It's beautiful! Nature is so full of marvels. I wonder at it every day. A human mind, almost completely bereft of the capacity of reason, and thus uniquely suited to survival in a state of total cognitive dissonance. It's not a common thing at all.
You are unique, Leland, you really are! Most people would curl into a ball and swallow their own tongue if they had to endure the assault on logic that your mind seems to make almost with every firing of every synapse in your skull. (I mean that in the very best possible way, naturally!) BTW, Marxists relied on this kind of argumentation almost out of necessity (considering the absurdity of their economic doctrine). Undermined by the clinical reasoning of actual economists, they resorted to blowing off every devastating intellectual critique as "bourgeoise propaganda" -- thus removing any need to actually know anything about economics, let alone address a valid point made by someone who does. God bless you Leland! - Bob On Friday, April 27, 2007, at 11:36AM, "Leland F. Jackson, CPA" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >You guys are a chunking and a jiving and a spinning. It has long been >know that the Bush Administration has muffled their own scientists >regard reports about the damage being done to the environment. Why is >the Bush Administration so afraid of facing the the truth about the >dangers of pollution, that they would squelch their own people on this >issue? > >It is likely that global warming is related to increases in CO2 and >other pollutant being released into the environment by we humans, but >trying to equate the cause and effect of which comes first is like >trying to solve the mystery of whether the chicken or egg came first. > >Regards, > >LelandJ > >Michael Madigan wrote: >> This is what I've been saying >> >> >> "This modelling approach assumes that CO2 levels drive >> temperature changes. However >> strong evidence exists to the contrary. De Freitas >> (2002) reports on a number of >> independent statistical analyses that conclude that >> the reverse is true, namely that >> temperature changes precede CO2 level changes, calling >> into question the basis of the >> modelling procedure." >> >> >> _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
