Advertisement

Archive for Wednesday, August 8, 2007

Gore: Polluters finance propaganda dismissing global warming

August 8, 2007

Advertisement

— Former Vice President Al Gore said Tuesday that some of the world's largest energy companies, including Exxon Mobil Corp., are funding research aimed at disputing the scientific consensus on global warming as part of a campaign to mislead the public.

ExxonMobil, the world's largest publicly traded oil company, rejected the allegation.

"There has been an organized campaign, financed to the tune of about $10 million a year from some of the largest carbon polluters, to create the impression that there is disagreement in the scientific community" about global warming, Gore said at a forum in Singapore. "In actuality, there is very little disagreement."

"This is one of the strongest of scientific consensus views in the history of science," Gore said. "We live in a world where what used to be called propaganda now has a major role to play in shaping public opinion."

Gore likened the campaign to that of the millions of dollars spent by U.S. tobacco companies years ago on creating the appearance of uncertainty and debate within the scientific community on the harmful effects of smoking cigarettes.

"Some of the tobacco companies spent millions of dollars to create the appearance that there was disagreement on the science. And some of the large coal and utility companies and the largest oil company, ExxonMobil, have been involved in doing that exact same thing for the last several years," Gore said.

After the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, made up of the world's top climate scientists, released a report in February that warned the cause of global warming is "very likely" man-made, "the deniers offered a bounty of $10,000 for each article disputing the consensus that people could crank out and get published somewhere," Gore said.

"They're trying to manipulate opinion, and they are taking us for fools," he said.

Last year, British and American science advocacy groups accused ExxonMobil of funding groups that undermine the scientific consensus on climate change. The company said the scientists' reports were just attempts to smear ExxonMobil's name and confuse the debate.

ExxonMobil spokesman Gantt Walton said Tuesday that the company's financial support for scientific reports did not mean it influenced the outcome of those studies. ExxonMobil believes the risk that greenhouse gas emissions are contributing to climate change warrants taking action to limit them, he said.

"The recycling of this type of discredited conspiracy theory diverts attention from the real challenge at hand: how to provide the energy needed to improve global living standards while also reducing greenhouse gas emissions," he said.

Comments

Tychoman 7 years, 1 month ago

There was flooding--and a tornado--in NYC over the past couple of days. Ever see "The Day After Tomorrow"? knowing wink

0

Kodiac 7 years, 1 month ago

Pilgrim,

So tell me how does one say something like this...

"How is 12 years relevant to global time frames. Either way, how does that relate to whether we are causing it?" -- Gr

and then say..

"staff04, not sure what you're meaning, but don't forget how unusually cool it was this spring." -- Gr

That's the beauty of being a short-sighted manipulative schemer. No matter what was said 5 seconds ago, no need to make any sense out of it as long as it is convenient for whatever your immediate argument is.

0

Stain 7 years, 1 month ago

It's a lot easier to freak out about the potential for terrorism than it is about global warming.

With terrorism, you can sit back and let the government manipulate other people into fighting for you, no matter how far-fetched the reasoning. All you have to do is sit on the sidelines and rah, rah, rah! Oh, and that $2 car magnet.

With global warming, you are called upon to DO SOMETHING YOURSELF. Every one of us.

Right wingers aren't into any kind of sacrifice for the common good.

0

drake 7 years, 1 month ago

No scenebooster, you and your ilk tell me this with your posts. Calling me names only lowers my opinion of you.

0

Bubbles 7 years, 1 month ago

Lets see scientists are from liberal colleges funded by liberals in the government.

Scientists aren't stupid. They are not going to bite the hand that feeds them.

0

acg 7 years, 1 month ago

LOL RT, your idiocy knows no bounds. No, dear, you are not brighter than a monkey, just so you know.

0

Tychoman 7 years, 1 month ago

That is the DUMBEST post I've read from you, Bubbles. And considering it's you I'm referring to, that's saying a lot. What complete idiocy.

0

staff04 7 years, 1 month ago

Hey, did you guys hear that the Earth is flat?

Nevermind, you already knew that...

0

Bubbles 7 years, 1 month ago

What is lunacy Tycho is that you think that they are not bought and payed for.

0

jmadison 7 years, 1 month ago

Let Al Gore debate the non-believers in an open forum, rather than pontificating from on high.

0

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 7 years, 1 month ago

"The recycling of this type of discredited conspiracy theory diverts attention from the real challenge at hand: how to provide the energy needed to improve global living standards while also reducing greenhouse gas emissions," he said.


Where has it been discredited? The fact is that the evidence is so strong that denials such as this are nearly as amusing as they are sick.

0

toefungus 7 years, 1 month ago

Al Gore is an elitist. He says we should put our shoulder to the plow while he drinks ice water in his air conditioned mansion and flies around the world telling others to use less. The glass is so thick on his house he can not hear the cries. I am sure he feels he must do this to counter giant corporations. What if Gandi used violence while he told everyone else not to? Al is just a political hack.

0

gr 7 years, 1 month ago

"Where has it been discredited? The fact is that the evidence is so strong that denials such as this are nearly as amusing as they are sick."

Well, I discredited us causing any supposed global warming with several links. Of course, you said you don't believe scientists who don't agree with you.

"while he drinks ice water in his air conditioned mansion and flies around the world"

If, global warming caused coastal flooding, you can buy an Al Gore credit, and watch your coastal neighbor drown. How nice.

Al Gore was a poor loser and still is. Why anyone gives him the time of day, I don't know.

0

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 7 years, 1 month ago

"Of course, you said you don't believe scientists who don't agree with you."

No, I've said that I find the evidence used by 99% of all scientists to support the hypotheses of human-induced global warming more compelling than the opposite evidence and hypotheses, supported by the remaining 1% (who are, curiously, almost all industry financed.)

0

staff04 7 years, 1 month ago

Wow. Morons abound, as usual...and to be clear, I'm referring to posters, not the article.

I wonder what you would think if GWB made the same statement...you'd probably jump on board and agree that we are facing a crisis.

Also, LJW sucks for posting this article on such a hot day. They MUST be a part of the conspiracy.

0

gr 7 years, 1 month ago

You wouldn't believe Galileo, would you?

"who are, curiously, almost all industry financed."

Which, you mean a conflict of interest. Which is what I claimed about those promoting it - Promote global warming or no more grant money.

What do you suggest would be a non-biased method of discovering the truth?

0

staff04 7 years, 1 month ago

Oh wait, it isn't 100 degrees in Lawrence...occasionally I forget where I am. Apologies. Enjoy your cooling rain.

http://www.weather.com/outlook/events/sports/local/22204?lswe=22204&lwsa=Weather36HourSportsCommand&from=whatwhere

Yeah, it's hot in my 'hood...

0

jhwk2008 7 years, 1 month ago

"ExxonMobil spokesman Gantt Walton said Tuesday that the company's financial support for scientific reports did not mean it influenced the outcome of those studies."

"Scientists aren't stupid. They are not going to bite the hand that feeds them." Bubbles Thanks for proving my point Bubbles.

0

Roadkill_Rob 7 years, 1 month ago

Can someone explain to me why a global warming conspiracy benefits liberals?

Regardless of your views on global warming, I don't know why you wouldn't want renewable energy resources, cleaner air, and less pollution in general...especially if you have children.

It's one of the great mysteries to me why people so desperately want to discredit global warming...other than oil and car companies, of course. They have the only true motivation to discredit it.

0

gr 7 years, 1 month ago

staff04, not sure what you're meaning, but don't forget how unusually cool it was this spring.

"Thanks for proving my point Bubbles."

Two-way street.

No suggestion for discovering the truth.

Only thing left is to throw insults at one another.

0

staff04 7 years, 1 month ago

"What do you suggest would be a non-biased method of discovering the truth?"

Ummm...maybe science...I took a few classes on it in school. I guess that makes me "one of them."

0

Tychoman 7 years, 1 month ago

You want to discover the truth? Go outside! Drought in many parts of the world, icecaps shrinking, flooding everywhere else. There was flooding in New York City today. Whether human caused or not, something's up with the climate and should be dealt with. Pointing fingers will only gain short-term gratification--which is the whole reason why we've been ignoring the problem for 30-odd years.

Throw insults at each other, gr? That's what you're best at. Heck, it's all YOU do around here. I've yet to see you contribute something of substance to any discussion.

0

drake 7 years, 1 month ago

Roadkill,

Most liberals hate everything this country stands for including capitalism, morals, self reliance and hard work. This global warming scare is yet another way to erode these things by creating the illusion that the evil corporations are causing the warming and must pay additional or new taxes (carbon tax).

This comes as a direct quote from Algore's partner in his carbon credit scam:

"Isn't the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn't it our responsibility to bring about?" - Maurice Strong

It really is nice when they show their true colors.

0

kmat 7 years, 1 month ago

All you idiots that want to go back to the dark ages and just can't seem to believe in modern science - GET IT THROUGH YOUR THICK SKULLS THAT THIS IS NOT A LIBERAL VS CONSERVATIVE ISSUE!!!!!! How hard is it to understand that humans over the last 100+ years have done serious damage to our planet????? Try to explain how belching exhaust into the atmosphere is NOT going to do some damage??? If you think that we haven't screwed up this planet, then you probably also believe that the world is 5000 years old, that we used to ride on the backs of dino's and that the wonderful weather the world is experiencing is ordained by God.

You can pull out all the b.s. about past weather trends. It doesn't apply because what we are now experiencing isn't isolated, it is world wide!!! There isn't an area in this world that isn't feeling the effects of global warming. People can keep sticking their heads in the sand and can ignore the problem, but eventually that sand is going to heat up and burn you.

Don't believe that big corporations are influencing what these 1% of scientists worldwide are reporting, against the other 99% of scientists? Then explain why a battery was created about 10 years ago that can run an electric car for up to 300 miles per charge, can be recharged in about 15 minutes, and could have been used to remove 90% of all co2 emitting vehicles from the roads - yet, Shell Oil bought out the rights to the battery and have shelved it and won't produce them and won't sell the rights to the technology to anyone else to use? That's just one example of many. Don't believe my example, then check out www.whokilledtheelectriccar.com.

Those of you that don't believe scientists - then no more modern medicine for you. No more weather channel. Give up all that modern science has given you and go back to the stone ages.

0

gr 7 years, 1 month ago

"Regardless of your views on global warming, I don't know why you wouldn't want" RB, does the results justifies the means. Does it matter what means are used to get the desired results? THAT'S the objection.

"Ummm:maybe science:I took a few classes on it in school. I guess that makes me "one of them."" We've just been demonstrated that both sides have scientists and science. That's why I asked the question. I didn't think that was hard to follow.

I took more than a few science classes in school. Using bozo's reasoning, does that make me more of a scientist than you and therefore you have no valid ideas nor reasoning? One thing classes taught me was to think for myself. Whether you approach the earth is a few thousand or a few billions of years old, it doesn't make sense to base a global warming/cooling tendency on 34 years (as one article so did). There is also the ice age and we have been warming ever since.

Then there is the sheer volume of carbon dioxide in the environment and the idea that a small fraction contributes to not just the volume but can be construed as having a global warming affect is preposterous. And I have seen no one, including the bozo, confront that.

"It's one of the great mysteries to me why people so desperately want to discredit global warming"

No great mystery. People discredit lots of things not based on science. And there isn't much science there - other than "consensus" - made by media.

There was an increase of Mexicans coming illegally to the U.S. coinciding with supposed global warming. Therefore, based upon scientific statistics, we conclude illegal entry is causing the whole planet to warm up.

If the media was promoting that "fact", it would be no mystery why people would so desperately want to discredit it. It's poor science.

0

jhwk2008 7 years, 1 month ago

How about we use EPA science? Is it "poor" too? It's a liberal agency supported by liberals in the government, right? Wait, that can't be true. The Administrator, who has Cabinet-level status, is appointed by the President. W appointed a liberal?

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/science/index.html

"As through much of its history, the Earth's climate is changing. Right now it is getting warmer. Most of the warming in recent decades is very likely1 the result of human activities" IPCC, 2007.

  1. "Throughout the science section of this Web site, use of "very likely" conveys a 90-99% chance the result is true."

I don't think people fully understand the term "global warming." According to the EPA, global warming is "an average increase in the temperature of the atmosphere near the Earth's surface and in the troposphere, which can contribute to changes in global climate patterns." Thus, a series of hot days is not an indication of global warming. Furthermore, an "unusually cool spring" is not an indication that global warming isn't happening.

The above quotes are good, but this one's the best.
"The information on these pages is drawn primarily from consensus documents that include assessments of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the U.S. Climate Change Science Program."

Can someone define "consensus" for me?

By the way, the EPA's website has recently changed. No longer does it use the word "theory" in its definition of climate change. Moreover, it cites the IPCC.

0

Roadkill_Rob 7 years, 1 month ago

Drake said:

"Most liberals hate everything this country stands for including capitalism, morals, self reliance and hard work."

You lost me with your first sentence. Sorry, I don't buy your sheeple reasoning. Why would American citizens want their own country destroyed? I agree that some liberal beliefs aren't sometimes in the best interest of this country, but I don't think they want their own country to collapse.

Now, does someone with an IQ higher than a monkey want to tell me how a global warming conspiracy benefits liberals?

0

kmat 7 years, 1 month ago

Roadkill - you will never get an answer to your question because the right-wingers on here are just happy to see a headline with Gore in it so they have any reason to trash him. The likes of these people won't ever look at what an individual is doing - regardless of political affiliation - because they only care whether anyone has a little R or little D by their name. That's what separates the "true" republicans from the right-wingers. True republicans can look beyond political affiliation.

RT - Gore isn't just now bringing this up since the weather is warm. If you pulled your head out every once in a while to see some sunshine, you might also notice that Gore has been doing almost nothing but speaking about this issue for YEARS. Pulling you head out might also help you to see the damage that has and continues to be done to our planet.

0

1derer 7 years, 1 month ago

ExxonMobil must have acquired time travel technology.

"The Medieval Warm Period occurred before the Little Ice Age (1350-1850), a time of particularly cool climate in Europe and other places around the world. In the graph on the left, the curve shows that during the Medieval Warm Period the temperatures were likely similar to the first part of the 20th century, climate cooled during the Little Ice Age, and has warmed dramatically in recent decades."

0

staff04 7 years, 1 month ago

gr--"staff04, not sure what you're meaning, but don't forget how unusually cool it was this spring."

Yes, fool...the point is that our abuse of the ecosystem causes extremes...cool, hot...

Let me put it in terms you can understand: God did it. Does that make your pea feel better?

0

acg 7 years, 1 month ago

If Al Gore hadn't been the one to make An Inconvenient Truth, then more people would be on board with doing something about global warming. The damned republicans are so desperate to hate him that they would try to discredit any idea he, or any other liberal or democrat had, just because that's the hateful, close minded way that they do things. I don't expect anything different from a group of people that think that Bill O'Reilly and Rush Limbaugh are giving them the real news.

0

Roadkill_Rob 7 years, 1 month ago

Nope, still not buying it, RT.

Especially since most of the developed countries around the world and most scientists from around the world concur that global warming is caused by humans. Is the whole world liberal? Are the only smart people in this world the right-wing midwesterners who've barely lived outside of the midwest? That's one heck of a conspiracy.

You can make the case that Gore is trying to keep his name in the news and is soaking in the fame but that's about it...I personally don't think this but I can see how a neocon would.

0

gr 7 years, 1 month ago

boytoy says: I went outside and it's hot. I sweated. And weather is happening all over. We must be causing it. We must do something. I hate sweating. whiiiiiiinne.

========== "How hard is it to understand that humans over the last 100+ years have done serious damage to our planet????? " So why attach global warming to it? Or are you admitting the scam? You have a purpose to accomplish, can't do it any other way, so you attach a made up scam that we are causing warming so you can accomplish your purpose. Making a feeble attempt to attach global warming to pollution is unnecessary. Why do it?

"Don't believe that big corporations are influencing what these 1% of scientists worldwide are reporting, against the other 99% of scientists?"

I heard that of a select group of scientists, 99% were said to believe we cause global warming.

Could you provide evidence that 99% of scientists worldwide believe humans are causing global warming?

"Those of you that don't believe scientists - then no more modern medicine for you." Objection. You are generalizing all scientists.
You are generalizing all ideas from them. You have not established most scientists believe that we cause global warming.

========

"Can someone define "consensus" for me?" Can someone define "Intergovernmental Panel" for me!

========

"Why would American citizens want their own country destroyed?" And, the same back at you on the other side.

==========

the staff fool: "Yes, fool:the point is that our abuse of the ecosystem causes extremes:cool, hot:"

Would you mind telling us who abused the ecosystem to cause the extreme ice age temperatures?

If this global warming hype is so true and factual, why not provide us some facts instead of hysteria of how we are dooming this world? Your weather reports are meaningless. If we were having record cold temperatures right now, you'd say it's because of global warming. I recall that usually we have broken 100 way before now. Must be global warming keeping it cooler than normal, huh?

I suppose the reason we aren't having the predicted record number of hurricanes so far is also because of global warming.

0

jhwk2008 7 years, 1 month ago

Facts: The global atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide has increased from a pre-industrial value of about 280 ppm to 379 ppm in 2005.

The atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide in 2005 exceeds by far the natural range over the last 650,000 years (180 to 300 ppm) as determined from ice cores.

Eleven of the last twelve years (19952006) rank among the 12 warmest years in the instrumental record of global surface temperature (since 1850).

Global mean surface temperatures have risen by 0.74°C ± 0.18°C when estimated by a linear trend over the last 100 years (19062005). The rate of warming over the last 50 years is almost double that over the last 100 years (0.13°C ± 0.03°C vs. 0.07°C ± 0.02°C per decade).

Global average sea level rose at an average rate of 1.8 [1.3 to 2.3] mm per year over 1961 to 2003.

0

Roadkill_Rob 7 years, 1 month ago

Roadkill_Rob wrote: "Why would American citizens want their own country destroyed?"

gr wrote: "And, the same back at you on the other side."

You see, I'm not claiming that neocons want the country to collapse...I just think they're brainwashed by the corporate elite.

However, the global warming conspiracy suggested earlier is that liberals want this country to fail and one way is to scare people with global warming. That would be one intricate, world-wide conspiracy by liberals, I'd have to say.

0

jhwk2008 7 years, 1 month ago

Inter- Main Entry: inter- Function: prefix Etymology: Middle English inter-, enter-, from Anglo-French & Latin; Anglo-French inter-, entre-, from Latin inter-, from inter; akin to Old High German untar among, Greek enteron intestine, Old English in in 1 : between : among : in the midst 2 : reciprocal : reciprocally 3 : located between 4 : carried on between 5 : occurring between : intervening 6 : shared by, involving, or derived from two or more 7 : between the limits of : within 8 : existing between

Government Main Entry: government Pronunciation: 'g&-v&r(n)-m&nt, -v&-m&nt; 'g&-b&m-&nt, -v&m- Function: noun Usage: often attributive 5 a : the organization, machinery, or agency through which a political unit exercises authority and performs functions and which is usually classified according to the distribution of power within it b : the complex of political institutions, laws, and customs through which the function of governing is carried out

Panel Main Entry: 1panel Pronunciation: 'pa-n&l Function: noun Etymology: Middle English, piece of cloth, jury list on a piece of parchment, from Anglo-French, from Vulgar Latin pannellus, diminutive of Latin pannus 1 b (1) : a group of persons selected for some service (as investigation or arbitration) (2) : a group of persons who discuss before an audience a topic of public interest

0

gr 7 years, 1 month ago

"The global atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide has increased from a pre-industrial value of about 280 ppm to 379 ppm in 2005."

How is that relevant to whether we are causing increased carbon dioxide levels and either CO2 or as a result of us causing global warming?

"The atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide in 2005 exceeds by far the natural range over the last 650,000 years (180 to 300 ppm) as determined from ice cores."

How is that relevant to whether we are causing it? I'd like to see a link to that. The link I saw only went back 420,000 years and during that time it only varied about 20 ppm from 300 ppm of 325,000 years ago. I wouldn't call that far exceeding. 6.7%

"Eleven of the last twelve years (19952006) rank among the 12 warmest years in the instrumental record of global surface temperature (since 1850)."

How is 12 years relevant to global time frames. Either way, how does that relate to whether we are causing it?

"Global mean surface temperatures have risen by 0.74°C ± 0.18°C when estimated by a linear trend over the last 100 years (19062005). The rate of warming over the last 50 years is almost double that over the last 100 years (0.13°C ± 0.03°C vs. 0.07°C ± 0.02°C per decade)."

Yet more useless trivia. Again, how does that relate to whether we are causing it.

"Global average sea level rose at an average rate of 1.8 [1.3 to 2.3] mm per year over 1961 to 2003"

Need I ask again? And why 1961?

0

jhwk2008 7 years, 1 month ago

I think you missed one of my previous posts. Do you disagree with the EPA?

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/science/index.html

"As through much of its history, the Earth's climate is changing. Right now it is getting warmer. Most of the warming in recent decades is very likely1 the result of human activities"

  1. "Throughout the science section of this Web site, use of "very likely" conveys a 90-99% chance the result is true."

1961 = First year sea levels were recorded in instrumental record. Temperature = 1850.

0

staff04 7 years, 1 month ago

gr-

No, my weather reports were me acting to humanize myself in this forum.

It's called "carbon monoxide," jackass...look it up. Or maybe FOX news has something on it.

0

gr 7 years, 1 month ago

"Do you disagree with the EPA?" I'm not sure EPA is well respected. They say mercury is bad for you, but yet people are still injecting it into children. The EPA is a government organization. And, more importantly, they got it from that "intergovernmental panel".

"conveys a 90-99% chance the result is true." Is that where 99% of scientists agree we cause global warming? Maybe you can provide the exact quote of how many and who make up that 99% of scientists. Or is it "very likely" 99% of scientists agree? Who knows. Too much gibberish.

"1961 = First year sea levels were recorded in instrumental record. Temperature = 1850."

Hmmm. If it was rising for thousands of years, it wouldn't show, would it?

0

staff04 7 years, 1 month ago

Oh wow. I feel stupid. It should have read, "carbon dioxide." Stupid points for me, especially given the context of my insult to the flat-earth society spokesman, gr...

0

Kodiac 7 years, 1 month ago

Gr,

Up to ye olde trickstery I see. Oh Wiley C himself would surely be proud of your clever attempts and elaborate word schemes. Such a Sccccchhhhhhhhemer you are.

Too bad you have a few Roadrunners defying your "gibberish" traps.

Always asking for that proof aren't ya. Yet when it comes to the sky gods, angel sex, reanimated corpses, and one hellacious boat among other things, if its in the good book, well then that is good enough for me. I gots me that olde tyme religion don't ya know...

Meanwhile...the EPA does not do the FDA's job. Thimerosal (the "mercury" you are referring to) is not under the purview of the EPA but rather the FDA. Many preservatives that are used in our foods, medicines, water could be "bad" for the environment but still be beneficial to our health. Do you have any idea how many people died because preservatives were not being used? Virtually all vaccinations are thimerosal-free now so no need for us to beat on a dead horse here. Does that really matter or have anything do with anything on here? Nope...

Speaking of beating on a dead horse, its time for me to go.

0

Tychoman 7 years, 1 month ago

Jesus H. you guys are vicious today.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Natural or human-caused, climate change is an issue people are going to have to deal with eventually. Fingerpointing at this point in time doesn't really matter.

0

Tychoman 7 years, 1 month ago

........Well, yes. It IS life. Fingerpointing and scapegoating is pointless in the end if proper preparations and adjustments are made.

0

mick 7 years, 1 month ago

Are you all idiots? The American Enterprise Institute offered 10K (The Guardian, Feb 2 , 07) to any scientist or economist to come out against global warning. Watch out for the AEI, it's the neocon organization in charge.

0

Tychoman 7 years, 1 month ago

Gore's "story" RT? You've really been way past your usual idiotic self lately. More inane posts per day, increasing in extreme right-wing drivel corresponding to the number of posts. Did you change your coffee?

0

UfoPilot 7 years, 1 month ago

And funding by "Government paid scientists" will result in them finding that they need "more funding" to continue research.

0

jonas 7 years, 1 month ago

"Fingerpointing at this point in time doesn't really matter."

I think, Tychoman, that this is why there's so much of it. Empty gestures distract us from actually thinking about potential problems. Besides, 911 should have taught us that, from public to politicians, we can't be motivated to care until something big happens.

With global warming and a rise in sea level, maybe we can have a coastal city flood or something. How far is Washington DC above sea-level? That's the one I think would be best to go first.

0

gr 7 years, 1 month ago

"That's the beauty of being a short-sighted manipulative schemer. No matter what was said 5 seconds ago,"

Kodiak, look 5 secs before that. You aren't even trying to understand - as usual. Ever hear of dishing it back?

0

perkins 7 years, 1 month ago

Right, Al. You also said you invented the Internet.

0

gr 7 years, 1 month ago

logicsound04 (Anonymous) says: "No one is injecting mercury into children."

Thimerosal-containing vaccines: (hemophilus, hepatitis, rabies, tetanus, influenza, diphtheria, pertussis) http://www.epa.gov/epaoswer/hazwaste/mercury/con-prod.htm#t2c12

LB 49 provides for a ban of the use of the preservative thimerosal, a 50% ethylmercury based preservative by weight, in the State of Nebraska.

The bills provide for a total phase-out of mercury in all vaccines or drugs, including the flu vaccine, for children and adults in NE by July 1, 2009. http://capwiz.com/a-champ/issues/alert/?alertid=9271046&type=TA

0

Tychoman 7 years, 1 month ago

Marion, I got that news about NYC from CNN, not the movies.

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.