TKoontz

Sounds like a good starting point. Cosmological Design Moral What arguments do you make in favor of god for each of these? Find your peace, though the world around you burns

Agreed, I've always been confused by the nomenclature there. "apologetics" just seems strange in my mind, are they literally apologizing, or is it some slightly different meaning of the word and means 'explanation using science'? ETA: @Andy, ah that clears things up much better. So, back to the OP's stance? Find your peace, though the world around you burns

It seems your views lie on the side of apologetic (assuming I read that correctly), I'd be interested to hear your views and proof/evidence/observations/reasoning in support of God. This is such a big topic as well, can you narrow it down a little so we can discuss one or several smaller aspects of the case for a creator? Find your peace, though the world around you burns

Last post for reals this time* (lol I'm tring) Guarantee was a dumb choice of words, obviously I can't guarantee anything in science. I was getting a bit frustrated at that point and misspoke/typed. Happens to us all I don't think PHD's are the only capable ones of producing science, at all in fact. However, I do tend to defer to them a bit more as their degree supposedly indicates a bit more knowledge in their subject. I usually try to invite discussion on issues, I don't like blind acceptance of any view. However being dismissive when I'm providing evidence to support my claims does tend to make me a bit grouchy. For what it's worth my motives lie only with the science, and as of yet I haven't seen anything that's more convincing than the GW data, hence my sticking to that side of the debate. -Rooster Find your peace, though the world around you burns

Jesus fuck.... I grow tired and frustrated of presenting defenses to your inane, stubborn, and willfully ignorant retorts. The time and energy required to provide a single person who's scientific opinions are utterly inconsequential the appropriate proof, citations, peer reviewed articles, and other testimonials is not worth my time nor that of anyone else's besides the most patient educator. Feel free to contact my professor, Simone Aloisio, if you really want some knowledge dropped on your ass in a much less patient and polite manner than mine. As for me, Ladies and Gentlemen, I'm off to calmer seas before my feathers get any more ruffled -Rooster Find your peace, though the world around you burns

I never said CO2 is the only, or primary contributor (it's either this thread or the other on the same topic) CO2, HOx NOx SOx VOCs and a whole slew of other compounds cause GW, however these are the primary contributors. Hell, CO2 isn't even close to the worst in destructive capability or residence time, it's just the most commonly produced. Comparatively, human CO2 is small on a global scale, I won't argue that. Let me be a little more clear on what I'm saying: 1. GW is occurring and humans are responsible (to a large extent) 2. The Scientific community is largely in concensus on this These are the only two points I'm attempting to make, I'm not sure where the disconnect is but I've already given you all the evidence in previous posts you need to concede that I do in fact, know what I'm talking about and that I'm not just making these things up to pander to the GW movement. Find your peace, though the world around you burns

I retract my previous statement about the 'researcher' identity. I was wrong on that front. I denounce that poll as being faked, as would and do the rest of the scientific community. So I'll refer you to, yet again, my post to the article in science which I can guarantee you, is legitimate. What I'm getting from your posts is that you're trying to break down the GW movement by pointing out people who have fudged evidence to suit their goals. The entire deniers movement is based around misinformation and skewing of scientific data. So which is worse? Find your peace, though the world around you burns

What community are you talking about? Surely you don't mean the scientifically literate community because I can guarantee you that these 'researchers' you found a quick blurb on would get laughed out of the room if they tried presenting this as evidence againt global warming. Here's the way it is. The vast majority of the *qualified* scientific community accepts that our world is warming up. It is caused *primarily* by an increase in greenhouse gasses, of which, a vast majority we are directly responsible for. Find your peace, though the world around you burns

A news article that exposes a tweaked poll from a college. That's your home run. That's the indisputable proof that I'm blowing smoke out my ass at you all. I bring you an article directly from Science, one of the most tightly peer-reviewed scientific journals out there, and you refute it with some half-assed story in the National Post about an online survey that was fudged by 'researchers'? Did you even take the time to read it? Notice they said researchers. Not professors, not doctors, hell, not even grad students. Researcher means someone like me, a junior in college with an associates degree that made up a two question poll and emailed it to a bunch of scientists in vaguely related fields (see "Earth Scientists"). I'll at last admit when I know nothing or very little of the subject in question (refer to my earlier post). Find your peace, though the world around you burns

First off, sorry for the long reply time. Second, you are provably wrong here. First I point you to this report: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/306/5702/1686.full After that I recommend you read up on the IPCC and their 4 reports spanning from 1990 to 2007: FAR SAR TAR and AR4 http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_and_data_reports.shtml#1 The case for man-made global warming (Note I said warming, not necessarily climate chance, because you are correct, our current understanding of global climes is not deep enough to say what the outcome will be) Is getting nothing but stronger and stronger to the point that a majority of climate scientists in the world today agree. Now, to the issue at hand. As Bill pointed out, there have been things done in the past that have drastically reduced our output without hurting the economy (see catalytic converters) and did not, deniers would assert, ruin our country and limit personal freedoms. I'll admit that I don't know enough about cap and trade policies beyond their basic function to give a good opinion on them, but I am certainly not against government intervention to promote/enforce cleaner practices. Find your peace, though the world around you burns

Cap and Trade wasn't mentioned anywhere in your OP. All you asked is "A question for warmists" Which automatically sets the field for a partisan attack based on your wording. You asked a simple question that was designed to rile up people against fossil fuels. I replied with a simple answer and called you on your trolling. So what is it you want to debate here? Find your peace, though the world around you burns

I don't really get the purpose of this question. You're offering a non-detrimental option here "Would you like fossil fuels if there were no negative consequences that came from using them?" Any person on the planet will agree to this. (And yes, I am ignoring resource competition for this example) This sounds more like you're just trolling for haterade on fossil fuels and you're looking to get an argument going on waming/climate change Find your peace, though the world around you burns

First, let me just make sure I understand your terminology: "warmist" being someone who subscribes to the idea that the emmissions of CO2, HOx NOx and VOCs are contributing to a global increase in temperature? Now, to your question. If there was a way to combat the emmissions from burning fossil fuels that still made them financially viable, then absolutely. I think they would end up being cost prohibitive at that point but assuming the solutions weren't then burn baby burn. ETA: I think that the best option would be to give the new 'clean-able' fuels to developing countries and move on to alternatives in places like ours Find your peace, though the world around you burns

*Not all religion, but I didn't feel like writing every religion whose focus is on an all-powerful/knowing deity in the title. Enjoy, and try not to take too seriously* This deals with the common belief of the Judeo-Christian god having both omniscience and omnipotence. Lovers of classical thought will instantly see where this is going: “If god is omnipotent and omniscient, can he change his own mind?” In case you’ve not heard this question posed before, or given much thought to it I’ll save you some time. It’s a paradox; the two powers are incompatible. I don’t think I would be remiss in saying that most of us subscribe to the view that our world is ordered, and follows a set of basic laws that (as of yet) never deviate. This all relates back to a discussion I was having with a coworker of mine, centered on this very question and it came down to this (mind you, this is paraphrased as his replies were always “yeah but…” ): If you accept the premise that god can be both all-knowing and all-powerful at the same time, then you are forced to make a rationalization; that our world is not constrained by the concept of logic, and that (by deductive reasoning) if one thing can exist in our world in two different states at the same time, it follows that other things may as well. *(Yes yes, I know a little of quantum mechanics, the uncertainty principles, Schrodinger’s cat, etc. But we’re talking macroscopic observations. ie, I am a 20 year old male only, I am not, at the same time, an 80 year old giant sequoia) Take this ‘logic’ and apply it to the concept of morality (or anything that exhibits duality). In this world which must now conform to the rationalization previously mentioned, so too can good and evil. Both are now freely interchangeable; this renders the concept of morality moot. Without a moral compass, choices are now only based on cause and effect. Thusly, the only choice from here for those that believe in the biblical god, is a path of staunch moral Nihilism. Unless of course you invent a rationalization for why morality is exempt from the rule, but let’s take this one step at a time.

Donated money to our local women's shelter and some of my annual leave to a coworker that was hit by a drunk driver a couple months ago since her sick and annual is about to run out. For my friends (and I'm proud of this one): 350 embossed, goldenrod business cards with the following phrase: FAILURE Your laughable understanding of the mechanics of parking a vehicle has earned you this embarrassing reminder that YOU SUCK -rooster Find your peace, though the world around you burns

The escalation of this event from peaceful to not isn't just because a couple bad-seed officers decided to go medieval on protestors. There are countless factors, the largest ones in no particular order: Massive numbers of disenfranchised, angry people Lack of immediate change Early mismanagement of the growing unrest (by the police) Amorphous goals Close proximity for extended periods of time To refocus, the original point of this thread was a woman claiming to have miscarried from a mixture of pepper spray and boot/bicycle to the stomach, and the potential outcomes of that in court. You're changing (moving the goalpost) it to be that we can no longer have peaceful protests in this country because your previous arguments are systematically being shown to be massive piles of rubbish...Your rants are systematically becoming less and less coherent. I suggest you try what I do. Collect your thoughts, figure out what your point is, make it, then reread to make sure it is clearly stated before posting. Basically the physical manifestation of "engage brain THEN unhinge jaw" -rooster Find your peace, though the world around you burns

If you'll reread what I've posted, objectively if possible, and not assuming I'm on one side or another, you'll notice I haven't defended anything except level-headedness and clear thinking. Straw man again. you're running 0-...some large number. It's getting tiring I haven't apologized for anyone or any group. I think if there's substantial evidence the police had something to do with her miscarriage, they should be punished severely. I am of the opinion however, that going to this rally in a sensitive and vulnerable state is not necessarily a good choice, and that she possibly should have weighed the life of her fetus slightly heavier, but hey. Hindsight...tragedy all around. -rooster Find your peace, though the world around you burns

+1 for science that can be backed up I'll post a link for a rad. chart if anyone wants it Amazon, just about every one of your posts has been a straw man argument trying to prop people up on far ends of the political spectrum, therefore rendering just about everything you said argumentatively moot points. At the beginning of this, most people were being pretty moderate saying that if the police were at fault then they should be tried to the fullest extent of the law. Then someone made a perfectly reasonable claim that going to an OWS protest while pregnant isn't necessarily the best decision in the world. They didn't try denying her the right to do it, and they certainly weren't implying that she should be confined to the traditional role of the '40s era housewife. But anyone who tries to defend the stance that expecting a peaceful demonstration at OWS is deluded. From day one videos have been surfacing of people being dragged, hit, sprayed, and arrested at this event. People aren't just carrying signs and yelling trite slogans, they're pissed off and there's a metric shit ton of them in a very small location. I can't think of anyone imagining that this is anything but a recipe for potential violent outbreaks. This is far from a peaceful demonstration, so I think it's a perfectly reasonable stance to say, "I want to demonstrate, however, I am pregnant and the risk to my fetus is not worth it, therefore I shall abstain temporarily" -rooster Find your peace, though the world around you burns

Rapture boogie anyone? Find your peace, though the world around you burns

Taft is a tiny close-knit community where word travels fast. If a parent is willing to go to police and the press just because her teenager got hold of some porn that was shot locally, think about the hellfire and brimstone she'd rain down on Dave's business if he spoke his mind. If he weren't facing a situation like that he probably would have laughed about it and told the lady to pack sand, but he's in a tight situation so he has to play the appeaser to the mindless horde. $.02 Find your peace, though the world around you burns

My condolences and hope for a speedy recovery, it's never easy seeing those close to us hurt. My girlfriend's sister just lost her boyfriend in a motorcycle wreck 3 days ago because he was dicking around, didn't have his helmet strap routed, and going too fast. Canuck is right though, there are only two categories of which I am thankfully of the uncrashed group. I was fortunate enough to have sold my streetbike for a rig before ever dumping it. I also agree with his assessment of getting advanced training before going out on pavement, as well as a damn good jacket, boots, and pants with kevlar inserts for skid protection (any kind of impact, your head's the only thing that has a chance of being safe). A solid background in basic riding isn't a bad idea either. I was on a dirtbike from 3 years old to present at 20, wouldn't even consider pavement until I was 18 and spent the first two weeks in abandoned parking lots doing drills with my dad (another life long rider). Of course, I have no idea what your son's experience levels are, but you titled the thread 'Motorcycle Safety?' so there's my $ .02 Again, best wishes. -Rooster Find your peace, though the world around you burns

Already sold my bike, my soul, and my left kidney to pay for this sport, I'm charitable to an extent...but sacrifice is part of the game Find your peace, though the world around you burns

Good quote, I notice a lot of people telling me to try and pressure them into it, and that's something I strictly avoid doing. I looked at my original post and tell it didn't look that way though. If someone expresses interest, I have a rule of two. I'll tell them about my next trip a week in advance, if for some reason other than, 'I don't wanna' comes up, I'll offer a second time a month or two later. Past that, it's up to them to find me. Many of my friends are into sports like this with me like rock cl;imbing, downhill mtn biking, street bikes, etc. so it seemed like a natural progression point for me. I've definitely found something special in the sport and I would enjoy sharing it with others, but I def try not to push or badger anyone into it, that would not end well. Lots of good advice though, thank you all for the input Find your peace, though the world around you burns

very true, maybe when my perpetually ground-shackled friends get bored of spending money to put fart cans on their accords and dropping $800 on subwoofers they'll have the disposable income and desire to try it? Find your peace, though the world around you burns

It's the same story every time, "Oh man that sounds so fun, I've always wanted to!....how much does it cost?" And that's where it ends almost every time. No getting around it, this sport is an investment. I gave up pretty much everything else I used to do sports-wise to be able to afford (both in $$ and time) this. For perspective, I, and most of the people I invite out are 18-21, minimum-wage, college students. In between paying for and actually attending classes, it's easy to see how this sport can be a challenge to enter. After a weekend of jumping even top ramen starts to look fancy So are there some ways to bridge this monetary gap? Most of these people are realistically going to do a tandem and not come back. Packing to earn money is pretty unlikely in this case, but what about those few that really jive with the sport? What are some ways to entice them coming out to the DZ and getting into the culture, knowing that they probably won't be jumping for some time to come? Find your peace, though the world around you burns