|
Post by ElrosTarMinitarsus on Jan 30, 2005 17:57:07 GMT -5
To be honest, the jury will be out on this one for decades to come. So its a loaded question to ask if they are right or wrong.
|
|
|
Post by Galadon on Jan 30, 2005 18:13:29 GMT -5
Of course I'm being mean. I mean how in the world are you going to arue with professors who been doing truth in enviroment for how many years.
|
|
|
Post by ElrosTarMinitarsus on Jan 30, 2005 18:19:11 GMT -5
WHo said anything about being mean?
|
|
|
Post by Galadon on Jan 30, 2005 18:48:03 GMT -5
I did just a post ago.
|
|
|
Post by ElrosTarMinitarsus on Jan 30, 2005 18:50:23 GMT -5
OK, have fun!! ;D
|
|
|
Post by Hussar on Jan 30, 2005 22:15:27 GMT -5
Umm, just a quick question.
Why is it, when a group of respected scientists agree with conservative thinking, they are simply telling the truth, but, when another group of respected scientists, including a number of Nobel prize winners, DISAGREES with conservative thinking, they are a bunch of liberal nut jobs with a political axe to grind?
An interesting view of the "conservative" mind.
|
|
|
Post by ElrosTarMinitarsus on Jan 30, 2005 22:29:34 GMT -5
Because "some" people need something to aurgue about....
|
|
|
Post by Galadon on Jan 31, 2005 17:44:29 GMT -5
Because the other side doesn't give names, places etc. Giving an obscure reference beg for a few jabs.
|
|
|
Post by ElrosTarMinitarsus on Jan 31, 2005 19:18:55 GMT -5
Please expound on you answer....
|
|
|
Post by Hussar on Feb 1, 2005 0:31:55 GMT -5
Gal, you really should read more than the Enquirer when making statements. In reference to the signatories I mentioned above:
That enough names for ya?
|
|
|
Post by ElrosTarMinitarsus on Feb 1, 2005 9:04:32 GMT -5
He will say no for sake of aurgument.....
|
|
|
Post by Galadon on Feb 1, 2005 10:13:56 GMT -5
Elros is answering for me now Why did it take you so long to put up names Hussar. I don't see what the confusion is. "We don't have enough information yet." There is plenty of information to make a inform decision. The only point is are you willing to accept the information or believe the babble of a few who have to much time on their hands. I read an article about a tree hugger claimed to save the red woods. This is the kind of arrogant busy body that should be taken as a joke. "I'M IMPORTANT, I SAVED THE RED WOODS!" The Red woods in California have been around a little longer than this guys 71 years, quite a bit longer. Yet this guy saved them. How did you do that Mr. tree hugger, (delusions of grandeur) He must have a ego like a black hole. The only thing you can say about the enviroment for sure is, change and there are still patterns. But we in the civilized country's put up with them, enviro wackos are rather funny with the stuff they come up with. It's like a side show circus.
|
|
|
Post by ElrosTarMinitarsus on Feb 1, 2005 12:11:13 GMT -5
Well, all I can say is that he "saved" them from getting cut down.... I guess? ?
|
|
|
Post by Galadon on Feb 1, 2005 17:53:14 GMT -5
How long have the red woods been here?
|
|
|
Post by ElrosTarMinitarsus on Feb 1, 2005 18:52:02 GMT -5
that is totally off the point. He saved them from man-made distruction;ie the saw.....
|
|