This blog originally founded by Blogger who holds a theological degree and a doctorate in Counseling Psychology. Taught Psychology for 32 years and is now Professor Emeritus. Is a board-certified psychologist and was awarded the Lifetime Achievement Award in his profession. Ministered as a chaplain, and pastored Baptist and Episcopal churches. Publications cover the integration of psychology and theology. Served in the Army, the Merchant Marines and the Peace Corps.

Sunday, August 12, 2012

VENT PAGE LI - The Vent Page from Area 51

This is Vent Page 51. I am not supposed to say anymore about it. Authorized Personnel know what to do.

Of course if we COULD say anything - we most likely would mention one of our most favorite cars of all time. The 1951 Mercury....the "lead sled" custom version - one of the most customized cars of the late 50s custom car era! Chopped top, DeSoto grill, 53 Buick trim, lowered with rear fender skirts and sometimes with "lake pipes". So many custom cars were built with this same "look" that it almost became a  "standard"!



129 comments:

Sarkazein said...

One thing I have to credit to Obama for is solving the homeless problem. He's done such a great job the subject is not even mentioned on news anymore.

Anonymous said...

Not only that but you don't hear too much about our military casualties in Afghanistan. I think it's only front page news during Republican administrations.

Sarkazein said...

War in Afghanistan?

Sarkazein said...

Gas prices must be going down too.

Johnny Rico said...

Is the Gulf polluted with oil or not? The press wants to report on it, but won't for fear of damaging the Messiah. Remember the Dutch Oil Skimmers that hussein obama wouldn't ask for? The oil spill isn't even a distant memory now - it's totally forgotten.

guy faullkes said...

Then there is voter I.D. that would oppress certain groups and keep them from voting (such as the dead. My only confusion is why there is not early voting poll in the cemetery.)

Johnny Rico said...

Why don't liberals want to talk about the Gulf Oil Spill. Was it a disaster or not? Had Bush been if office, it would've been on the cover of every major magazine for months. Speaking of magazines, Newsweek has a very disparaging cover regarding Romney as stupid. Glad Newsweek is going out of business.

Adair Philson

Johnny Rico

Blogger said...

Did anyone note that on the presidential guessing thread, I did not say I wanted Ryan picked for VP, I said “. . .it will be Paul Ryan.” August 8, 2012 11:32 AM–three days before the world knew. Also, if you remember, we nailed the Sarah Palin nomination way before most people even knew who she was. (By the way, which of you was it with me on that Palin post way back then? I forget.)

Happily Married said...

JR,

I am not sure if I qualify as a liberal, but I will state without a doubt that the gulf oil spill was a disaster ( and yes, under Obama) as was the Exxon Valdez (Under Bush 1). Whereas you would like to talk about the politicizing of information around the disaster, it is more important to talk about how to avert the disasters. Neither Bush or Obama were directly responsible for the disasters. Both are responsible for policies that keep us dependent on oil (foreign or domestic). At least Obama made some effort to block the future disaster known as Keystone. Now I bet your response will focus on whether or not I am a liberal or the political misinformation instead of the problem at hand.

NewGuy said...

HR...Of course you qualify! Don't sell yourself short! They will probably deduct a few points from your liberal credentials because you claim to favor the death penalty...but aside from that, you seem to be fully "liberalized".

Happily Married said...

NG I am not sure. I have guns and believe in gun ownership. I believe in a smaller more efficient government - mostly through defense cuts and foreign aid. I believe that English should be established as the official language of the land. I don't operate in the same black and white mentality that most of you do here - which is why I question. I am also not a fan of generalizing someone with a label. One reason I don't like the two party system. I think both have their pluses and minuses.

NewGuy said...

OK...thanks for clarifying.
;)

Hillary said...

Happily Liberal- What is important, is what each President did after the oil spills. Obama slowed down the oil industry for no good reason, causing job loses and higher prices. Stopping Keystone does the same. There are many pipelines crisscrossing the country. Should all those be shut down? He is going after coal fired utilities also. He's a mess. He's made a mess.

President Bush didn't do anything after Valdese to cause a worse problem as Obama did in the BP oil blow-out.

Hillary said...

Above comment is a Sarkazein not a Hillary. It's a login problem I have on this particular PC.

Happily Married said...

Hillary,

An environmental disaster is no good reason to slow down an industry? When drugs are found to have adverse side effects, they are pulled from the market. The fossil fuel industry needs to be slowed down. As long as people are involved accidents and environmental disasters will ensue. Here is the funny thing - no one seems to realize (especially repubs or conservatives) that if the same money went into renewable energy infrastructure, the same jobs would be created and the source of the energy would never dry up. The keystone pipeline source eventually will (and with America's thirst for oil it will be sooner than later). The jobs thing is a specious argument based on that alone. Yes - kill all of the existing pipelines as they represent future environmental disasters. Amory Lovins in his book "Reinventing Fire" goes through step by step how we can get off of fossil fuels by 2050. Coal fired utilities are the mess - not the president. We have only one earth for our children and we are ruining it. and we have options if people would just get their heads out of their butts and look around.

guy faulkes said...

HM, huge amounts of money is going into "alternative" energy research. Most of it comes from the regular energy companies.

Do you really think these companies will be caught down and out when the technology to economically produce "alternative" energy is established. If so, you are fooling yourself yet again.

Take my advice and look out for poison oak while you are hugging your tree. There is no free lunch. The fossil fuel industry has to power the country until alternative technologies are competitive, or would you prefer the world to starve?

Happily Married said...

The alternative energy industry is already competitive. You have simply been brainwashed by the fossil fuel industry: http://awesome.good.is/transparency/web/1012/subsidize-this/flat.html
If the renewable energy industry were subsided as much as the fossil fuel industry, we would already be driving electric cars. But the fossil fuel industry pays for your politicians campaigns - so that wont happen - and that is you fault for being uninformed and for preferring to keep your head in the sand. I will keep hugging my tree because I fear there might not be trees around forever if we keep the status quo. The world will not starve - it would actually be much better off if we just shut off the pumps.

Johnny Rico said...

Happily Dumb said:

"I don't operate in the same black and white mentality that most of you do here".

That's your problem HD. With the inability to think for yourself or exercise any personal responsibility whatsoever, the black and white thing becomes your scapegoat. It's not mine. I understand the basic principles associated with liberty and freedom. It is pretty black and white with little room for error. Liberals, like you, will never understand this. We are trying to help you on this site, but you have to open your mind. Having an open mind is what conservatism is all about HD. Open your mind and liberty will follow.

Your ole pal

Johnny Rico

Johnny "Stinger" Rico said...

Happily Dumb said:

"I am not sure if I qualify as a liberal"

You do qualify as a liberal, believe me.

You then go on to break the bank by saying:

"Whereas you would like to talk about the politicizing of information around the disaster, it is more important to talk about how to avert the disasters"

I like to talk about lack of information pertaining to a supposed disaster. With no information pertaining to a disaster (a media blackout), how will we avert another one? The news media hasn't mentioned the Gulf Oil Spill in 3 years. The Valdez disaster, by contrast, was all over the news for years. Why the disparity in oil disaster treatment? hussein obama (notice lower case) did nothing for 100 days to help AVERT the disaster. No Dutch oil skimmers, no disaster area declaration, nothing. All I heard the idiot say was he was going to kick someone's ass (very presidential sounding by the way). Bush, by contrast, was held to task for waiting 3 days to help people who should've helped themselves during Katrina. Why the disparity? Tough one to answer for liberal socialist sheep such as yourself.

I thought you were quitting this site? Back for another pounding I see.

What have you done to prevent future oil disasters? Do you drive a car or use fossil fuel to heat your home? If so, then you're a hypocrite which is so typical of the fringe left.

Stings don't it.

Your ole pal

Johnny Rico

PS None of you libertards ever asked about my Europe trip a couple months back. Why? LOL!!!!

Bernice Bodenlaver

Johnny Rico said...

Happily Dumber said:

"Coal fired utilities are the mess - not the president"

Your home and car are completely fossil fuel free. Have you put your money where your well worn mouth is and moved to the city where you can walk or ride a bike to work and grocery store? Or, like a typical liberal, do you want others to live according to how you think the world should operate. There is no evidence whatsoever that fossil fuels hurt anything. Obviously the Gulf Oil Spill isn't that big of a deal because the liberal news media is mum on that one! So what evidence to you have that fossil fuels "destroy the earth" as you say? This ought to be interesting!! LOL!

Your ole pal

Johnny Rico

Melissa Higgins

Johnny Rico said...

Happily Deluded said:

"The alternative energy industry is already competitive"

Uh huh. Is that why Solydra went under AFTER half a billion of my hard earned tax dollars funded it? If it's so competitive then why are solar companies going under quicker than you lemmings can follow one another off the renewable energy fallacy cliff? LOL!!!!

Your ole pal

Johnny Rico

Clare Valdorf

Johnny Rico said...

Once again, we have a series of questions that liberal socialist sheep will have a tough time answering. I hear the emotional laced rants coming!!!!!! What a bunch of dolts.

Johnny Rico

Johnny "Liberal Beater" Rico said...

Can anyone show or name a country that has benefited from multi-culturalism? Does multi-culturalism make a country or society stronger or weaker? Just asking because I don't know. Perhaps France, South Africa, United States, Switzerland, Russia, Poland, and Israel would be good countries to cross reference during this discussion class. Any liberal socialist sheep want to take a crack at this one? LOL!!!!!

Johnny Rico said...

I figured the rapid staccato of tough questions would give the babbling dolts reason to pause. LOL!!!!

Sarah Kauffman

Sarkazein said...

Do you think they will call it SWIFT-BOATING?
Like in John Do-You-Know-Who-I-Am Kerry's case it was true but perhaps too truthful.

Happily Married said...

Johnny "Crap for Brains" Rico -
I think for myself all the time – why I don’t’ prescribe blindly to one party’s ideology or the other. You seem to have tattooed the republican handbook to your forehead for review anytime you look in the mirror – what an independent thinker! I take personal responsibility for all of my actions – I do not take any form of government assistance. Unlike you I actually fight for other people’s causes instead of selfishly imposing my ideals on others. Your black and white ideas of freedom and liberty include discriminating against Americans (Gay Americans are just as American as you) and bashing anyone who think differently than you – what a joke. My open mindedness includes having the same respect for all people. You want to tread on anyone that is different. No – you are not qualified to talk about multiculturalism so I refuse to go down that path with you. We get to talk about renewable energy. Funny how I provide data regarding gov subsidies and their effect on the competitiveness of renewable energy and you come back with nothing but witty quips. I drive a hybrid, heat with wood and have solar thermal panels. I have minimized my carbon footprint because – yes, we are screwing up the planet. We now have more carbon in our atmosphere than ever before because of stupid naysayers like you that refuse to listen to scientific evidence http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_in_Earth%27s_atmosphere. (I cite only one source for simplicity and I cite a simple source for the simple minded – there are hundreds of sources that agree) By the way, they have also proven the Earth is round and not flat – although I am sure you will argue that too. There is plenty of information about the environmental disasters to help avert them in the future – that is a cop out on making a valid point about liberal bias in the media – which I agree exists – get over it. Be true to yourself and your arguments – you cant slide that crap past me. You can keep your pounding and suck on this. I don’t care about your Eurotrip. I drive to work about a mile each way to reduce my fossil fuel usage. It is actually the conservatives that try to force the world to live according to their narrow minded religious views – gay marriage birth control, etc. I have provided evidence and you have not provided crap. (Oops I take that back – your caustic comments, put downs and mindless dribble do actually qualify as crap.) Solyndra went under mostly because of Chinese panels makers having an advantage due to currency manipulation. The Solyndra technology would have been viable at a particular price point lower than the panel price point at the time. Boy the NYT had an article this weekend that said dolts like you would cite this and keep your head up your butt regarding the industry was right on. I challenge you to 1) use my actual name in response 2) actually read what I write and information I have cited. 3) Instead of snappy insulting quips, cite actually data driven evidence about anything you have said. I think you have some potential for actual political dialogue if your asinine personality could stay out of the way. I don’t believe you have the mental capacities or social aptitude to be respectful – but I welcome you to prove me wrong in your next post.

Happily Married said...

Looks like I was censored I'll try again.
I think for myself all the time – why I don’t’ prescribe blindly to one party’s ideology or the other. You seem to have tattooed the republican handbook to your forehead for review anytime you look in the mirror – what an independent thinker! I take personal responsibility for all of my actions – I do not take any form of government assistance. Unlike you I actually fight for other people’s causes instead of selfishly imposing my ideals on others. Your black and white ideas of freedom and liberty include discriminating against Americans (Gay Americans are just as American as you) and bashing anyone who think differently than you – what a joke. My open mindedness includes having the same respect for all people. You want to tread on anyone that is different. No – you are not qualified to talk about multiculturalism so I refuse to go down that path with you. We get to talk about renewable energy. Funny how I provide data regarding gov subsidies and their effect on the competitiveness of renewable energy and you come back with nothing but witty quips. I drive a hybrid, heat with wood and have solar thermal panels. I have minimized my carbon footprint because – yes, we are screwing up the planet. We now have more carbon in our atmosphere than ever before because of stupid naysayers like you that refuse to listen to scientific evidence http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_in_Earth%27s_atmosphere. (I cite only one source for simplicity and I cite a simple source for the simple minded – there are hundreds of sources that agree) By the way, they have also proven the Earth is round and not flat – although I am sure you will argue that too. There is plenty of information about the environmental disasters to help avert them in the future – that is a cop out on making a valid point about liberal bias in the media – which I agree exists – get over it. Be true to yourself and your arguments – you cant slide that crap past me. You can keep your pounding and suck on this. I don’t care about your Eurotrip. I drive to work about a mile each way to reduce my fossil fuel usage. It is actually the conservatives that try to force the world to live according to their narrow minded religious views – gay marriage birth control, etc. I have provided evidence and you have not provided crap. (Oops I take that back – your caustic comments. Put downs and mindless dribble do qualify as crap.) Solyndra went under mostly because of Chinese panels makers having an advantage due to currency manipulation. The technology would have been viable at a particular price point lower than the panel price point at the time. Boy the NYT had an article this weekend that said dolts like you would cite this and keep your head up your butt regarding the industry. I challenge you to 1) use my actual name in response 2) actually read what I write and information I have cited. 3) Instead of snappy insulting quips, cite actually data driven evidence about anything you have said. I think you have some potential for actual political dialogue if your asinine personality could stay out of the way. I don’ believe you have the mental capacities or social aptitude to be respectful – but I welcome you to prove me wrong in your next post.

guy faulkes said...

Hm, you are incredible. Do you realize that alternate energy companies have went bankrupt even though they were backed with millions of taxpayer dollars?

Every conservative on this blog wants alternative energy to be viable. It is not presently. More work has to be done and is being done, mainly by private energy companies that want to make a profit (GASP) from this type energy..

We also want to be energy independent in this country with safe and clean fossil fuel and nuclear energy. This can be achieved easily if we get the government out of the way.

Happily Married said...

Guy,

You are incredible. I provide data to show how much tax payer dollars are being funneled into the oil companies despite their record breaking profits - no wonder they can afford to put a little money into research on alternatives. Your bemoan the government for investing in renewables but are OK with it as laundered money. I have explained the Solyndra issue. I guess I should not expect any one on this site to actually care and do research as to why the company failed. There are also hundreds of companies that are profitable that deal with renewables. The subsidies and tax credits are skewed toward fossil fuels such atht it gives people like you the false impression that renewables are not competitive. Please look at the info I provided instead of reacting with oil company rhetoric. Oil companies constantly buy elections to keep this machine going and you are supporting it. If we keep the government out of the way of the energy industry our environmental disasters will be ten fold - because energy companies only care about the bottom dollar - not human or environmental safety.

NewGuy said...

HM ...You were neither "edited" nor "Censored". For some reason the SPAM filter picked you up and put you in the spam folder. Usually, if your post does not appear within about 90 seconds or so after you enter it, then the spam filter most likely has misidentified it as spam.

At any rate, your posts were in the spam folder - they have been recovered and are posted now. If, in the future, your post doesn't appear right after you submit it, try again, chances are the spam bot got it.

We do monitor for profanity or obscenity and we do remove the posts from our resident troll -no matter what name he chooses to use.

Your posts are however, to my knowledge, never "edited".

guy faulkes said...

HM, nothing you have published is anything but an opinion piece.

Do you deny the fact that alternative energy companies cannot make it even though they are subsidized by millions of dollars of tax payer money? The technology is not yet extant.

However, alternative energy will become viable because private companies are working on the technologies to make it so. Many of these companies are the same that you despise.

As to tax breaks, did you know the government makes more on a gallon of gas through taxes than the petroleum companies do through profits? Check the figures.

guy faulkes said...


Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano Sued for Sexual Discrimination

http://www.wfmz.com/news/Judge-won-t-stop-state-voter-ID-law/-/121458/16134414/-/c4gfnu/-/index.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+WFMZ-TV%2F69News%2FBreakingNews+%28WFMZ-TV+69NEWS%3A+Breaking+News%29

Has anyone seen anything about this on the mainstream media?

Blogger said...


51% Expect Most Reporters To Help Obama; 9% Predict Most Will Help Romney Rasmussen poll today.

guy faulkes said...

Does anyone know anything about the left wing extremist's foiled shooting rampage at the Family Research Council. Apparently he was upset with the organization over their support for Chic-fil-A. He supposedly shot a security guard, but the guard was able to subdue him.

There seems to be a lot of things happening and the silence of the reporting on them is deafening.

Happily Married said...

Guy-

This is not an opinion piece, it is graphical data from the Environmental Law Institute that is respected for being non partisan:
http://awesome.good.is/transparency/web/1012/subsidize-this/flat.html.
Alternative Energy companies can and are making it withe the help of some of these subsidies. First Solar was number 39 on Forbes list of fastest growing companies. Think of the jobs we would create and the environment we would save if we shifted fossil fuel subsidies to renewable energies right now!

guy faulkes said...

Think of the misery and deaths that would occur due to the economic conditions that would prevail by abandoning fossil fuels with no viable replacements.

Sarkazein said...

Our $200 haircut/$5 brain news media EXPORTS to China

Johnny Rico said...

Happily Deluded,

You must not be dumb, no one could be that stupid, so it must be you're deluded. Hence, the new descriptive moniker. At any rate, you fail to answer a majority of my questions so I will break down your weak diatribe into it's most baseless elements. LOL!! You say:

"what an independent thinker!" Why thank you. I am a registered independent and think independently of political class. I do not belong to one party or the other. Unlike you, I don't follow blindly along with whatever talking points CNN broadcasts to the sheep. Funny, you dolts RAN from my comments disparaging your arch enemy Virginia Foxx and Richard Burr over the Blowing Rock Land Trade. When liberals like you were asked if you supported Foxx's decision to side with a crooked town council over local outdoorsmen, you idiots came out with the tried and true comment: "I don't know much about that". This is exactly why I am black and white because I DO know much about "that". LOL!!!!

Then you get really stupid with this comment: "Your black and white ideas of freedom and liberty include discriminating against Americans (Gay Americans are just as American as you) and bashing anyone who think differently than you"

Really? Can you provide any shred of evidence that I discriminate? As a former lesbian, I believe fully in one's right to choose sexual orientation. I also believe fully in another's decision to forbid marriage between a woman and a women. I support the group called "Pink Pistols" which promotes 2nd Amendment Rights for gay, lesbian and transgenders. You just keep digging the hole deeper! LOL! And what do you do to increase freedoms for homosexuals.

Then the topping on the cake: "No – you are not qualified to talk about multiculturalism so I refuse to go down that path with you".

And what makes you qualified to make this assessment. Are you some expert or God unable to concern him/herself with this question? Or are you caught in a conundrum because you CAN'T ANSWER THE QUESTION. You refuse to go down that path with me because the path leads into a rabbit hole. Perhaps if you thought a little more black and white, you would be able to express yourself on this rather simple question. Truth hurts don't it!!! LOL!!!!!

Stings don't it.

Continued....

Johnny Rico said...

Then you go self-rightous on us with the following: "I have minimized my carbon footprint because – yes, we are screwing up the planet".

First off, you may think you minimize the "carbon footprint" but who says you've done enough? You may think you've done something, but that's your microcosm thought in a world full of thoughts. Maybe I think you shouldn't drive a car at all. Maybe your president thinks you should ride a bicycle. Careful with thinking you've done enough - the liberals in this country will TELL YOU when you've done enough after they've figured a way to tax you for it.

Perhaps, if carbon emissions are the problem, we should ban ALL automobile use immediately. If carbon is "destroying the planet", then quit driving altoghther. Even starting your car makes you the problem as much as me. Black and white.

As for the planet being destroyed, there is no evidence whatsoever that carbon emissions are destroying the planet. Volcanos spew more carbon and debris into the air than cars do in a hundred years. Are you going to stop volcanos now? What a dunce. Whatever happened to sea level rise? I thought rising sea levels were going to inundate towns along the east coast? Artic Ice Caps are supposedly melting so where is all the sea level rise? Quit being an alarmist and enjoy driving whatever you want to drive. The only thing environmental regulations have done is drive up the cost of everything and cause companies to move overseas (China, Mexico, Tiawan) where there are no regulations. Good job on putting Americans out of work with your "hybrid" mentality. LOL!!!

Then the dumbest comment of all takes place:

"Solyndra went under mostly because of Chinese panels makers having an advantage due to currency manipulation".

WTF. Solyndra went under because alternative energy DOESN'T WORK. It is not efficient enough to make money. Who manipulated the currency to allow the Red Chinese to make solar panels that in turn sent Solyndra into financial ruin? The Federal Reserve maybe? The Republicans in the House maybe? Who! The only currency manipulation I saw was half a billion of my hard earned taxpayer money thrown at non-existant technology in an already failing company. Funny how you liberal socialist sheep don't mention that little part of the Solyndra scandal.

As for the Red Chinese making solar panels cheaper than we can - I made this prediction before I was kicked off Watauga Watch 4 years ago. I asked the question how "Green Jobs" (remember those) would be able to compete with cheap labor overseas. Crickets. You liberal sheep were unable to come up with an answer to that one. And now, 4 years later, you blame the Chinese!!!! What a bunch of dolting idiots. We told you so!!! Conservatives, with black and white thinking, told you so. Pretty black and white that a Red Chinaman can make a solar panel cheaper than a liberal socialist American (you). It wasn't hard to see that one coming, yet you idiots threw money at solar companies with blind disregard anyway!!! I can't think of anything anymore incompetant than your ability to dodge the truth. But hey, your driving a hybrid to make yourself feel better anyhow. LOL!!!!

That was pretty easy

Your ole pal

Sarah Burkett

Johnny Rico

Johnny Rico said...

The question is: "Can anyone show or name a country that has benefited from multi-culturalism? Does multi-culturalism make a country or society stronger or weaker? Just asking because I don't know. Perhaps France, South Africa, United States, Switzerland, Russia, Poland, and Israel would be good countries to cross reference during this discussion class. Any liberal socialist sheep want to take a crack at this one? LOL!!!!!" Oh and let's add Australia to the equation also.

Happily deluded, since you're the self proclaimed expert on this one, why don't you take a crack at answering it. LOL!!!

Another question avoided by liberals. Oh wait, it must be tied to "currency manipulation". LOL!!!

Your ole pal

Johnny Rico

Happily Married said...

Johnny "crap for brains" Rico. I can't imagine, after reading your pointless rants, that your brain matter qualifies as anything else, hence the moniker.
1) I don't just follow points brought up by CNN - I am also an independent with leanings to both side of the spectrum and I evaluate each issue independent of its politics.
2) I fought against the marriage amendment because, unlike you, I don't think it is OK to impose my beliefs on others or discriminate against someone because of their sexual orientation. You contradict yourself by saying you support both. You can support both sides to have their belief - not impose it.
3) I am not qualified to talk about multiculturalism - but I seem to remember you ranting about some negative aspect of Europeans. You seemed to have a very anti European slant. I could be wrong - just my memory. If you already expressed bias maybe you should not talk about multiculturalism because the opinion will most likely be slanted. I simply have no interest in the topic and would love to talk about the topic at hand instead of Foxx or multiculturalism. I egt tyo choose which conversation i want to engage in - not you.
4)I have minimized my carbon footprint - I fail to see how saying that is self righteous - it is simple fact. I never said I have done enough - i would like to do more - I don't care whether you think I have done enough or if you think I shoudl ride a bicycle - i am doing something - are you? Unless you are starting a hybrid and driving less than a mile to work - then no i am not as much of a problem on the environment as you are. How bad do you think all that airline travel is?
5)I never claimed to want to stop natural events such as volcanoes. I do say we are capable of controlling what we do to the planet. I have provided very clear data on the human impact of carbon. How is the drought treating you? How is the hottest summer on record? We have more carbon in the atmosphere than in the last 400,000 years and through 5 "natural ice age cycles" - so much for no impact by humans. You can keep your head buried in the sand or provide documents that counter the data I have provided.
6) Environmental Regulations have cleaned up rivers so they are swimmable and removed particulates form the air so acid rain is no longer killing trees at the highest elevations - all proof that they work. It is not all about jobs - there has to be a balance. Your black and white thinking on this will make our country so it is uninhabitable for future generations - you should be ashamed.
7) What a stupid comment " alternative energy DOESN'T WORK". How is First Solar one of the fastest growing companies in the US?. Why are Texas and California teaming with wind generators? The only reason it is note as financially competitive is the subsidies (data already provided) Your the dolt who is trapped in your antique fossil fuel mindset. Your black and white thinking will keep us in the past and not competitive. Funny how you never answered about the Earth being round - not flat. Your comments at this point are so ludicrous they dont even stir me up anymore. Your brain isn't capable of an intelligent conversation about renewable energy. Your like the President of Iran claiming his country does not have gay people - oblivious.

guy faulkes said...

It seems to me that Rico countered your comments very logically, HM.

It seems to me that all you did was fly in the face of the fact that alternative energy is not economically feasible at this time. It will remain that way until private companies come up with the technology to to remove cost prohibitions.

Exactly who made you the arbitrator of what another's opinion should be about multiculturalism or anything else. This is what your post seems to imply.

You are certainly free to disagree, but you cannot indicate Rico has no right to an opinion any more than I can do that to you. You are perfectly entitled to your mistaken opinions.

Johnny Rico said...

Happily Deluded said:

"I can't imagine, after reading your pointless rants, that your brain matter qualifies as anything else"

Happily Deluded, I can't imagine, after reading your dodge and parry remarks, that what little remains of your grey matter (too much dope) qualifies as anything but delusional. LOL!

then you say:

"I evaluate each issue independent of its politics." No you don't. You spout the same tired, worn out liberal socialist talking points. Go eat a Chick Filet sandwhich and muse on how independent your not.

Here's a big cop out: "I am not qualified to talk about multiculturalism". And how does one become "qualified" to talk about multiculteralism? I didn't know there was a qualification process involved. So you don't hold an opinion of multiculteralism that you care to share with the rest of us. I though you were an independent thinker there Mr. Independent! LOL!! What a dunce. In one sentence you're a thinker and the next your unqualified. As for my European slant - you said you didn't want to hear about my Europe trip so why are you bringing this up now?

It gets better: "I don't care whether you think I have done enough or if you think I shoudl ride a bicycle"

Like most liberals, you fail to see the point I am making. Liberals love to tell others how to live their lives and spend their money. Liberals love to tell others how to reduce carbon footprints and such. I was parroting this mindset by asking if you were doing enough. In other words, I was alluding to the fact that a liberal might tell you that you're not doing enough to the point your hybrid is confiscated. The point I was trying to make, and it's lost on you, is living the way you want to live is the key. Mandating the way others live through faulty or false science (global warming) is decadent, deceitful, and wrong.

Then we have the hippie environmentalist coming out: "You can keep your head buried in the sand or provide documents that counter the data I have provided."

I seem to remember leaked emails from leading climate change scientists who admitted their data was skewed to favor climate change. And suckers like you believe it! Your pseudo-science is just that - a liberal fallacy designed to obtain more money from us working class folks (ever hear of cap and trade?). Don't talk to me about a Wiki-pedia article written by a crap-house hippie who doesn't understand that Al Gore doesn't practice what he preaches. LOL!!!

Then the ole liberal standby: "Environmental Regulations have cleaned up rivers so they are swimmable and removed particulates form the air so acid rain is no longer killing trees at the highest elevations"

Funny how liberals don't understand the first environmental conservation practices were accomplished by conservatives like me. Teddy Roosevelt, wolf hunter and conservationist, protected Yellowstone and created the National Park system. Hunters (conservatives) have funded conservation measures ever since far more than ANY liberal organization. Ever hear of Duck Stamps, Hunting licenses, Pittman-Robertson Act? Of course you haven't. You liberals are too stuck on preventing carbon emissions from automobiles when a volcano does more damage in 2 days than cars do in a century. What idiots. As a hunter and conservationist, I do far more for fish and wildlife each year than you do.

Won't even bother with your last statement. Funny how you don't want to mention Solyndra and the money manipulation scheme that some crap house liberal invented to steer the conversation away from a solar company that went broke AFTER using a half billion dollars of tax money. Why don't liberals (you) bemoan this waste? It's pretty black and white, don't you think? LOL.

I won (again).

Your ole pal

Cindy Disler

Johnny Rico

Johnny Rico said...

I've got another good one. Happily delusional, do you smoke, or have you ever smoked pot?

This is going to be so much fun!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sarkazein said...

Complete and total dumb-ass or a total liar or both

Happily Married said...

JR - You did not win crap. I have at least tried to provide some information about global warming and the subsidies for fossil fuels. You have not provided crap except a mindless opinion. Funny how you do not deny that fossil fuels are heavily subsidized and if renewable energy were subsidized as much it would be more economical than fossil fuels. I have shown data. You have shown ignorance. I also have never tried to tell others how to live - seems to me thats your bag of telling people not to have abortions or telling people they cannot get married. When have I tried to force anyone to live according to my beliefs? I am not trying to force hybrids on anyone I merely said I was doing my part. Finally, you do not know how many hunting and fishing licenses I have bought over my lifetime or my contributions to wildlife - so dont pretend to be high and mighty. The only thing you won at was proving to be jerk.

Please go back and review my posts on this thread. I was trying to be civil - once again you are incapable - I have won at proving that.

guy faulkes said...

All you have done, HM is to repeat your talking points with no back up or answers for such things as alternative energy not being viable at the present time.

You repeat La La La La la as bad as LPOV dud.

Happily Married said...

Guy and JR -

I have provided data - you have not. First Solar is one of the fastest growing companies in the country. How is that possible if solar energy is not viable? If your only argument is that if renewable energy were viable everyone would have it? I have pointed out the fossil fuel subsidies that are preventing it from being as economical as fossil fuels. You are not addressing this issue at all. I am repeating talking points because they are valid points that you keep ignoring and not addressing. If the technology is not viable why do we currently have enough wind generators to power 15 million households up and running? I seem to be the only one having a data driven discussion here. You guys just whine and say it aint true.

Johnny Rico said...

Happily Deluded said:

"First Solar is one of the fastest growing companies in the country"

And it's funded by my hard earned taxpayer dollars. Just like Solyndra. Don't you find it the least bit embarassing not to talk about the Solyndra scandal? After all, hussein obama used half a billion dollars of my hard earned taxpayer money on a company already failing. And you have the gall to blame it on "Chinese currency manipulation" (WTF!!!). And who is dodging black and white facts here? LOL!!!!! When liberals fail to talk, at all, about Solyndra and the other failed solar companies that, even though failing already, still greedily took my hard earned taxpayer dollar, it makes me think you don't pay taxes. You must be one of the 50% who sucks off me and other hard working conservatives. Easy to yap and babble about solar when you aren't financing their failures like me.

Then you say:

"I have pointed out the fossil fuel subsidies that are preventing it from being as economical as fossil fuels"

No you don't. Fossil fuel subsidies don't prevent us from being economical. Failing to drill, explore and build the Keystone pipeline do. Fossil fuels pose no environemental hazard as evidenced by the media's refusal to report on the Gulf Oil Spill. You thought that was going away didn't you? Sorry, some of us don't forget the 100 days it took hussein obama (notice lower case) to take ANY action to contain the spill. Remember the Dutch skimmer ships who volunteered to skim up some of that oil who were turned away by the most transparent administration in history. Black and white my liberal slug of a lemming.

Here it is:

"I seem to be the only one having a data driven discussion here"

You must be having a discussion with yourself in another dimension. Too much pot eh? Speaking of which, you dodged the question about pot smoking or drugs. Do you, or have you smoked pot? Nothing hard about answering that question is there? LOL!! Come on and do it and see what happens!!!

Oh, and the multiculteralism question. Honestly I knew you would shy away from it as all liberals do. It's a toughie and is sort of like asking the question "Do you still beat your husband?" No good way out of it. Being on shaky moral and ethical foundations, a liberal truism, does make it hard.

LOL!!!!

Your ole pal

Lindsey Anasthesia

Johnny Rico

And, yes, I did Win!! You've some major digging out to do.

Johnny Rico said...

Happily deluded,

You didn't want to touch this little jewel of a statement did you? Here it is again so you'll have to scream in the mirror for being made a fool of.

"I seem to remember leaked emails from leading climate change scientists who admitted their data was skewed to favor climate change. And suckers like you believe it! Your pseudo-science is just that - a liberal fallacy designed to obtain more money from us working class folks (ever hear of cap and trade?). Don't talk to me about a Wiki-pedia article written by a crap-house hippie who doesn't understand that Al Gore doesn't practice what he preaches. LOL!!!"

Stings don't it

You're ole pal

Johnny Rico

Johnny Rico said...

Happily numb,

I was wondering; have you ever seen the video entitled "No Guns for Negros"?

If not, watch it on YouTube and tell me what you think. Let's have a discussion on whitey preventing blackey from owning, buying or possessing firearms in the modern world. You up for it?

LOL!!

Your ole pal

Johnny Rico

Billy Chastain

Johnny Rico said...

Can someone tell me if Al Gore's mansion is effecient or not? Also, does he jet set all over the world? Just curious.

Oh, and does George Bush live in an energy effecient home in Crawford, Texas. I can't seem to remember. Someone please help me with my memory.

Johnny Rico

Johnny Rico said...

The liberals have been silenced. They have taken a royal beating in recent days. Time to crawl back in the hole and lick a few literary wounds eh? LOL!!

I didn't even break a sweat. What a bunch of dolts.

Your ole pal

Johnny Rico

Johnny Rico said...

Anyone notice that hussein obama (notice lower case) isn't packing stadiums anymore? The last stadium he had an event at, there were more empty seats than full ones. Of course the liberal news media didn't report on that at all, but I did read about it on Drudge Report. With voter enthusiasm at a low for the Demoturds, hussein obama may indeed lose by a landslide.

Another indicator I see is the fact students aren't going out of their way to volunteer for hussein obama this time. Four years ago, the grassroots army was deep. Today I wonder if it's even there.

The liberals are running scared which is fun to see. They hate to talk about facts like jobs or the economy and instead rely on scaring seniors and talking, of all things, about transparency. What a bunch of dolts.

Johnny Rico

Johnny Rico said...

The following is a link on why we don't need zoning laws. If I want to bury a loved one in the front yard it should be a capital crime for someone to stop it. I really hope this old fella wins against the government in this case.

More of the same is coming to a location near you folks. Hero Dan Soucek forsaw things like this and tried to limit the power of Boone, but he was unsuccessful. You get what you reap.

http://news.yahoo.com/ala-man-fights-keep-wife-buried-front-yard-153303814.html

NewGuy said...

There is one of those "viral" emails making the rounds (I've received it twice) ...saying that there is going to be an "interesting" revelation or two on Fox news channel tonight at 8PM.

My channel guide says that it's Huckabee at 8 so I don't know if its on his show or what...

Very possibly a hoax, but I thought I would pass it on for what its worth...

Johnny Rico said...

Bill O Reilly on Fox News is a socialist liberal. I have always detested the idiot. Do any of you remember when he called Appalachian hillbillies "ignorant"? I remember it and resent it. I have never liked O Reilly or 80% of the others on Foxx which is just a shade better than MSNBC.

Greta Van Susteren is another fringe left liberal. Remember when she agreed with billary clinton on assault weapons enroute to Mexico being a problem? A few months later Fast and Furious broke and the hair lipped Van Susteren wouldn't say a word about the fact the government trafficked the guns across the border that killed the border guard.

Foxx news sucks, although it is better than the other broadcasts out there.

Happily Married said...

J "Crap for brains" Rico,

I have tried to be nice and have an intellectual discussion without name calling because I am interested in differing perspectives. JR is such a jackhole that that type of discussion becomes impossible. Fine I'll keep it at your level. I did not run - I have a family that is so much more important than you piss ants. Funny how you want to accuse me of some kind of illegal drug use when you ranted about 5 different topics in five different posts - have trouble staying on topic heh? Maybe you need to lay off the meth or crack or coke or whatever your on - I am not familiar enough with drugs to diagnose your schitzoidism. I pay taxes - a lot of them. You still have no data - just a bassackward opinion. Al Gore is probably hypocritical - does not mean anthropomorphic global warming is not real (that means man made you dolt). If you don't like wiki - how about NASA?http://climate.nasa.gov/keyIndicators/
I am sure you will try to make some political excuse as to how NASA is biased. The e-mails that indicated the original study (which was just a starter that has been re verified countless times) was fabricated - eight committees investigated the allegations and published reports, finding no evidence of fraud or scientific misconduct. Regarding subsidies - don't you find it the least bit embarrassing when the government subsidizes the fossil fuel industry and they drill a hole and nothing comes out - same thing as Solyndra - or worse when the gov subsidizes fossil fuels and they screw up the gulf waters. Yes, they did major environmental damage that is not measured by news hype (that is one of the dumbest arguments yet). http://qn.som.yale.edu/content/should-government-subsidize-alternative-energy
Finally, you dolts cant seem to wrap your feeble minds around the fact that jobs are jobs - in renewable energy or fossil fuels - a job is a job. What if we could increase our workforce in an area where the source does not go away and the environment is cleaner for it? Is that worth a little more in personal energy costs? Or will you selfish jackoffs want to keep driving whatever you feel like at the cost of the environment for your children and grandchildren? I dare you to generate some data to support your position. I will continue to remain on track with the original conversation and have no interest in your coke driven course changes. You did not win crap - prove me wrong with something other than your worthless opinion.

Anonymous said...

"My open mindedness includes having the same respect for all people. "
Happily Married, Aug 15


guy faulkes said...

HM, once again you fail to realize that you are doing the exact same thing you decry about others. You are remarkable in thinking that somehow your opinion is superior to that of other people to the point they should not oppose you.

More of the same la La La La La that you keep posting. You are getting as boring as LPOV.

Happily Married said...

Anon,

I tried to be respectful and JR just kicks in with his rants. I am being just as respectful as he is. As pointed out, I started this thread with good intentions and invited him to be civil. He chose not to be. As soon as he starts being civil, I will be happy to address him properly. I can't believe this blog kicks other people out but tolerates his abusiveness. Tell me Im wrong here.

Happily Married said...

Guy - you are amazing. This is not about my opinion - I have cited work from NASA and Yale University. What have you guys cited? Please tell me you aren't going to just say nanny nanny booboo and stick your tongue out becuase you disagree. Please cite at least some data. -otherwise you are the one La La La ing.

guy faulkes said...

I did not have to site anything, HM. This topic has been covered thoroughly in the past. In addition Rico cover all your comments.

You are never going to be able to overcome the leaked emails that proved the man made global warming issue issue is a hoax. Nor can you get past the fact alternative energy companies are not technologically advanced enough to be economically feasible. They cannot survive even when funded by the taxpayer.

You have no viable argument and are emotionally unable to hear the other side of your emotional opinions.

Happily Married said...

Guy -

As a newcomer I am not aware the issue has been covered. I am willing to listen. Surely, if it has been covered in the past, it should be easy enough to retrieve. A simple search regarding the emails showed that eight different committees investigated and found no problem. Were they all involved in some conspiracy? Is NASA making data up? If you truly believe what you say and have some basis for it - surely you would want to convince someone like me to see your side of things. I deal in data - not emotional opinion. I believe you guys cant show data which is why you keep your head up your ****. I say again, please prove me wrong. I have taken the time to present data - where is yours? Data provides for facts - not opinion. Lack of data is indicative of opinion - and a poor one.

guy faulkes said...

Excellent idea, HM. After you do your search, you will be much better informed. Be aware you have several years of discussion on which to catch up.

Let me know what you think after you read it.

Sarkazein said...

"The Great Lakes are estimated to have been formed at the end of the last glacial period (about 10,000 years ago), when the Laurentide ice sheet receded. The retreat of the ice sheet left behind a large amount of meltwater (see Lake Agassiz) that filled up the basins that the glaciers had carved, thus creating the Great Lakes as we know them today. Because of the uneven nature of glacier erosion, some higher hills became Great Lakes islands. The Niagara Escarpment follows the contour of the Great Lakes between New York and Wisconsin." Wiki and geology in general.


10,000 years ago there was "global warming"... pre SUV, A/C, Coal burning power plants, Al Gore's private jet and mansions, Solindra,etc.

Sarkazein said...

And pre-NASA.

Johnny Rico said...

Happily numb said:

"JR is such a jackhole that that type of discussion becomes impossible"

What's a "Jackhole"? Is it similar to your well worn pie hole running almost nonstop without saying anything? The truth is, HM, that discussion is impossible only in your own mind when debating with me. I am able to hit the core issues to the point it becomes very uncomfortable for people like you. This is why we have the emotional laced tirades and name calling which happens to by synonymous with the left. Standard operating procedure for fringe leftists. I am having a delightful discussion with you. To the point I made Green Tea and drank it with chocolate covered wafers. Most excellent.

Then you degenerate even further by saying:

"Funny how you want to accuse me of some kind of illegal drug use when you ranted about 5 different topics in five different posts"

I didn't accuse you of anything my dear. I asked you if you ever smoked marijuana. Read for content. You never answered this and instead accuse me of accusing you. Typical for the left to use this tactic. Well, have you ever smoked pot? Simple question begs a simple answer. As for 5 different topics in 5 different posts; I can't help it if I'm multifaceted. Keeping up 5 posts is not all that hard, try it sometime. In fact, you must have read my posts on the Fast and Furious scandal. How about commenting on that one! LOL!! I know all the liberal socialists read that one, but somehow they are all afraid to engage with me on government run weapons into a foreign country. By your own admission you read my post so why did you ignore it? Dug a little hole for yourself on that one!!!!

Next we have: "eight committees investigated the allegations and published reports, finding no evidence of fraud or scientific misconduct."

So 8 committees investigated a flawed and biased report written by fringe left socialists and found nothing wrong with it? And you believe that? LOL!! I don't. I believe that sea levels were supposed to rise as the Arctic melted. The biased reports said as much. So where is the sea level rise that was "investigated" by 8 committees? Obviously someone is wrong. Why isn't Wilmington under water? Where are all the supercanes (hurricanes)? Tough questions aren't they!! LOL!


continued below

Johnny Rico said...

Continued from above


And then we have:

"Finally, you dolts can’t seem to wrap your feeble minds around the fact that jobs are jobs - in renewable energy or fossil fuels - a job is a job."

You mean a job is a job for a red chinaman? Or an illegal alien? Since you cannot read my prior post explaining this in detail, let me explain it to you dolts again. 4 years ago I asked the question on Watauga Watch, before I was kicked off for asking tough questions, concerning how green jobs would be generated in this country when all other jobs were exported overseas to Red China and Mexico. The fringe left (you) wouldn't even touch that one. In other words, how can we make a solar panel cheaper than the Red Chinese when we can't make anything else cheaper than they can (because unions drove companies overseas)? Not a peep.
Now we have socialists like you trying the same tired rhetoric (jobs are jobs) that was proven unattainable over the past 4 years. Amazing incompetence!!!

Finally:

"You did not win crap - prove me wrong with something other than your worthless opinion."

Yes, I did win my upset lemming of a friend. Everything I have said is purely fact. Solyndra used 500 million dollars of my hard earned money. Sea levels aren't rising. Red Chinese can make solar panels cheaper than us. You are unable to answer whether or not you smoked pot. Not sure how much more factual one can be. Then again, when dealing with a liberal socialist sheep (you), I've come to expect nothing.

Pipe down, calm down, and take a deep breath. No use in working yourself up over me besting you. I have never been beaten by a liberal on any post, ever. And I won't be. My beliefs, opinions and facts aren't driven by a fractured and faulty belief system like yours. I deal in facts and common sense friend. LOL!!

Your ole pal

Johnny Rico

Sam Shepardson

PS Wanna take a crack at the Fast and Furious post you admittedly ignored?

Stings don't it

Johnny Rico said...

How about some of you worthless liberals come to the aid of Happily dumb as he goes down in flames. At least he is putting up a fight. Where's pov, jw, blowing rock in blue, shyster (shylock) and rest of the village idiots. You finally have one of your own standing up, and you're too lazy to help him. The again, Watauga Watch only has 4 or 5 active posts for the entire blog (must have something to do with censorship), so how could we expect more from braindead igits? LOL!!!!

Your ole pal

Johnny Rico

Johnny Rico said...

Sark,

Those were some awesome posts. The ice age didn't end with continuing cold now did it. Fantastic foray into common sense and logic!

Johnny Rico said...

Happily Dumb,

Did you cut and run or are you in shock that you've been shown up again? LOL!!!!

Your ole pal

Johnny Rico

Johnny Rico said...

Let's ask ourselves this question. What has the County Commission done to increase our freedoms? I can't think of one thing they have done (with the exception of hero Vince Gable) to increase my personal freedoms. And these idiots think they need another term. Vote them out and install a fresh set of idiots.

Johnny Rico

Happily Married said...

Johnny Crap Crap for Brains - No going down in flames here! Your logic is so flawed it is hysterical at this point! Firstly, I plan to stick to the topic at hand - renewable energy and global warming. Your take on it is that 8 different committees reviewed the original work and found no evidence that the e-mail fiasco altered the findings is some kind of cover up and that NASA is obviously just making crap up because we are all not underwater. I can say that global warming will probably not significantly affect you or me - it will hurt our kids and grand kids. Your shortsightedness (or maybe it is just pure selfishness so you can keep driving whatever you want to) is frustrating for those of us who care about our progeny. I have provided data (From NASA - but I have confirmed with several other entities the same data) that we have more carbon in our atmosphere than in the last 400,000 years and through several different ice ages. I am not going to explain to you the implications of that fact because you don't believe in science. I have provided a great summation on why it is important to invest in renewable energy (even if it means failure) from Yale University - but I forgot you consider college types uppity blow-hards who are not in touch with reality. When i talk of green energy jobs - you say the red Chinese have all of those and your predicted that. No - dufus - the Chinese make panels. The jobs to install renewable energy infrastructure on American soil will go to skilled Americans. In fact - more skilled and better paying work than would be to install the Keystone pipeline so your jobs argument is bunk. I should have guessed you would not even consider the data I have provided, but in a good intellectual conversation, rational people can make evaluations and change their stance based on rational argument. Your nanny nanny booboo approach and no data needed - my common sense is better than the world's leading scientist approach is laughable and certainly not persuasive. My question for you is this - What is the worst case scenario if we take both approaches. If global warming is real and we choose to ignore it are we dooming our future generations. If it is not real all we have done is to invest in an energy infrastructure that will never run out - wind and solar - and our planet will be a little less polluted. Can you say the same about fossil fuels? The energy might cost a little more (although several studies have shown that if the same fossil fuels subsidies were applied - energy would be on an equal playing field)but would it not be worth it? What are you afraid of exactly? Still have not seen any data from you tards on this site. And i am still interested in civility if you will call me by my proper name and quit using demeaning language when you provide a response..

guy faulkes said...

HM - La La La La La> Same old drivel.

guy faulkes said...

HM - La La La La La> Same old drivel.

Anonymous said...

Check out today's Day by Day cartoon. It makes Rico's point.

Happily Married said...

Guy - same old lack of response

Nobody said...

HM, Is it your contention that alternative energies right now are as efficient, affordable and plentiful as fossil fuels?

Happily Married said...

Nobody -

Renewable Energies are more plentiful than fossil fuels and you don't have to frack the ground to get to them. The sun and the wind will be with us for millions of years. As far as affordable - they would be on par with fossil fuels if government subsidies were concentrated there instead of on fossil fuels or nuclear. Efficiency ratings between the two are apples and oranges. The task is to set up infrastructure to create the amount of energy required. Fossil fuels have been a good source of energy and a bad source of pollution and environmental degradation. One advantage renewables have is that they are local. Solar farms can be distributed widely without the need for super pipelines to pump oil from isolated areas. Wind is more isolated, but improving our electrical grid to a smart system will allow for that - and benefit electrical distribution as a whole by increasing efficiency and reliability. Renewables will provide for local jobs to install local infrastucture and provide a energy system that has no limits in terms of supply. And our children and grandchildren might still be able to hunt and we might not need to spend all of our resources dealing with environemntal extremes - drought (wildfires), hurricanes, and flooding.

guy faulkes said...

HM, alternative energy is not cost effective. It will be when private industry does the research to make it happen. It is not viable at this time. Its sole use would lead to chaos and starvation until it is affordable.

I know it and you know it.

Happily Married said...

Guy -

Its sole use might do just that. But what about NOT investing in any more fossil fuel infrastructure and investing all FUTURE monies into renewables. This allows for no major shift in current state and creates a new renewable infrastructure over the next 50 years. Your idea about private companies making it viable would hold perfectly true exept for the government interference that you decrie. Subsidies scew the private system toward fossil fuel usage and you know that. I would even be happy ending any and all subsidies to energy and getting rid of tax loopholes.

Johnny Rico said...

Happily very dumb said:

"I can say that global warming will probably not significantly affect you or me - it will hurt our kids and grand kids"

So you're now a global warming expert. Were you also an Ice Age expert when that was being thrown around in the late 70s when we had a cold winter or two? You trogs just keep following the shiny objects don't you. LOL!!!

"I have provided a great summation on why it is important to invest in renewable energy (even if it means failure) from Yale University"

A hero in your own mind. Who said it was a great summation? I didn't, nor did anyone else on this site. The fact is, global warming scientists have engaged in a self serving bias, which I have documented very adequately (and you conviently ignore), to the point a set of leaked emails crushed the whole global warming concept. Now, 4 years later, they are hoping the masses (you) forget so they can continue with "research" that is really a means to an end.

You still failed to answer why sea levels haven't risen since the Artic is apparently melting. Is it melting or not? If it is, then a majority of global warming "scientists" said the sea level was going to rise. Why isn't Wilmington under water? You dolts sure don't have any hard evidence, yet you wish everyone to believe hair brained thories too dumb for the average person to even consider.

A volcano spews more carbon dioxide during an eruption than cars do in a century. How do you get around that tough fact? I noticed you didn't address it at all. Why? LOL!

Truth hurts.

guy faulkes said...

HM, you have to invest in conventional energy until alternative energy is cost effective. To not do so would kill million. No one can prediction the eventual breakthrough in alternative energy.

guy faulkes said...

HM, here is a partial list of alternative energy companies that have went under despite taxpayer funding.

Solyindra
Unisolar
Evergreen Solar
A123 Solar
Azure Dynamics
Ecotality
Amonix
Solar Trust
Energy Conversion Devices
Abound Solar
Lightsource
Beacon
Enerdel

Alternative energy will succeed, but its time has not quite arrived.

guy faulkes said...

Apparently some college students feel redistributing wealth is fine, but not grade point averages.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lOyaJ2UI7Ss&feature=related

Happily Married said...

JR - You are obtuse aren't you? I never claimed to be an expert - simply relaying my understanding. Although my status as an expert or not would matter nothing to you - you don't listen to the experts. Try this on for size where Koch (a known anti global warming group) funded a study and here are the results: http://berkeleyearth.org/results-summary/. Whereas volcanoes do add to the number:The published estimates of the global CO2 emission rate for all degassing subaerial (on land) and submarine volcanoes lie in a range from 0.13 gigaton to 0.44 gigaton per year (Gerlach, 1991; Varekamp et al., 1992; Allard, 1992; Sano and Williams, 1996; Marty and Tolstikhin, 1998). The preferred global estimates of the authors of these studies range from about 0.15 to 0.26 gigaton per year. The 35-gigaton projected anthropogenic CO2 emission for 2010 is about 80 to 270 times larger than the respective maximum and minimum annual global volcanic CO2 emission estimates. It is 135 times larger than the highest preferred global volcanic CO2 estimate of 0.26 gigaton per year (Marty and Tolstikhin, 1998). Scientist never claimed Wilmington would be under water - as I indicated the process takes longer and, unfortunately, is progressive.

The truth (which lies in facts - not opinion) - does hurt doesn't it!

Happily Married said...

JR - The reason an ice age was being considered was the amount of particulates our fossil fuels use was putting into the air and the resulting shielding from the sun in our atmosphere. These particulates caused enough of a scare with shielding and acid rain, that environmental regulations were put into place to solve the problem. http://ff.org/centers/csspp/library/co2weekly/20060711/20060711_23.html . Air pollution is way down - which lets more sunlight in. The problem is CO2 is way up - which warms us up. I know this is confusing to the simple minded so I would ask for people like you who do not understand to quit spewing your lies and inaccurate "common sense".

Happily Married said...

Guy -
If you believe it will succeed, why not invest in it now. Even if it costs a little more (not sure it would if subsidies were considered), wouldn't the environmental benefits be worth some additional cost? Do you not agree that subsidies skew the free market ability to compete? Would it really harm people to keep our existing system and simply say "all new infrastructure will be renewable"? Correct me if I am wrong but gov policy has given businesses multiple opportunities. Vehicle air bags - they have created a cottage industry for air bags (jobs) they keep us safer in vehicles - they are now required in all cars - they make cars more expensive. Is this not the same concept - or do you disagree with air bags being in cars?

Happily Married said...

Guy and JR -

Let me make sure I understand your black and white way of thinking. So a scandal erupts about some of the verbiage in some e-mails in the original study at the Climate Research Study indicates a bias toward global warming. Eight different committees look into it and determine that the results of the study are valid despite the scandal. In your mind it not only invalidates completely all of the work of the study but every study that has occurred after that that has provided the same conclusion? I have provided specific data on other studies that have concluded the same thing - why are they invalid? Please enlighten me on why one scandal means all studies must be false. Its like saying Mitt Romney has never created jobs because he specifically made the statement - "I like firing people" That statement must mean he does not create jobs but rather fires people conclusively. Isn't that the black and white approach to conclusion?

Happily Married said...

Guy and JR,

I have taken the time to research the data supporting the claim that global warming is a hoax. The funny thing is, when you research the for versus the against, the global warming reality has hundreds of charts and graphs showing data supporting the claim. The hoax side has very few charts or graphs. It did contain one graph from the University of Alabama Huntsville that declared decreasing temperatures as of 2008. I also researched to get some updated information up to now and the chart looks different. It seams as if the global temperature is actually rising. I then researched to see how his information compared to everyone else's and found this - http://www.skepticalscience.com/christy-crock-4-observations-match-models.html

The truth does hurt JR doesn't it! Maybe I am simply not privy to the data that you have that clearly shows I am wrong. As I am open minded enough to actually research both sides of the issue, I would love to see what my research has not turned up. I don't want to see articles with opinion. I will consider charts and graphs of actual data only. I look forward to your response.

Sarkazein said...

MAN MADE global warnming HM.

Happily Married said...

Sark,

Everything I have presented supports man made global warming. Given I have provided data on volcanoes, co2 levels, etc. Waht else do you need/. i have provided a link to a chart covering the last 400,000 years of co2 that shows this is not anything like the half a dozen ice ages in that span of time. I am still lokking for data that suggests man has nothing to do with this. Anyone?

Happily Married said...

Here is what gets me. I am open minded enough to say Hey what if I am wrong. So I spent the time doing the research on both sides. There is no data to support the hoax theory - there is a lot of rhetoric and charges of falsifying data - but no actual opposing data. Must just be a big hoax. Who here has the balls to stand up and say they have taken this approach and been open minded enough to consider they might be wrong? JR - your the biggest ass among this crowd, are you man enough to admit it - or are you so stupid that you have actually looked at both sides and still believe in the hoax theory - or are you so arrogant and selfish that you will not look at anyone else perspective and just claim yourself and your warped sense of common sense to be superior to scientific knowledge as to be infallible. I am so tired of your knock downs and insults and ridicule of someone who might have a different opinion. Opinion and belief are one thing - But you cant get away with calling science bullshit. I have proven my case - can you. The truth does hurt.

Happily Married said...

I am reminded of a sitcom where a physicist says to his bible thumping mother that he wanted to move home and try to teach evolution to creationist. The mother replied that creation was true. He indicated that science has proven that evolution is true and that creation is an opinion based on blind faith and there is a big difference between fact and opinion and evolution was a fact. She quickly retorted that that was his OPINION.
I noticed no one has responded to my query about worse case scenario and what if the one or the other approach was wrong.

guy faulkes said...

HM, no matter how you try to spin it, the proponents of man made global warming proved by their own emails and leaked documents that it was a hoax. Nothing you can say will change that fact.

guy faulkes said...


If you believe it will succeed, why not invest in it now.

I already have, HM. Part of my retirement accounts are with conventional energy companies that are working on the switch to alternative energies. These are the companies that will create effective alternative energy as they will not be left behind.

Sarkazein said...

HM- At one time, scientists said the world is flat. Scientists bled George Washington death in an attempt to cure Strep throat. Scientists at one time said the molecule is the smallest particle.

The man made global warming hoax has had millions and millions of dollars in grants for studies. It became a cottage industry, then an anti-capitalist tool and now a religion for the anti-capitalists. Its main sponsor is a seminary school drop-out with no formal training in climatology.

Sarkazein said...

Obama's legacy portrait

Sarkazein said...

HM- Please read THIS

Sarkazein said...

HM- One famous scientist didn't even know there was gravity until a falling apple hit him on the head.

Happily Married said...

Sark,

I have repeatedly expressed research into facts - not allegations. You sent me a link that references a supposed letter that has no data - I am not even sure the letter exists. Hansen is a radical comparing global warming to slavery, but he most likely feels he has to bring that kind of attention to the matter for real change to occur because of hoaxer dipshits like you. I will be happy to look at scientific data proving the hoax - otherwise it is simply political BS (much like the article you attached) Surely you can do better than that.

Happily Married said...

Sark,

Further research shows that the link you provided is to a far right website that claims knowledge of a letter but provides no proof or data. This is simply a joke of an argument. I look forward to any data. Surely these scientist who wrote the letter have data to back up their perspective.

Happily Married said...

Guy,

You keep citing one e-mail scnadal when other studies have proven the same thing over and over again. Kepp your head in the sand if you want just don't block people who are trying to do the right thing. Funny how no one answered the question about worst case scenario. What if you are wrong? What is the worst case if I am?

Sarkazein said...

HM- You can see I am arguing against your religion of man-made global warming. Science is mostly theory.


1,000 Sarkazeins

Anonymous said...

Sort of like when you are wrong on abortion and, in the meantime, millions of babies have been killed?

Sarkazein said...

HP- "Worse case scenario" - The US economy fails (people starve, food riots, anarchy) even more because of restrictions on commerce by man-made global warming bureaucrats and chicken little liberals.

What is the data? .5 to 1.0 increase in 100 years.
Bogus, in fact, because the environment has changed around the temp gathering sites (a/c's, concrete, glass etc).

Everyone is for cleaner air and water. Man-made global warming is a hoax used by anti-calitalists. Anti-capitalists making your data you are relying on have been caught with the email scandals and opposing climatologists.

Liberalism is the "worse case scenario". It has already caused blind following of a man-made hoax.

Happily Married said...

Sark,

I will reiterate, show me some data. I read the report and there was not a single chart or graph showing data that opposes the anthropomorphic global warming theory. My research only finds graphs that support it. What you have is a document quoting opinions without any scientific basis other than opinion. Show me data, show me facts and I will respect your belief. Until then, you are a fool. I also went to the website of the group that created the report to see if they were legit. I found an article on wind turbines and how they kill birds. It stated that teh US fish and wildlife service estimates that turbines kill 500,000 birds eacdh year. I went to the US Fiush and Wildlife Service page. Their site only indicates "hundreds" of birds are killed each year. The site you rely on is a bunch of damn liars. You are so gullible as to believe anything without doing some checking. I have some swamp land to sell - you interested? You can found the ad on FOX news - you big idiot. This is just not that hard - do some actual research - check some facts before you spout off.

Happily Married said...

Anpn,

If you are aware of millions of babies being killed each year, then you need to report it to the authorities. Killing babies is illegal and horrible. Good thing abortion (the removal of a fetus) is different.

Happily Married said...

Guy -

Really - not maybe an exaggeration that spending a little more on energy will cause an economic collapse. I will have a real conversation with you when you stop blowing things out of proportion.

Sarkazein said...

Happy, you are the most unhappy of all. And such a mouth.... oh that's right, it's my fault you are a name caller.

My link was a copy of a letter penned by scientists. It was not an opinion.
There are many scientist NOT believing the man-made global warming hoax. They have the same data.
You think all scientists agree with man-made global warming... they don't. And many more do not agree with its implied urgency.

Sarkazein said...

HM- You and Jacque are much alike. Who is the official dead bird counter for the government. Are the buzzards and the varmints told not to haul off or move the dead birds until they have been tagged and counted by the government? Are the relatives of wounded birds that die later in flight told to report their loved ones death to the government dead bird counter?


THIS RIGHT WING RAG

You are wrong, it is the Windmill A$$ociation that disputes the governments figures of 500,000.

HM said- " I found an article on wind turbines and how they kill birds. It stated that teh US fish and wildlife service estimates that turbines kill 500,000 birds eacdh year. I went to the US Fiush and Wildlife Service page. Their site only indicates "hundreds" of birds are killed each year."

guy faulkes said...

HM, we spent over two billion dollars of taxpayer money on ten alternative energy companies that failed. This is not a little money.

Your problem is that you are not content to move forward with all energy sources because you are emotionally evolved in the man made global warming hoax. You would prefer the certainty that people will die without conventional energy to the impossibly that people will die from the man made global warming hoax.

Just for your information, before the proponents of man made global warming outed their subterfuge with MANY leaked documents, over thirty thousand scientists signed a petition denouncing man made global warming theory.

That should have shown up in your research of previous discussions on the blog. How is that coming?

Anonymous said...

Happily Moronic. With the same respect you show others, I will say that you are a lying, stupid friggin a-hole or are just too much of an idiot to know how to read. Where did I say that millions of babies were killed each year? You just make crap up to suit your idiotic ideas and read things that aren't there because you can't deal with the true facts.

YOU say they are "fetuses" and not babies. I say WHAT IF YOU ARE WRONG?

Of course you are too f'n stupid to understand that point. Here it is again, If you are wrong, then these babies are being killed.

You asked about global warming and "what if sark was wrong". I'm asking the same thing of you. What if you are wrong. Which you are, dumbass!

Happily Married said...

Anonymous said...

Sort of like when you are wrong on abortion and, in the meantime, millions of babies have been killed?

This clearly states that in your opinion millions of babies have been killed. I incorrectly added the each year as I was on my bird rant. Please forgive me. The point was baby versus fetus. The issue of abortion is an opinion and a belief system issue - not one of scientific data. But again, I do apologize for adding the each year part-that was incorrect. Speaking of which - i am sure this has shown up in everyone' selected reading:
http://grist.org/list/heres-what-record-low-sea-ice-levels-look-like/

Still have not seen any data - just opinions

Sarkazein said...

Happy- From another scientist- Date: Sun May 31 19:04:45 1998
Posted By: Nick Hoffman, Physics
Area of science: Astronomy
ID: 896351700.As
Message:

Whoa, Craig,

That's quite a handful for one question, so let's take it piece by piece...

1) Is ice building up at the poles relentlessly, year by year?

The North Pole is floating sea ice, with a cover of snow. It drifts on sea
currents and after a few decades, drifts away from the pole, breaks up and
melts. At the South Pole, there is a permanent ice sheet.....

Sure, it snows every year at the South pole, and never melts, but that snow
doesn't just pack down to ice and sit there. What happens is that once the ice
is thick enough, it starts to slowly flow under the pressure of its own weight,
like a huge glacier. The ice spreads out in all directions like crazy putty, and
flows away from the poles. When these glaciers and ice sheets reach the edge of
the ice shelf, they calve off as icebergs, especially in the summer. In fact,
most people monitoring this situation will tell you that the ice caps are
shrinking due to global warming, not growing.

Sarkazein said...

HAPPY-There is THIS

Sarkazein said...

HM- Remember, the South Pole is also part of the "global".

One reminder is the sheep in the mountains of Chile were having eyeball problems. "Scientists" blamed it on the hole in the ozone layer. Remember? Much later it was quietly and with less fanfare diagnosed as a sheep eye disease.

Opoib said...

Pot meet kettle

"stupid friggin a-hole" "Of course you are too f'n stupid "

I was told we had to keep things pg. Yet i get censored for just not agreeing and wanting to show a different viewpoint.

Sarkazein said...

Happy- My above link 8:34 has some nice graphee and dataee stuff on it.

Sarkazein said...

A city with BIG gun control and Liberal Democrat leadership

Happily Married said...

Sark,

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/08/100816-global-warming-antarctica-sea-ice-paradox-science-environment/

You are right with data to boot. The lack of follow through is the problem. More precipitation caused by global warming has caused more snow pack. The ice at the North pole is reaching record lows right now. The article above tells all about it and predicts a shift soon. When ice at the South Pole reverses course and starts shrinking, will that finally be proof enough?

The biggest point of data that I would love some retort to is the amount of carbon in the atmosphere today that is at never before seen levels going back 400,000 years and through half a dozen ice ages. No hoaxers have tackled that and, as evidenced, I am looking at both sides for data and conclusions based on data.

BTW, good call on the bird kill thing. I will have to do more research to determine who is actually telling the truth. Wouldn't it be nice if more people took the time to do this?

Sarkazein said...

HM- Point being, it is not "settled science". There are many differing opinions.

Under some retreating glaciers, grass and animal dropping were found. This showing that at one time there was no glacier, one time there was a glacier.

Remember also the TV commercials promoting Al Gore's livelihood (man-made global warming)-- It showed a poor polar bear stranded on a 10' x10' slab of floating ice. As though it was the last piece of ice and when it was gone, the poor polar bear would drown a miserable death to a watery grave.
ALL FALSE. Polar bears swim for miles and stop on ice chunks to rest or fish. Always has been that way, always will be that way.

It is a hoax.

Sarkazein said...

Happy- Look to the sun for climate change. There is no thermostat.

Happily Married said...

Sark,

I wish you had at least looked at the link. It agreed with the data and info you pointed to. It also explained why. Yes the snow pack is increasing in the antarctic. This makes sense as global warming has caused a shift in weather patterns and increased precipitation there. As teh temp really never gets above freezing and all the precip falls as snow, of course the snow pack will increase. But the temperatures are not decreasing - they are either stabilized or increasing - causing massive ice shelf breaks: http://www.coolantarctica.com/Antarctica%20fact%20file/science/global_warming.htm. the science is pretty much settled when considered thoroughly.

In 2008 polar bears were listed as a threatened species. One reason is yes, they swim but they cannot swim forever. And the ice keeps getting farther and farther between. If polar bears become extinct, would you then at least consider the ramifications. you are right in that the sun is powerful enough to dictate changes in weather on this planet. Unfortunately, so is man's reckless use of fossil fuels.
No one has answered my query about carbon in the atmosphere.

Sarkazein said...

HM- Polar bears can live in the Houston Zoo. It is HOT here.

"...man's reckless use of fossil fuels"- HM

Never drive a car again. Walk! Barefoot! And don't be a passenger. Even if it is electric or Ethanol because it takes fossil fuel to charge the battery, build the car, make the tires, and even make the plastics in it. Don't use the roads, because it took fossil fuel to build them. Stay on the grass... it's renewable.

Sarkazein said...

Happily Married- It is fossil fuel that helped individuals create the greatest nation on Earth. Fossil fuels run hospitals, universities, factories, national defense, and individuals homes. We have electricity 24 hours a day 7 days a week. We have power to support the best agriculture in the world. USA is stamped on the food boxes sent to starving people everywhere in the world today. Those food boxes got there because of fossil fuel. Oil men risk their fortunes and their lives to seek wealth and in return fuel a nation.
Embrase fossil fuels, they have increased man's life span and comfort and productivity.
I love the smell of diesel in the morning! Progress!

Sarkazein said...

The Mexican Police assumed they were gun smugglers.

Anonymous said...

buy valium online valium drug choice stressed out yuppies - valium medication pain