Obama Is A Liar
2011-09-21 05:39:30 UTC
Ohh, the "tuck rule" was a rule before that game??? NO, it was not.
Bullshit. It was officially added to the rule book in 1999.The call was good. It's the rule that is bad.
season.... but the only time any one really bitches about it is when it
concerns that particular call in the Pats/Oakland game. It's all just
jealousy and idiotic whining.
that one, do we?
LOL
;]
to his knees and shriek like a little bitch.
--
We must change the way we live
Or the climate will do it for us
Another Nobel Prize-winning physicist protests global warmingWe must change the way we live
Or the climate will do it for us
alarmism and falsehoods
http://blog.nj.com/njv_paul_mulshine/2011/09/another_nobel_prize
_winning_ph.html
I noted recently how the Nobel Prize-winning physicist Freeman
Dyson of Princeton has objected to global warming alarmism.
Now we learn that another Nobel Prize winner, Dr. Ivar Giaever,
objects to all the hype as well.
Glaever has resigned from the American Physical Society to
protest its position that there is "incontrovertible" evidence
that human activity is causing the temperature to rise to
dangerous levels.
Such group-think is normally unthinkably in scientific circles,
and in an e-mail to the society Glaever skewers it nicely:
"In the APS it is ok to discuss whether the mass of the proton
changes over time and how a multi-universe behaves, but the
evidence of global warming is incontrovertible?"
He went on to write:
The claim (how can you measure the average temperature of the
whole earth for a whole year?) is that the temperature has
changed from ~288.0 to ~288.8 degree Kelvin in about 150 years,
which (if true) means to me is that the temperature has been
amazingly stable, and both human health and happiness have
definitely improved in this 'warming' period."
His view is common among physicists. Another Princeton
physicist, William Happer, had this to say about the APS embrace
of the alarmist hysteria:
My own trade union, the American Physical Society (APS), is a
good example, but hardly the worst. An APS Council statement
issued on November 18, 2007 states: The evidence is
incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring. If no mitigating
actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earths
physical and ecological systems, social systems, security, and
human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of
greenhouse gases beginning now. This is pretty strong language
for physicists, for whom skepticism about evidence was once
considered a virtue, and nothing was incontrovertible.
In the fall of 2009 a petition, organized by Fellow of the
American Physical Society, Roger Cohen, and containing the
signatures of hundreds of distinguished APS members was
presented to the APS management with a request that at least the
truly embarrassing word incontrovertible be taken out of the
statement. The APS managements response was to threaten the
petitioners, while grudgingly appointing a committee to consider
the request.
All of this is just further evidence of Dyson's contention that
the global-warming movement is religious, rather than scientific:
The books that I have seen about the science and economics of
global warming, including the two books under review, miss the
main point. The main point is religious rather than scientific.
There is a worldwide secular religion which we may call
environmentalism, holding that we are stewards of the earth,
that despoiling the planet with waste products of our luxurious
living is a sin, and that the path of righteousness is to live
as frugally as possible.
And if you don't believe this movement is religious, just read
the comments that appear on this blog from the true believers
every time I write on this subject. They repeat the same mantra
over and over again. As I'm sure they will this time.