James wrote on December 05, 2009 08:23 AM: The parents of these little monsters are conspicuously absent while their kids tear up the neighborhoods with their spray paint and skateboards. But just like magic they appear, waving a lawsuit in your face when one breaks his neck in your common area. Bottom line: don't bring kids into the world and expect society and the government to raise them!

Sean wrote on December 04, 2009 04:08 AM: To laetz in Las Vegas, Apparently they don't have t.v. or newspapers in Vegas. Toyota leads the U.S. in recalls including the latest floor matt issue which has been implicated in several deaths!! That is most definitly a quality control problem for the so called japanese gurus.I only wish the lack of knowledge that is bread in Vegas would stay in Vegas!

MTS wrote on December 01, 2009 10:48 AM: This is in response to Mr. Laetz's letter. I totally agree with him in regard to his comments about the UAW. However, he seems to let GM's horrible Management off the hook and laments that Government is supposedly running things. Hey, GM begged for the Government aid and there should be "strings attached" to protect Taxpayer money. The truth is that there is more than enough fault for GM Management and UAW to share the blame.

cousin b wrote on November 30, 2009 10:06 AM: I try to acknowledge points from both sides. I point out problems on either side. I also try to look at other possibilities. This is what being middle-of-the-road means.

I rarely get any criticism or support from the left. Booey jumping in to defend the global warming issue is a welcome isolated instance.

But, outright lambasting with any website or invented impossibility is par for the course from the right.

Mo and I have been called 'ridiculous' for stating a simple, physical fact- that water cools down when ice is added. That massive, documented iceberg melts could have lowered ocean temperatures. I further hypothesized that cooler oceans would influence the atmosphere.

I've been told that I'm ridiculously wrong in every way- that no icebergs have melted, that glaciers are increasing and that polar bears are thriving.

All of course, patently false.

Furthermore, I've been told that not only does a missing iceberg cause no cooling whatsoever, the sun hitting it's former space of ocean now warms considerably from more sunlight. 'Absurd' doesn't quite cover it.

I quoted some indisputable facts- iceberg melts and polar bear population drops, and I agreed that scientists don't know if it's actually global warming, our vandalism or just a fluctuation.

I couldn't have been more accommodating to both sides, but the right has put a target on me just the same.

Divide and conquer. Right wingers are making it easy.

brian wrote on November 30, 2009 09:41 AM: So, millions of tons of ice falls into the water, it doesn't melt into the currents and bring down the water temperature at all, but the sun hitting the 20 sq miles it occupied now warms the entire globe?

You get an 'F'. Go see the principle.

Commie Sense wrote on November 30, 2009 09:38 AM: Polar bears are socialist, you know.

cousin b wrote on November 30, 2009 09:29 AM: We've lost almost 3/4 of the polar bear population in the last 50 years, but a small increase recently means it never happened.

Riiiiiiight.

mo schmo wrote on November 30, 2009 09:26 AM: a DECREASE in ice means MORE sunlight to be absorbed by the oceans (since ice reflects sunlight), therefore less ice means higher ocean temperatures,

This statement makes absolutely no sense whatsoever .

Everything about it is physically impossible.

So, I drop an ice cube into my coffee, it doesn't get cooler, but if I point a sunlamp at it, it warms up?

You obviously don't understand physics in any way, shape or form.

And Antarctica is a land mass covered with ice and with no polar bears.

The Arctic is entirely ice and noticeably smaller in the last 20 years.

These are indisputable facts and scientific laws.

There is no such thing as selective thermo-dynamics. The example you state could never exist.

What I said is undeniable unless you can't understand simple physics. And you certainly don't.

You want this to be a political conspiracy so you can feel intelligent about something that completely evades you.

I went out of my way to accommodate both sides of this argument and you attacked me over a simple, proven fact- that significant numbers of icebergs
have melted away in the last 20 years.

I suppose smog is a myth, too? There's no haze over every major American city. There's no harmful pollutants in the air- it's all a liberal plot, right?

You right wing nutjobs failed high school science, so you make up political dramas to conceal it.

There is always some website somewhere to back up any idea, however ridiculous.

This one is a doozy.

elvis wrote on November 30, 2009 09:10 AM: "a DECREASE in ice means MORE sunlight to be absorbed by the oceans (since ice reflects sunlight), therefore less ice means higher ocean temperatures,"

Stupidest bit of made-up nonsense ever printed.

joe s wrote on November 29, 2009 11:57 PM: "These arrogant fraudsters — for fraudsters are what we now know them to be — have refused, for years and years and years, to reveal their data and their computer program listings.

Now we know why: As a revealing 15,000-line document from the computer division at the Climate Research Unit shows, THE PROGRAMS AND DATA ARE A HOPELESS, TANGLED MESS. In effect, the global temperature trends have simply been made up…

Procurement of data destruction, as they are about to find out to
their cost, is a criminal offense. They are not merely bad scientists —
they are crooks. And crooks who have perpetrated their crimes at the expense of British and U.S. taxpayers.

Lord Monkton

Read All Comments