I know, I know!!! It is....Nitrogen, which comprises about 78% of the atmosphere. But other than taking the opportunity to slam Gore, what's your point?
Of course there are more. The quanitity isn't what im disputing, it's the quality. Out of interest, what did you search for for that to be the fisrt result?
Texas can only be tied to oil eh? Actually when I was considering moving to TX I thought of companies like NASA, Dell, Cisco, HP, IBM, Nortel, and Texas Instruments to name a few of the many hundreds we would all recognize by name with a major presence here. Texas is about to pass California on it's computers and electronics company R&D, manufacturing, and exports http://www.jsharf.com/view/images/California-Texas/Computers-Chemicals.gif When I got here I learned about the high level cancer research and treatment centers that are respected nationally when my wife had to go in for treatment. Also its known for oil companies as you said. But to classify it as a bunch of oil people is foolish. Of course what do I know about it, I've hardly been around: 18 years in Indiana 1 year in Tennessee (military) <1 year in North Carolina (military) 4 years in Arizona (military) 2 years in California 2 years in Massachusetts 2 years in Florida 5 years in Texas <1 year in Madrid Spain (I worked for INDRA as a contractor, lived in Eurobuilding 2 APT 626) and visited: Philippines Thailand Hong Kong Singapore Dubai (JUBIL-ALI) Kuwait Mexico (7 cities) and many other US states If st0x (who doesn't live in the US) says Texas is only known for it's oil, that must be all they do. I doubt you've researched or visited Texas though, especially Austin which is known for its conservation and recycling (look, another of many). -------------------------------------- Anyways, back to the actual subject. I think guys like in the link (many pages of data) have a lot of valid studies and information that goes against what Gore says about global warming. If it WAS cut and dry and clear, Gore would be addressing things like what this guys brings up which I haven't seen Gore address anywhere. He couldn't even address the guy asking about polar bears at the climate change event and they cut the guy's mic. He wasn't being stupid, it was a valid question. Now combine that with the many other things like the fact that in the 1970's we were all doomed due to "global cooling" and I can't help but want these questions answered. I'm not saying Gore is wrong, but I think we deserve these questions answered if we're supposed to believe this. I do feel what wins over all is the pursuit of clean quality air, but not due to a global warming theory, for our health. That's one reason I moved to Austin from Florida, the air and water quality here in North Austin combined with the opportunities for my family and my computer company I brought with me... just a small one, $25 mil revenue in 4 years.
Great, I clicked show post and get this: He wants to argue the quality of Nitrogen, oxygen, h2O in the air? Polution may be a problem but the quality of the elements themselves are not.
I didn't say it's only known for oil, I said it's very much known for oil. Is that statment correct or incorrect?
It's very true just like it's very well known as Bush's home state. It's how you put it in the form of a conspiracy. While I'm sure there are biased scientists out to shoot down Gore's global warming, there's no evidence that Texas holds a disproportionate number of them to even rate a mention as you did IMO. I just want the questions answered and this not to be a fight. This is what sucks when politicians get ahold of these things and use them as partisan topics, logic and discussion gets buried by who supports who. I think at a minimum Gore owes it to us to have a sit down interview to address the arguments against it rather than just speeches preaching his points.
Reseq there is no evidence that the people who signed that petition are scientists, well, nothing besides their ability so say there are. Doesn't it strike you as odd that the majority of the people who signed the petition, scientists or not, just happen to come from the oil producing state? Eric, if you don't have the ability to converse with honesty at least have dignity to keep quiet.
I thought he was being quiet, but then again, he is one of 2 people who deemed themselves the necessity to be ignored, too much pollution coming from his keyboard. I am still surprised that there are not more people ignoring him. Some threads it appears everyone has him on ignore when no one responds to him and nothing seems to be missing from what I see of the conversation. It is nice when no one quotes him and keeps the pollution levels down.
The telegraph has the same story: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...petition-denying-man-made-global-warming.html
Eric is one of these people who comes to a conclusion then goes off to find evidence for it, regardless how out of date or unreliable the evidence is.
stOx is one of the few that I take notes from. Opinions are great to listen to when there's actually support behind it - even if i don't agree with it.
I was answering your source quality question. I do not know if your opinion on the telegraph is good or not.
The telegraph reported that the petition exists, I agree that it exists. It also said; A spokesman for the Royal Society, Britain’s national academy of science, said: “The world’s leading climate experts at the Nobel Prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change believe that it is greater than 90 per cent likely that human activity is responsible for most of the observed warming in recent decades. That is a pretty strong consensus. “The science has come a long way since 1998 and it continues to point in one direction - the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to avert dangerous climate change.â€
His posts are far too amusing for me to ignore. Whenever I need a little pick me up, or just want to dumb down a bit a Stox post keeps me going!