Beach Runner wrote:
> Even if the few scientists, most of which are subsidized by groups

Ipse dixit and unproven. I showed you, dumb ass, that scientists are
EVENLY DIVIDED on the notion of global warming being a result of human
activities. What part of EVENLY DIVIDED do you not comprehend?

> ...the very real number of independent scientists warn we must
> take strong action. That's Marxist?

Yes -- and you're both overestimating the number of scientists who
believe humans are responsible for global warming and overstating the
number of those who "warn we must take strong action." Scientists are
evenly divided on whether humans have even caused a problem. The number
of scientists who believe we should make radical change is a percentage
of those who believe it's a human problem -- or a smaller percentage of
all scientists.

The fact remains: this is an issue at which you leftists want to take
radical *POLITICAL* action before clear *SCIENTIFIC* assessments are
made. You leftist nutjobs want to replace FREE ENTERPRISE with your
pathetic version of a Marxist Utopia. You would eliminate freedom for
what YOU (and YOU ALONE) call "the greater good."

> Hardly.

You ARE a Marxist. You're an authoritarian leftist.

> We stand a strong change of terrible consequences.

Strong chance? That's entirely UNPROVEN. There are many data which
contradict your claims of cataclysm. I just disagree with your position
that we need to act before knowing (a) IF there is really a problem --
and remember, scientists are EVENLY SPLIT on the issue of whether human
activity is to blame for global warming -- and (b) the extent to which
human activity plays a role in global warming or the extent to which
changing our behavior will reverse global warming. You have predictions,
prophecy. I demand SCIENCE before I'll consent that there's a problem or
that altering my behavior will have any affect on it. Until science has
clear answers, go **** yourself.

> Many independent scientists,

About half of them, and the other half disagrees with them.

> MIT, NOA, NASA all agree on Global warming.

NOAA. They do not all agree, nor do all their scientists.

http://www.globalwarming.org/article.php?uid=901

> You pull a site funded by Mitsubishi

No, funded by a cross-section of car makers.

> and say big deal.

I say "big deal" on the basis of what a variety of sources have to say
about the issue.

http://www.marshall.org/article.php?id=67
http://www.globalwarming.org/article.php?uid=887
http://www.globalwarming.org/article.php?uid=851

Etc.

> Insult me some more

Sure. Scatterbrains. Dipshit. ****. Asshole. Is that better?


>>>>> We may need to sacrifice some performance for the greater good.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You're a Marxist authoritarian zealot who has the audacity to say
>>>> Ben Franklin would be on your side. **** you and your version of the
>>>> greater good -- notions which our Founders would've strenuously
>>>> objected and resisted to their deaths, just as I shall. You make
>>>> your own sacrifices. I refuse to sacrifice for your good.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm not a Marxist,
>>
>>
>>
>> You're a Marxist and a liar.
>>
>>> MANY believe we must take strong action
>>
>>
>>
>> Logical fallacy of appealing to popularity.
>> http://www.datanation.com/fallacies/pop.htm
>>
>>> I make a few typos. Insult me for it.
>>
>>
>>
>> Gladly. Dickhead. Moron. Loser. ****. Happy now?