Presidential election

Considering last election, Many people claimed Bush was the lesser of two morons, who would you chose this time around, and why?

Let the debate start early! If your under 18, or illegal (me....ian) or female, you cant vote so dont respond.

Are you voting for the ninny, the fukers, or the worthwhile black candidate?
And too bad you can edit a poll, oh well.

Can't you give Blair American citizenship and elect him? The US is about the only place he's still popular.



Oh god - Blair as US President. 8O I've created a monster.

* has nightmares *

So my list then is censored, ignoring anyone i want.


sue me.


Note: Why am I sup prized that Bush did not try to amend the rule that says 2 terms max?

true very true. hillary would fock it up for us all. people dont realize that tough choices dont always equate to the easiest possible solution.

as for the list;

it sucks, how the hell am i going to vote on a poll, when it doesnt have anyone i want to vote for in it. and/or if it is incomplete as hell.

I voted, just to annoy you.

I like how you leave out the stuff on foreign relations, healthcare, eroding middle class, global warming, and gas. To be fair I'll say global warming and healthcare isn't bush's fault. Still, he hasn't exactly taken any steps to fix them. Prescription drug benefit was an OK step forward, but what about the rest of us left to pay 15% increases in premiums every year? *Fcuking technology*

The ONLY place I applaud Bush is on the economy and immigration. He's a fcuk up on the rest of the problems. He gets a "B" for terrorism. He'll get an "A" when he decides to give the finger to Pakistan and get Bin Laden.

who the fcuk voted for hillary?

wow, that would suck.

i dont hate on skill, just on team bias.

lmfao, hes really grasping on those, aint he?

yes and it appears we are headed for an ice age regardless of what we do. however, the concern that most scientist have is that we're rapidly accelerating the timetable for the next ice age. i don't think i need to explain how badly an ice age would fcuk us up until we figure out a way to A. Stop it or B. live somewhere else. The evidence of the "acceleration" is irrefutable. those who wish to discount global warming as myth are kidding themselves.

So unless we can come up with a way to replicate food (like on star trek), bringing about the next ice age ain't a good thing however inevitable it may be.


That’s true. The extent of the acceleration is under debate. I’m much more curious about other things though. Someone says 'global warming' and everyone jumps on automobile emissions, fluorocarbons etc. I’m very curious if those things aren’t over estimated in the grand scheme of the problem and I can’t help but wonder how much heating is not through UV heating/loss of ozone, but from human waste heat. Home/business/Street Lights, air conditioners, Laundromats, energy production etc.

*sigh*

The best attitude to have toward climate changes and so on is to carry on regardless.

I'm serious. This way when the climactic shift takes place, we're completely unprepared, and about 75% of humanity goes down the tubes. I like this concept. That way the average IQ goes up, and humanity's drain on natural resources goes down. Bliss.

[/misanthropia]

as you wish:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com [...] rming.html

http://www.space.com/scienceastron [...] 31208.html

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/n [...] 720024.ece

this one actually suggests other planets, hrm

tells how the global warming on mars could make it livable.


so that should keep you busy for awhile and maybe you can start looking for yourself before jumping on a bandwagon about something.

have a nice day yourself,

Wow, a 3 year trend can maybe possibly be compared to earth...

Top in his field. Why have I never heard of him before? Oh yeah, he is a nobody!

Believes. You know what that means in scientific jargon? It means he cannot prove it, but may be seeinga trend. He has not got the info to back it up yet and is just airing ideas.

He is spouting BS. Some scientists like to cling to things until they get noticed.

Tracking the caps for three years and saying that their temps follow ours is not very accurate. The Earth has a lot more stuff going on, including a thicker atmosphere and quite a bit of water (a very big thermal store) as well as a very active molten core.

Doing too direct a comparison with Mars without a lot of government funded re$earch is foolish.

and that is also in direct correlation with your posts as well. heh.

Nice comeback there.

They must LOVE you at the local elementary school playground.

But you don't get pwn3d by the 5th graders anymore!

his theory is an interesting one and perhaps it IS true. but i think the chances of him being right are slim. if solar irradiance is decreasing (and it is) then why is the planet still heating up?

his theory seems to be at odds with the facts.

as the article says, he's the only scientist who believes this theory. again, doesn't mean he's wrong, it just makes it unlikely.

i'm going to have to go with the popular opinion on this one.

word.


@jesse, yeah i was just stating that other planets are going thru the same thing, now whether i believe or not is a different thing.

[/shrug]

I dont know. My point is, I dont think weve studied the problem anywhere near thoroughly enough. For example, I read a report some time ago (sorry, no links) that stated localized ecological tempurature increases were clearly evident as the result of human conflict (war). The interesting thing was, the temp increase were noted after the conflicts and were the result of the heat energy given off by the decaying human bodies.

How many different things do we overlook. What about humans ourselves?

The planets human population is currently estimated at over 6.6 billion. Only 100 years ago, it was about 1.6 billion. In the last 20 years alone, the human population has increased by 2 billion. Each operating @ 96.8'C. Thats a lot of heat. By comparison, right now there are about 100,000 gorillas, 50,000 polar bears, less than 10,000 tigers, and about 2,000 giant pandas.

Other things like the housing explosion in the US have to generate waste heat, both through construction and operation. Were always posting about computers, what about the ever increasing number of those. Hell, Intel alone must have some tiny respsonsability in global warming if for no other reason than netburst. Transportation, we focus on automotive emmisions, but what about ships and aircraft, which are growing in number rapidly. Construction equipment, home appliances, recreational devices. Electric motors are notoriously inefficient and produce buttloads of wasteheat.

From your time in the mil, Im sure youve heard the phrase "big picture". The problem with that is the big picture is a colage of tiny pictures. How many tiny pictures do we miss? I worry that we focus so much on a few of the larger pictures in the colage at the expense of too much else.

I intend to survive the population crash, and lead the way for the survivors, to a society based on truth, justice, brotherhood and the total and utter annihilation of anyone who disagrees with us.

I'm a firm believer in the global thermostat theory. The planet gets warmer, people turn down the thermostats in their houses. This uses less energy, emissions decrease and the temp levels out at a more acceptable level. There is a fair chance we may lose Norfolk in the process, no biggie, the backward fcuks don't even have motorways.

Thanks for the links - interesting theory, even if it is pants.
Reasons why it's pants;
1. Study only over 3 years - hardly sufficient to draw a conclusion
2. He hasn't taken into account Mars' Milankovitch's cycles. A totally unforgiveable error.

Your penultimate link actually works against your belief. It admits that the warming on Mars is caused by CO2. And what are humans pumping out in to Earth's atmosphere? Yup, you got it. Strangely, the writer of the article doesn't actually discuss that much.

I haven't had time to read the others because I'm at work, but if they're as poor as those two, I look forward to having a good laugh this weekend...


Oh, and the "Ostrich Theory" is the idea that if we just all go "la la la, it's sun cycles" the problem will solve itself.


Edit: oh, and regarding the "bandwagon" jibe; I've been interested in climate science since I was in my early teens (long before it became so prominent in the news), and I spent 4 years studying Earth Sciences at one of the world's best universities. So, whilst I'm not an expert, I do know a little more than the average layperson and not through trying to be fashionable.

I'm all for ignoring the problem. That way the cause will eventually die out.

And I'm being serious. [/angry misanthropic son of a bi[b][/b]tch]

Why not? Except for bull dykes - there it's obvious why not.

I'm offering myself for stud service, someone's going to have work on re-population. Being a professional stud, bull dykes should be allowed as long as they're willing to breed.