When the leaders of Iran say before, during and after negotiations they want to destroy America - what part of that is causing you confusion? Huckabee might be wrong only because they don't need ballistic missiles to hit Israel.
Did Burger have an opinion about the government selling guns to Mex drug lords to shoot US border guards? Did anyone do time for that?
Gee, maybe you should read some real scientific journals instead of the junk that comes out of the heritage institute faux journals or WUWT or whatever Koch supported propaganda is "published".
You must have missed my ;-) which means I'm joking. If you haven't noticed I seldom take you seriously. I've studied climate change for over 10 years. There is nothing you have presented on this forum thus far that has added to my knowledge. Since I have direct access I prefer getting my info directly from peer reviewed journals, climate scientist, physicists, etc.
"and Liberals were worried about owning handguns" Dude, thousands of people die in the US from gun violence every year, and tens of thousands of people in the US suffer non-fatal wounds from gun violence in the US each year....Is that not a big deal? That's like having three, 9/11 attacks every year.
"surveyed 25,182 peer reviewed papers showing climate change/human responsibility"
I went to james powell dot org to verify your claims. Fist of all none of his claims have been submitted for peer review publication. I did a search on Google Scholar and there is no 97% consensus paper in the peer reviewed literature by James Powell. You mistakenly assume that papers that didn't reject humans as the primary cause of global warming automatically endorsed humans as the primary cause, but that is not the case.
Fortunately the chaps at Skeptical Science did publish a peer reviewed paper using Powell's approach of doing a literature search and they even acknowledge Powell's methodology but improve upon it. SS boys went further and classified 12280 papers by scoring them from 1 to 7 based on reviewers interpretation of the papers' endorsements/rejections of man's contribution to global warming. This was an improvement over flawed methodology used by Powell because Powell did not show endorsement of AWG and only tracked rejection. This is probably why he didn't try to submit his work for peer review.
Of the 12,280 papers reviewed using the more accurate SS approach, 7930 or 66.39% of papers were found to have "no position" on AGW. Only 105 or .879% of papers explicitly endorsed humans as the primary cause of climate change. I can't imagine any of science/math professors not laughing at someone presenting this paper as proof that 97% of scientists agree that man is the primary cause of global warming.
1880??? You serious? If there is some uncertainty in the 1880 record it has absolutely no relevance to 2015 measurements - classic deflectentem reprehensionem.
And breathing? Good grief, you really have no clue about the carbon cycle do you? Here is a little refresher:
Even breathing out creates carbon emissions!
This statement fails to take into account the other half of the carbon cycle. As you also learned in grade school, plants are the opposite to animals in this respect: Through photosynthesis, they take in carbon dioxide and release oxygen, in a chemical equation opposite to the one above. (They also perform some respiration, because they need to eat as well, but it is outweighed by the photosynthesis.) The carbon they collect from the CO2 in the air forms their tissues - roots, stems, leaves, and fruit.
These tissues form the base of the food chain, as they are eaten by animals, which are eaten by other animals, and so on. As humans, we are part of this food chain. All the carbon in our body comes either directly or indirectly from plants, which took it out of the air only recently. Therefore, when we breathe out, all the carbon dioxide we exhale has already been accounted for. We are simply returning to the air the same carbon that was there to begin with.
Rand Paul Still Leads GOP in Head-to-Head Polls vs. Hillary (7/26)
Updated on 7/26. RealClearPolitics average of national polls shows that Rand Paul still leads all GOP candidates in a head-to-head match-up versus Hillary Clinton. Paul has kept improving, week after week. Jeb Bush got a small bump following his announcement, but is now falling further behind. Trump remains dead-last, where he has been stuck since these polls began.
Paul v Clinton (-4.4%)
Bush v Clinton (-6.0%)
Huckabee v Clinton (-7.3%)
Rubio v Clinton (-7.6%)
Cruz v Clinton (-8.5%)
Walker v Clinton (-10.6%)
Christie v Clinton (-11.0%)
Carson v Clinton (-12.5%)
Trump v Clinton (-17.8%)
So if you want Hillary to win in a landslide, then you need to support Trump. Note that if not for an inexplicably positive FoxNews poll, Bush would be essentially tied with Huckabee in a distant second place.
This is still the single most effective idea you can share on social media. For some unknown reason, many Republicans care more about winning than they do about principles. You can post a thousand explanations about why Rand's position on foreign-aid is better than Bush's, but it won't hold a candle to letting the R's know Rand can win.
I believe there are a very large segment of society that believes them since they are brain washed cult members...many of them who key in on buzz words such as "we must stop racism at all costs and tear down Mt Rushmore" (the word "Racism" being a "cue" word for the brainwashed victim to suspend independent thought much like Marco in the Movie the Manchurian Candidate).....Large swaths of Americans will believe anything in the right cue words or if prefaced with "Obama wants this and its for Obama"
The National Guard can now be Nationalized and made to serve the President and Federal objectives...(These days they are the objectives of Globalists)....
NOW..in SELECT states...like Texas...there is a STATE GUARD....which is NOT subject to being Nationalized and is only answerable to the Governor of the State...EXACTLY what the founding fathers had in mind vis a vis checks and balances.
For example...since Obama is out of Control with Jade Helm, the Governor of Texas (RIGHTLY) decided that he wanted to have the Stat Guard check up on what Federal Troops are doing in his state, going through local communities collecting Intelligence on local citizens.....Since these troos cannot be called to Federal Duty...it is EXACTLY the check and balance on potential corrupt power intended in the constitution.
In July of 2001At the G-20 conference in Milan, GWB slept on an aircraft carrier because of the reports that Osama bin Laden was planning an attack on the G-20 using remote controlled aircraft and explosives. The Italians installed anti-aircraft defenses at the airports to defend against these attacks.
The funny thing is that according to the conservative French newspaper Le Figaro, at just about that time Osama bin Laden was in the American Hospital in Dubai getting treatment from Dr. Terry Callaway--and also meeting with with CIA agent Terry Mitchell and Saudi Security Honcho Prince Turki al Faisal (future Ambassador to the USA).
A typically ignorant post from apparently a proud member of the "preferred ignorance" club. The vast majority of actual scientists contribute to the incontrovertible evidence that the climate has changed and humans are involved significantly.
But on a better note for the human race, today's "preferred ignorance" club shrinks daily in the face of overwhelming proof.
Dr. James Powell, Reagan and Bush 41's science man, surveyed 25,182 peer reviewed papers showing climate change/human responsibility. 26 (twenty six) peer reviewed papers claim the opposite.
(25,182 to 26.)
Preferred ignorance must be a fun place for you to live.
Here's a few worthy also-rans: Avro, Handley Page, Vickers, Consolidated, Douglas, Grumman, Short.