangible evidence, as report by The Guardian:

I don't think lesbians are any more promiscuous than straight women/couples. But men are men. They are horny and they cheat. I would imagine that many gay men are sexual animals (like straight men) and do have more partners than straight couples or lesbians. The only thing stopping straight men from having sex with any woman they meet is that the women aren't nearly as horny...unfortunately.

So i guess you're not enjoying the Victoria Day long weekend so far?

Well, honestly, the post is quite long, i probably wouldn't have read it either. Maybe skimmed it. I disagree that people don't care about healthcare. It's a huge issue to voters that will just get bigger as the baby boomers age. There is obviously apathy among the public towards politics and many don't bother voting, but for actual voters i think its a big issue (since voter turnout increases among age groups the older the age).

There has been discussion on the "historical perspective" in this thread, ie: Shady vs whomever on the British Bill of Rights of 1689 etc., and comparisons to Chretien etc. As another poster said, it's routine in poli-sci to compare political institutions of different countries. Pick up a book on Senate reform and you'll certainly see many comparisons to the U.S., U.K., and Australian Senates. It's natural for Canadians to compare many things in Canada to how it is in the U.S. Its the only country that borders Canada and the only country anywhere close with any signs of significant civilization. We are obviously exposed to tons of your media so we are quite knowledgeable of your country, political or otherwise, so comparisons ensue. I don't know why this is so fascinating to you. And yeah, we will criticize your country, especially if it affects us or others. I'll criticize U.S. foreign policy, just as i do my own ie: Afghan detainees and Haiti etc., and if you or anyone else in the world criticizes Canada for legit reasons (ie: not just for spite) that's fine by me.