Suzuki 1 Harper 0

suck1tup,

You've shown that you are open-minded so I am going to address your issues and avoid the trolls - for the moment.

Do me a solid and Google David Suzuki Mercury. Then Google David Suzuki GM food.

Go to http://www.davidsuzuki.org/ and search for mercury or GM food.

You'll find that he has been warning about the dangers of mercury contamination for decades.

You'll also find this 3 part series about GM foods:
http://www.davidsuzuki.org/About_us/Dr_ ... 279901.asp

"Genetically modifying our food: Part one

October 27, 1999 - Recently, I gave a speech at a Toronto health food conference where I spoke out against the widespread use of genetically modified (GM) food crops. The public and media reaction was immediate and strong. Since then, I have been quoted, misquoted and questioned as though concern about GM foods is something new. It isn't."

Did you notice the date?

I realize that you've raised more than just those two issues and I'll be more than happy to debate you on them once you've replied to the GM foods and mercury issues. That is, if you're interested.

Peace,

Monty

Mann is the goofy troll

John L. Daly, huh?
You mean the 'science advisor' for Big Coal in the USA?
The guy was a school teacher, not a scientist.
That John Daly?

Check out the critique of his work here:
http://people.aapt.net.au/~johunter/greenhou/home.html

Good link C.M. Burns.

Daly is another of those who the denial industry like to present as something he's not in order to perpetuate the lies they tell.

The truth is that they cannot produce scientifically valid data to back up their denials.

Thanks, Rev.

What are the chances that sasquatch will recognize that Daly's credentials are at least suspect? I think they're near zero.

Yeah, he's unlikely to understand the truth. Eventually he'll trot somebody else out though.

Belief is a hard nut to crack, eh?
If science literacy were at higher levels it would be easier to communicate simple concepts like weather-is-not-climate.

Yeah, but our current government is working harder than ever to reduce science literacy.

Makes it easier to import foreign trained workers for lower pay.

Yeah, no doubt. We'll import scientists, then refuse to listen to them.

Rearguard, we agree on many things here, most in fact. I have absolutely no doubt, for example, that the Canadian government will make ordinary citizens pay to 'fix' global warming (which has not gone anywhere, and is still quite valid. Snow, btw, is a sign of global warming.)

They will make us all pay, reducing us to poverty, while the rich and the corporations skate free. oh yes, we wouldn't want to damage our precious ECONOMY, now would we? Provincial governments will do the same. The most recent BC budget calls for the first official carbon tax in Canada, as well as increases to electricity rates. It also, in the same breath, hands out a 34% increase in subsidies to oil and gas exploration in BC. This process will continue until our current oil-addicted civilization grinds to a horrible wrenching halt, whether we all go out and buy fluorescents or not. That's the only lie the scientists are telling - that this is all still stoppable, prevetable. They have to - the alternative is suicide.

What we disagree on is the opinion on whether global warming is real or not. My story is pretty straight forward:
1. Man finds oil.
2. Man exploits oil, the cheapest and most powerful energy source ever found, litre for litre. Civilization explodes, technology, population, agriculture, consumerism, all driven on cheap oil.
3. Massive environmental damage begins to take effect (suppressed). Cancer rates from oil products, from pesticides to just plain exaust, skyrocket to epidemic proportions (suppressed - public told to stop smoking and eat right)
4. Slowly, in ones and twos, small groups of scientists, many who study ice layers, begin to see alarming trends in their data. Global world temperatures, which have been only moderately fluctuating for centuries, are now spiking up up up with no end in sight.
5. Many years of discussion, peer reviewed journals and papers follow. More get involved in this. There is no discussion on 'how can we turn this into a plot to globalize the planet?' Only alarm, mounting evidence, and growing consensus.
6. Scientists begin to voice their concerns publically. Most are suppressed, especially NASA and US government scientists. They continue anyway, many losing their positions in the process. Finally the stories begin to hit the media, but the media, in their time-honoured media way, need a counter-argument, so they dredge up old lobbyists from the tobacco industry and such other dregs of humanity to voice concerns. Many receive funding from big oil, Exxon being right up there.
7. The global warming denial machine continues to this day (as evidenced by some on here) pumping out nonsense to keep funding going to the big energy corporations for as long as possible. The reason is simple - survival of the current economic model. If we decide to actually DO something about this problem, it will require the complete restructuring of the entire global economy to a substainable model as opposed to the historic endless growth model. That is uncharted territory, and THAT scares the living hell out of anyone who is in a position of power and rich.

What is your story? That a global conspiracy was formed to lie to people about the climate, to force the requirement of a New World Order that imposes massive taxation and wipes out all national borders? This conspiracy requires the participation of hundreds of scientists worldwide, to falsify data. It requires the sending up of complex satellites (ICESat) to fake data that the ice caps are thinning. It requires the silencing of any 'good' scientists who have issues with the plan.

I say your story is preposterous, and cannot be supported by any form of scientific evidence. Where are the 'good' scientists who are being silenced? What is this Master Plan of Globalization, no doubt being ran by those devils in the UN?

sasquatch,

Let me quote you:
"This Burns guy is just another mindless, ignorant, Suzukster cheerleader."

THAT is a personal attack.
If you're so opposed to personal attacks then why did you attack me?
Care to retract it?

Monty