Defiant: On Benghazi, are you saying you know more than the last few Secretaries of Defense? And if what you say were correct, do you really think the current administration would purposely not respond? And articles and expert testimony are credible evidence for making an informed opinion and gaining knowledge, why would you throw that out? You are basically saying our military is the most advanced in the world and should be able to handle the situation, and if someone disagrees with your opinion, then they're not a thinking person. But that's just not the case according the last few heads of national security.
And I've read Heritage Foundation articles my Republican friends send me as well as Krauthammer, and I think they're way off base on the environment. Scientific organizations and peer-reviewed science is not leftist, it's science! Conservatives and people of all political leanings from all over the world contribute to them too! And all these American scientific organizations worked for Bush Jr., Bush Sr., Reagan... too, so why would they have been saying the same thing then that they are now? (See atmospheric scientist James Hansen's testimony before Congress in 1989. Not only has what he said come to bear, but it's come much faster than scientists originally thought.)
Your whole argument is that there's a conspiracy and the evidence is falsified, and yet the evidence just continues to accumulate. You can't fake what's going on in all the temperature readings in the world, the melting of the Arctic, Greenland, and ice sheets, rising sea levels, increasing acidity in the ocean... You are just so planted in your position, you refuse to see what's actually happening. I don't know why you think man can't affect nature, perhaps it's religious reasons, but you really couldn't be more wrong. We are completely transforming the planet in many ways.
And anything with the word European in it is liberal, really? That is really far out on the conspiracy level and makes no sense considering all the conservative factions in Europe. Further, all these other media organization that do not agree with the Heritage Foundation are not necessarily leftist either, there's a whole world out there beyond the Heritage Foundation.
Gates: Some Benghazi Critics Have "Cartoonish" View of Military Capability
CBS News
Jake Miller
May 12, 2013
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/gates-some-benghazi-critics-have-cartoonish-view-of-military-capability/
Former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates forcefully defended the Obama administration on Sunday against charges that it did not do enough to prevent the tragedy in Benghazi, telling CBS' "Face the Nation" that some critics of the administration have a "cartoonish impression of military capabilities and military forces."
Gates, a Republican who was appointed by then-President George W. Bush in 2006 and agreed to stay through more than two years of President Obama's first term, repeatedly declined to criticize the policymakers who devised a response to the September 2012 attack on a U.S. diplomatic facility in Benghazi, Libya, that left four Americans dead, including the U.S. Ambassador to Libya, Chris Stevens.
"Frankly, had I been in the job at the time, I think my decisions would have been just as theirs were," said Gates, now the chancellor of the College of William and Mary.
"We don't have a ready force standing by in the Middle East, and so getting somebody there in a timely way would have been very difficult, if not impossible." he explained.
Suggestions that we could have flown a fighter jet over the attackers to "scare them with the noise or something," Gates said, ignored the "number of surface to air missiles that have disappeared from [former Libyan leader] Qaddafi's arsenals."
"I would not have approved sending an aircraft, a single aircraft, over Benghazi under those circumstances," he said....
Tomahaha: Climate models are also based on evidence and have continually told the same story, each decade is hotter than the last:
http://www.climatesciencewatch.org/2014/02/20/mcnider-and-christy-defend-inertia/
And peers are from universities, businesses, and governments from all over the world. It's silly to say they are towing the company line, particularly when this process has worked so well for so many areas of science for hundreds of years. Just as you would have someone who knows something about a jet do a safety check on a jet, this is no different. And the person checking the jet may in fact be working for a competitor of the person making or flying the jet. Believe me, you wouldn't want a novice doing a safety check on a jet.
And no one is ridiculing people because they are simply opposed to them, they are saying that the opposition does not have the evidence to overturn the findings of established climate measurements and science. Trying to discredit and cast doubt continually on various results or funding that comes from multiple universities, businesses, governments... in multiple countries throughout the world simply does not discount the body of evidence that backs up what we are seeing in the climate. You are using the same arguments the tobacco companies used for so long to cast doubt on the scientific evidence that nicotine can cause cancer.
And just because there was warming in the past, mostly over thousands or millions of years or due to cataclysmic events, like super volcano eruptions and asteroids hitting the Earth, doesn't mean that we aren't rapidly warming the Earth up over the course of decades to a point that could lead to a mass extinction event in a very short amount of time. And see the Hansen quote in my last post about why warming is not linear and why extreme weather of all types is to be expected. As for the Antarctic, land ice is melting, falling into the ocean, and accelerating the growth of sea ice... for now. See this PBS article if you want to learn more:
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/why-climate-change-means-more-and-less-ice-for-the-antarctic/
Subs start phase Gobble
perhaps. Would anyone be interested?
)
)
)