Record speaks for itself RAF - now you are trying to spin it rather than admit you were wrong. Its sad really.

This is a pathetic excuse of an article by ROBYN BLUMNER.... Of course the scientist love the Dem's THEY PAY THEIR BILLS. Dems have been pushing for excessive scientific waste for years giving research monies to scientists to study things that have no relevance to the human race. As longs as the dem's continue spreading the Global Warming myth, under-educated people like Blumner will continue to be able to spew their vomit to the people and they will believe it.

So, now you're saying that stopped clocks really aren't dead-nuts accurate twice a day, RAF? ;~)

You are easily caught in your version of what you think vs reality, like so many other topics you have commented on in the past.

You choose to think a person that claimed illegal immigrants pay taxes, by providing they pay taxes on groceries in Wisconsin, is correct in his next assumption of a GPS error, caused by satellite distance from earth, is the reason others think the earth is tilting in it's orbit.

Yes, well then, your logic is to strong for me.

I agree Coyote. I think RAF has proven the article's intent with Republicans vs science. And better yet RAF knows that we know that he knows, that there is not a neutron star in orbit but that relativistic corrections had to be made anyway.

I agree Coyote. I think RAF has proven the article's intent with Republicans vs science. And better yet RAF knows that we know that he knows, that there is not a neutron star in orbit but that relativistic corrections had to be made anyway.

What a complete waste of space this blog has turned into; why don't you all take it to the Rants & Raves section of Craigs List?

Right FOTH - you didn't say you were done with this, wait a sec, you did but I think you meant something else by done - like maybe just done for a little while?

Touche' RAF! I should know better than to say things like that. Wait... I mean, I was talking about something else. Yeah, that's the ticket! It all depends on what the meaning of "this" is. ;~)

For someone that claimed they were done talking about the subject why do you keep posting on it?

Fascinating... I don't believe I have ever seen anyone even ATTEMPT to deny a statement documented on the same page as their denial. Does the Guinness World Book of Records have a competitive category for "Denial"? I think we have the uncontested winner!

Yes you are correct, the problem is you can't connect the dots. He said there is error because of the distance from gravity, as each vehicle is adjusted for height and transport rate there is no error, it is fixed before launch. In order for there to indeed be any error in the system, not fixed before launch, would require comic book type graviton; his quote was there is error based on gravity. I would draw you a picture but you would then complain of the colors.

RAF wrote:

But no worry, the clocks are adjusted to compensate for rate of travel and height of orbit not for comic book gravity shifts...
And
What kind of science comic book have you been reading? How do you think GPS works? It is all based on time and has nothing to do with gravity. The only time shift due to gravitational forces appears to happen during your nap time reading of “science”. The subject is a bit dry, if you really want to truly know how it works I can point you to some fairly decent reference sources that use a little more critical thinking than “time difference based on gravity"

FOHT, as you keep circling the drain with your partner, I did address the inaccuracy of his claim; error...there is none. As I have repeatedly said it is corrected in each vehicle before launch.

Ok RAF you are right - there is no god. I retract my statement about him putting liars in helll forever because he hates sin so much. See how easy it is to admit when your wrong about a statement you made? Now you try!

[Yeah he never said "GPS errors occur"...I guess I just made that up.]

No, RAF, you didn't make that up. Darwin1 definitely wrote that. But, if your issue HAD been with the "errors" portion of his claim, then why didn't you ridicule the dubiousness of THAT instead of his claim about Earth's gravity and relativity, which we now know to be scientifically valid and not the stuff of comic books?

I do hope you realize you've sacrificed your queen with the above statement. Check and mate!

I thought you said there was no God? Or do you change your story to suit the comments?

God hates liars and burns them in hell forever, FYI.

RAF you clearly scoffed at the idea that relativistic forces were at work at all in the system. You even went so far as to say there would need to be a neutron star in orbit. Wrong again RAF - at least be honest about it.

Yeah he never said "GPS errors occur"...I guess I just made that up.

RAF: No one here (including Darwin1) has ever claimed that GPS errors were uncorrected, thereby rendering the present GPS system flawed, inaccurate or imprecise. That is ridiculous! Of COURSE errors are corrected and compensated. You brought up the issue of "correction" to backpedal on your black hole and comic book remarks. (Review the chronology of comments. It's all a matter of historical record.)

hmmm, as I said two correction; one for altitude and the other for transport rate both corrected at time of launch, hence no error in the system.

To have any error (not corrected) would require additional gravitational force...comic book style.

Any error occurring due to an elliptical orbit or position of the ground based clock in relation to delta from poles is adjusted after the fact by the receivers (user)--this falling into the category of error of less than one microsecond.

Keep trying though, your copy and paste is excellent, good job.

Good link, Prounion. Technically, Doppler is relativistic but some of us avoid using Doppler and "relativity" in the same sentence because it further confounds one's ability to comprehend Spacetime continuum. (That's hard enough already!)

Relativistic effects on satellite clocks can be combined in such a way that only two corrections need be considered. First, the average frequency shift of clocks in orbit is corrected downward in frequency by parts in . This is a combination of five different sources of relativistic effects: gravitational frequency shifts of ground clocks due to earth's monopole and quadrupole moments, gravitational frequency shifts of the satellite clock, and second-order Doppler shifts from motion of satellite and earth-fixed clocks. Second, if the orbit is eccentric, an additional correction arises from a combination of varying gravitational and motional frequency shifts as the satellite's distance from earth varies.
.
http://www.phys.lsu.edu/mog/mog9/node9.h...
.
General relativity in the global positioning system
Neil Ashby
University of Colorado

Excellent.

You telling anyone about credibility is oxymoronic.

Sorry RAF - you are flat out wrong - everyone is waiting for you to admit it. Step Up RAF - retract your comic book statement you know you were wrong! Or don't, its your credibility on the line.

Yes pro, the HAHAHAHA"s got to me. You are so right I am so wrong. I must have also said Palin was a great leader as you stated earlier, how dare I correct you the all knowing darwin, umm I mean prounion. I am so surprised you can even read my posts with your head spinning so much I am sure Einsteins theory of GR has your clock almost stopped compared to everyone else; everyone has aged ten years to your one for as much as you spin tales.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH - RAF - that was awesome never admit your wrong!
.
RAF wrote:
prounion unless you are insisting our planet is anywhere near a black-hole or a neutron star there is no "vast time shifting". But no worry, the clocks are adjusted to compensate for rate of travel and height of orbit not for comic book gravity shifts...
.
And RAF before you latch on to the word Vast - you added that to the discussion.
.
Don't ever admit that you are dead nuts wrong RAF - ever, it makes all of us admire your determination!

I never discounted Einstein’s theory, only Darwins ridicules claim there is error in the GPS system; as I have stated it is corrected. You are the one that defended his inaccurate comment.

The only thing I'm defending is the truth, RAF. In fact, I had intended to let this slide, then joeflint jumped in.

Please stop digging yourself deeper. The temporary and forgettable blow to your ego that comes with admitting a mistake is nothing compared to the permanent damage you are doing to your credibility. You screwed up with your black hole and comic book remarks to Darwin1 and prounion. Big deal. Don't toss red herrings or shoot the messenger. Gravity is the effect of Earth's mass on the Spacetime continuum. This, in turn, causes time to run slower on the surface of Earth than it does for satellites, even geostationary satellites. Einstein predicted it over 100 years ago. It is the stuff of science, not comic books. Just admit that and move on.

I'm done with this. The record will speak for itself.

If so, that leaves the obvious conclusion, instead of cookies in your mouth they must somehow be impairing your vision and disrupting your comprehinsion, not only of the complete conversation but also causing babbling utterances of political sanctuaries. You are the one that decided to defend his comment...

Everyone knows what was stated, when it was stated and by whom, RAF. (Every word is documented and timestamped here.)

This is like watching a kid with his hand in the jar and his mouth full of cookies say, "I dwdn't twke wny cwwkies... rwwly!"

You two are talking in circles. My comments to poor Darwin, to include his asinine comment on my healthcare, pointed out the stupidity of his claim. He was responding to another posters comment of earth tilt. His retort was there were GPS errors because of GR, when in fact these errors are corrected in the system, both before launch in each vehicle and during updates to clock timings on a regular basis. For his claim to have validity the modeling used for the corrections, based on height in orbit and transport rates, would require a further increase in gravitational levels beyond our current 1g. As I stated, and you continue to argue over, the timing has already been adjusted…as such the only errors left are inherent noise, non-perfect timing, and for easy explanation direct line of site/reflection issues. Since all the clocks in the system are corrected to within 1 microsecond of universal coordinated time, there is in effect no error resulting from GR as I stated. The resulting 1 microsecond is corrected at the receiver level while tracking an extra signal; 3 needed for accurate position the 4th for time correction.

RAF oops you are correct you never said Palin was the greatest leader in the world. See how easy it is to admit when one was wrong? You could do the same thing in regards to your lack of understanding about your lack of understanding about the Theory of Relativity. Or don't - actually its quite amazing that you refuse to admit that you were wrong. Now I am off to read one of the comic books you mentioned.

RAF: There is an ongoing 45µS/day gravitational time dilation inherent in the GPS system. Einstein predicted this phenomenon in his 1907 essay on relativity, where he describes the effect of Earth's mass on Spacetime: http://hermes.ffn.ub.es/luisnavarro/nuev...

Of all the discussion on this topic, I think oldgrefelf pretty well draws the line. And it is exactly the line the writers like Ms. Blumner have fun with. He tells us not only the boundaries of science, but he also throws out a bright line of morality.
*
Oldgrey, most scientist do not feel the urge to wonder into the morass of defining morality, why do you need to feel the need to define what is subjective science versus objective science? Your arguments are onerous, especially the part of your definition is that anything happened before the present time is subjective and not quantifiable. Wrong.
*
Your post contains the arguments for creationism and intellegent design.

FOTH, the time distortion would theoretically be there just the same as here on earth between a person standing still and a person moving in a car. Yet the error is not seen in the GPS system precisely because it is corrected at the time of launch; for each vehicle placed in orbit. His comments do not match reality, these deltas are corrected, and the time in the satellite is the same as earth time.

As I have never stepped into a Republican Party office your comments are unwise. Reading darwins words are easy, he said there is a time difference between the two…reality is there is not because of the correction.

Prounion, you have reached the realm of Darwin with comments of, “he was wrong about Palin being the greatest leader in the world”. Your time-space quandary has you creating statements I never made. But as this is not completely new for you, making up untrue statements as supposed fact, your comments reflect your intelligence.

This link is only to remind people that wikipedia is not always accurate and shouldn't be completely relied on for accurate information.
+
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_tec_wikipe...

Here-ye, here-ye, BETTY ... the sun also revolves around the earth, the toothfairy is real, and I am the second coming of Jesus Christ.

I understand the principles of GPS, Joe. I only wanted clarification so our agreement on the point of contention didn't end up being rationalized by anyone as some sort of "qualified agreement". That's what I meant by obfuscation. You know... ask a guy for the time and he tells you how to build a watch. :~)

> the error [relativity] introduces does exist; and such error has been factored into the design of the GPS system.

Yes, very much so. Violent agreement, as I said.

I did not mean to obfuscate so I will repeat only the most relevant part:

"... the [receiver's clock] is used to measure the ranges to the different satellites at almost the same time, this makes that all the measured ranges have the same error..."

This means, from time step to time step, we can use an inaccurate local clock (w/o relativistic correction) to still provide the primary position determination if we know the distance to several GPS satellites.

The reductio ad absurdum case is if the GPS birds were completely fixed in space (e.g. a GEO orbit) or were just sitting on three nearby rooftops. Knowing ONLY three distances, we can compute fairly accurately our position. If we do it a second later and note that our position has changed, we can get a pretty good idea of our velocity too.

Don't push it, Prounion. I already resent being "compelled" to defend Darwin1.

Yes and now we wait to see RAF post that he was way off base as it has been clearly demonstrated. Once he admits to being wrong about the Theory of Relativity we can ask him if he was wrong about Palin being the greatest leader the world has ever known.

Yikes, Joe! Nice attempt at obfuscation via irrelevant technicalese! I'm sure that deflection will thoroughly snow some of the folks here. Maybe we should discuss the color of the satellites, too.

There is only one point of contention on this subject: RAF's so-called "comic book" dismissal of Darwin1's assertion that the relativity effect of gravity causes GPS errors. Clearly, such effect is real; the error it introduces does exist; and such error has been factored into the design of the GPS system.

Yes or no?

(For reference, the exchange begins at 1l:00p on Aug. 26th.)

prounion> "Relativity produces several measurable effects on the GPS System that uncorrected would render the system useless."

Yes; however, they are corrected. :)

foth> "If these effects were not properly taken into account, a navigational fix based on the GPS constellation would be false after only 2 minutes, and errors in global positions would continue to accumulate at a rate of about 10 kilometers each day!"

However, the next paragraph of your link states:

"The engineers who designed the GPS system included these relativistic effects when they designed and deployed the system. For example, to counteract the General Relativistic effect once on orbit, they slowed down the ticking frequency of the atomic clocks before they were launched so that once they were in their proper orbit stations their clocks would appear to tick at the correct rate as compared to the reference atomic clocks at the GPS ground stations...."

To further back my contention that the PRIMARY source of error is only the range to receiver:

"Typically a quartz oscillator is used to do the timing [in a GPS receiver]. Quartz clocks in general are less accurate than 1 in a million, if the clock hasn't been corrected for a week, the distance will put you not on the earth but behind the moons orbit. Even if the clock is corrected, a second later the clock is not usable anymore for positional calculation, because after a second the error will be hundreds of meters for a typical quartz clock."

So far we are in violent agreement... but here comes the critical part. This is the same point I made in my last post:

"But the clocks time is used to measure the ranges to the different satellites at almost the same time, this makes that all the measured ranges have the same error. Ranges with the (same) error are called pseudoranges. With four pseudoranges (and the location of the satellites) solutions for the receiver's position along the x-, y-, z- and Δt- axes can be computed.

"The reason we speak of pseudo-ranges rather than ranges, is precisely this "contamination" with unknown receiver clock offset. GPS positioning is sometimes referred to as trilateration, but would be more accurately referred to as pseudo-trilateration."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudorange...

foth> "Just a reminder... the original point of contention was whether or not gravitational time/space warp on GPS is a real effect or the stuff of comic books."

Missed that; yes, indeed, GR and SR are excellent theories! :)

You are correct, joeflint. I calculated the effect of that 38µS error per second instead of per day. My mistake. However, if left uncorrected, a 10 kilometers drift per day is anything but negligible. Agreed?

"If these effects were not properly taken into account, a navigational fix based on the GPS constellation would be false after only 2 minutes, and errors in global positions would continue to accumulate at a rate of about 10 kilometers each day!"

http://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/~pog...

Just a reminder... the original point of contention was whether or not gravitational time/space warp on GPS is a real effect or the stuff of comic books.

Go to the winkipedia page for "Effects of relativity on GPS" and this is the first statement:
.
Relativity produces several measurable effects on the GPS System that uncorrected would render the system useless.
.
RAF - seems clear that the gravitational frequency shift is there. Were you wrong?
.
What kind of science comic book have you been reading? How do you think GPS works? It is all based on time and has nothing to do with gravity.
LOL - Republicans don't understand science and also can't admit when they are wrong.

Re: GPS (redux)

As I said, the relativistic effects are negligible (for positional calculation).

All GPS birds orbit at about 20,200 km above the surface or about 26,600 above the center of the Earth. Thus, a bird that is directly overhead will be 20,200 km from you. A bird that is off near the horizon will be about 26,500 km away.

d = r t
t = d / r
For the overhead bird, the signal will take 20,200 km x 1000 m / km / 3 x 10^8 m / sec = 67 msec; for the bird near the horizon, the signal will take 91 msec to reach you. This is milliseconds (msec). A millisecond is 1,000x longer than than a microsecond (usec).

So, even on its face, the delay solely due to distance is much greater than the relativistic delay.

However, you are off by another almost FIVE orders of magnitude as the relativistic error value you gave is the clock drift per DAY. One solar day is 86,400 seconds. The +45 usec / day delay is due to general relativity; there is also a -7 usec / day delay due to special relativitiy. The sum is 38 usec / day.

The signals reached us in a time length on the order of 100 msec. There are 864,000 100 msec intervals in each day. The relativistic change to the GPS onboard clock in each 100 msec interval is thus 44 psec or 44 trillionths of a second.

To sum up:
Time to receive signal from overhead: 0.067 sec
Time to receive signal from near horizon: 0.091 sec
Clock drift of GPS internal clock in that time: 0.000000000044 sec

I'd say that's negligible.

No way - RAF must never admit he was bold faced wrong! LOL - try again RAF!

RAF, there IS a time/space distortion between the satellites and Earth. In fact, there is 45 microseconds worth of time/space warp due to gravitational delta. While that is considerably less than a black hole, it is still greater than a comic book. Correct? That was my only point. (May I suggest seeking sanctuary in a local Republican Party field office, thereby making any admission of error completely unnecessary? Either that or use the "even stopped clocks are dead-nuts twice a day" loophole. On the other hand, admitting error when one is wrong will only improve ones credibility.)

FOTH. He stated there was a time difference between the satellite and earth, false, because these are corrected at the time of launch. Over time, there is a delta that will grow if uncorrected; to be exact at some point the two must be the same in order for a delta to begin.

The delay I reference is not only from propagation. The corrected time variable is based on a stationary fixed point on earth; not adjusted for speed or altitude of the receiver ,thus building on the relativity error corrected at each satellite. The resulting uncorrected error is marginal, but does exist.

Thanks FOTH - I meant can't. RAF you have never been proven wrong on these posts (in your opinion anyway), I wonder what your response will be to being so clearly wrong about the Theory of Relativity in this case.

RAF, you are referencing the RF propagation delay, which is another factor altogether. Yes, propagation delay is more significant, but that is unrelated to the time distortion of relativity. (Someone can check my math but I believe an error of 38μS corresponds to ~11,400 meters, which is nothing to sneeze at.) My only point was that relativity errors DO exist and the ridicule of Darwin1, in this particular case, was unjustified.

"You only need faith if you can prove something exists."

Pro, you intended to write "can't" and not "can", correct?

FOTH, as I stated "the clocks are adjusted to compensate for rate of travel and height of orbit".

You failed to mention the inherent delta based on each receivers (car/plane/person) position and velocity; all combined, based on radial-error-rate is very meticulous variable.

There are two fixed time distortions affecting the GPS system. One, caused by the satellites' distance from Earth's mass, as explained by General Relativity, effects an error of about +45μS. The second, caused by the satellites' relative rotational velocity around Earth, as explained by Special Relativity, effects an error of about -7μS. Summed, these two errors result in an effective error of about +38μS. In terms of GPS timing, 38μS is ENORMOUS but easily corrected, though elliptical orbits complicate it.

Therefore, none of you is entirely correct, though Darwin1 appears to be the least wrong of all.

You only need faith if you can prove something exists.

I would like to point out the religious aspect in both sides of this discussion. If you believe only in science, you are required to believe there is no god or "super"natural explanation for any observed phenomenon. It is assumed and therefore is a matter of faith. If you believe in a supernatural designer (or god) this also is assumed and a matter of faith. This in turn limits your ability to accept what speculative science proclaims. True science is based on obervation, not speculation, and cannot deal in issues like the origin of the universe or of life in any from (the unobservable past), the value of human life (moral, not scientific determination), or the long term effects (climate) of short-term observations (weather)(too many variables in the predicting software, all adjusted by people who do not and cannot be sure what "The World of Tomorrow" will be like - and don't want to lose their grants or the respect of like-minded peers by bucking the scientific "faith").

Accept that unquestioning faith in science and its theories that go beyond observable phenomenon (speculative science) is just as strong an influence on one's moral (and thus political) views as is faith in a creator who has gifted humans with rights, dignity and the ability to explore and understand the world they see (true science).

If you believe morality is generated by majority vote or opinion, then you are likely to be a Democrat with no extrinsic moral values in favor of abortion, human embryo stem cell research and equal acceptance of all sexual orientations. If you believe morality is determined by a prescribed moral code outside of human opinion, you are more likely to favor the Republican party's social views. But let me end by saying this - neither party is the sole source of truth or wisdom. I don't think most people who vote for one of two candidates do so out of any party loyalty. We just pick the that is least offensive to our own personal "faith" whether in god or no-god.

omg Telsa. That's sad. Of course, I meant the "man out of time" -- Tesla.

Pete,

The Sun is actually in an EXTREMELY quiet phase right now. Also, there have been sunspot observations for nearly 3,000 years. There have been accurate sunspot counts for nearly as long as the telescope has existed -- 400 years! Solar activity correlates very well with tree ring and other climatological data.

I have no idea to what you are referring regarding the Earth's axial tilt. If you are referring to the 18.6-year nutation cycle, that is very well understood. As is the 26,000-year precessional "wobble" and the 42,000-year tilt variation of a few degrees. Any classical or celestial mechanics book will have chapters devoted to these effects. The Milankovitch cycle hypothesis is still contested.

Lastly, "man kind has less than 100 years of knowledge about the planet" is astonishingly laughable. Eratosthenes, in the 200s BC utilized a system of latitude and longitude and very accurately calculated the Earth's actual size. Closer to our time, just to name a few, you have done a great disservice to the works of Copernicus, Newton, Kepler, Euler, Bernoulli, Lavoisier, Riemann, Liouville, Lagrange, Hamilton, Maxwell, Bell, Edison, Telsa, and Einstein (all before 1909!).

Re: GPS

Although there _are_ relativistic effects that must be compensated, RAF essentially is correct -- they are negligible for everyday purposes.

GPS receivers (e.g. your cell phone, moving map in your car, etc) triangulate based on the signal received from several satellites. Each signal contains that satellite's position and time; since some satellites will be farther away than others, the signals will arrive out of phase -- some earlier and some later. From the satellites' reported positions and times and the observed time delay (solely due to distance from each satellite), a receiver can calculate position and velocity.

"if you oppose Lord Obama"
-
Hey!! Some of us prefer "Darth Obama," if you don't mind.

Funny how if you exercise your 1st Ammendment right and it opposes the socialist liberal agenda, you're automatically labeled a "evil conservative", never mind the fact that the poll numbers show that the vast majority of Americans have no faith in the government to run health care, if you oppose Lord Obama, you must be an evil republican. As far as the whole Sotomayor thing goes, I guess once again, if you believe in equal treatment across the board, regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation rather than built in advantages for selected groups you are once again labeled an evil republican. Well, sorry babe, but label me an evil republican. Your liberal buddies best get it together in the next 14 months or so or I think you'll be in for a rude awakening. I myself am counting on the fact that dopes like you will continue to overplay your hand and thus bring some sanity back to this country.

Republican science continued:
*
Genetics: Study to show that "Mitochondrial Eve" is socialist propaganda. In fact, she sprung from the loins of a Senate Republican, who has since repented his sin. Futhermore, DNA is not the acronym for deoxyribonuclic acid, it is the acronym for "Dock Noah's Arc" a scientific concept to explain the spread life form upon the Planet Earth, center of the universe.

prounion...still waiting on your response to my earlier statement to you.

RAF - Classic - no one said "vast" and you don't know what you are talking about...again. Nice support of the headline for this article though - case in point: RAF.

The result of a war the was entered into under false pretense and lies.

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2009/aug200...

It just seems to be soooo out of control. Here's an example from Fox. If you go into their search engine and type in H1N1 you'll see that they've thrown out a scary headline about H1N1 almost every single day for the past 3 weeks. That's "fair and balanced"? That's not total fearmongering??

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,5401...

prounion unless you are insisting our planet is anywhere near a black-hole or a neutron star there is no "vast time shifting". But no worry, the clocks are adjusted to compensate for rate of travel and height of orbit not for comic book gravity shifts...

Did the Republican party alway's have this whole "keep em scared and keep em ignorant" code? Just asking.

LOL - RAF doesn't understand the Theory of Relativity - what a shocker from a Republican.
.
Allthough the relativistic errors encountered are compensated for by setting the clocks to a slightly different frequency.

darwin, you are too funny; "…the satellites are so far from the gravity of the earth that there is a time difference."

What kind of science comic book have you been reading? How do you think GPS works? It is all based on time and has nothing to do with gravity. The only time shift due to gravitational forces appears to happen during your nap time reading of “science”. The subject is a bit dry, if you really want to truly know how it works I can point you to some fairly decent reference sources that use a little more critical thinking than “time difference based on gravity”.

Darwin exactly where is my health care socialized? Since my departure from the military 100% of my medical visits have been to Aurora facilities where my insurance pays part of the bill and I pay the rest.

As I said, please keep posting, one of these days you are bound to get something right and we will all stand and cheer for you if/when it happens.

Pete, scientists take variables like sunspots into account. GPS errors occur because of Einstein's theory of General Relativity. The satellites are so far from the gravity of the earth that there is a time difference. They don't tend to make NASA study more axis tilt. Where did you see this?

RAF, facts are fact: you get socialized medicine but don't want anyone else to get it. Thanks for defending nothing.

"This from someone who is against government health care while receiving government health care. "
-
If the above comment was meant to highlight that he's military, and the military gets free health care while serving, at least HE earned it by virtue of his service to the COUNTRY. A fair enough trade for the possiblility of getting killed for no personal gain whatsoever.

Darwin, still chasing your tale on who you think pays for my health care? For someone that claims to know so much, with your advanced degree, you have continually shown on a daily basis what little you grasp and retain on many subjects. Do keep posting, perhaps someday you will post something accurate and we will all cheer for you.

Prounion, you wanting the government to do it does not answer the question; we already know you want others to pay for it. If you think it is a good investment why not be part of it and invest your time and money into a company that champions your cause? Bringing any of Rush’s thoughts into your comments displays the weakness of your argument and further deflects from your position…

RAF, is that the third or fourth time you've used a sarcastic post of mine? This from someone who is against government health care while receiving government health care. At least I don't lie to myself.

RAF - Rush Limbaugh said that government investment in technology is required for our country to take the lead over other countries who are investing heavily in it. Does that change your opposition to investing in the devlopment of technology that allows for the US to lead the way rather than following behind countries like China?

I thought making fun of someone's garage is against the rules.

darwin don't you have some groceries to go pay taxes on?

Mr Booch11, what study on Climate Change or what part of the IPCC report did you read and what exactly did you find as shaky?

Also, Mr Booch11 why are you betraying our real voting democracy for a psuedo one based on a report.

Limbaugh didn't know the difference between the Constitution and the Declaration, said that drug addicts like Daryl Strawberry should go to jail though not himself, Glenn Beck said Obama was a racist and then said he didn't say that when he did. When Mr Beck had surgery just a few months ago, he said there was a health care crisis and now he says it is the best in the world: he is either disingenuous or a con-man.

To all conservatives. If the government can't do anything then why are you on the government built socialist internet?

Yeah your garage will not work, other than for sarcasm.

If you are convinced you are right, this is a good thing, do what every other business does and raise capital for your project. Put together a sound business plan and seek investments. Your posts on this have never swayed, you have been adamant this should be done. This is your opportunity to shine; the American dream.

Right RAF I will start my own stem cell research out of my garage and as a result America will leap ahead in the technology race surpassing China's advancements. Then folks won't need to travel to countries where religious dogma has less influence over policy.

Congress answer to them being included in healthcare plan:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/...

Congressman Fleming's public petition for us to sign as approval of 'House resolution 615' that Congress agree to enrol in the publice option.
http://www.fleming.house.gov/index.html

If nothing else you are consistant; not making logical points or backing your statements with facts.

And now with the goofy response.

Yes logic is counterproductive to your train of thought.

Leave it to RAF to come up with a totally goofy question.

Prounion why not start you own company on stem cell research if you think it is a good investment?

Booch thats true about stem cell research, meanwhile other countries dumped tons of funding into the effort, now our kids go to places like China when they need treatment.
.
Get the picture? Our manufacturing jobs go, also now our high tech jobs go, because of religious soul in the cell superstition.

FINALLY, A voice in the wilderness. A Senator who is listening. Unfortunately mine do not and so far have refused to answer my 1st big question: "Why does Congress think it is better than the rest of America and excludes itself and fellow federal workers from a bill that affects every other American?"

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090823/ap_o...

"so call me a racist, call me a hate-monger, gun-nut, intolerant churchie, homophobe -- seriously, that's all ya got?"
*
No, but you pretty well summed it up Professor Booch.

bush opposed PUBLIC funding for embryonic stem cell research only. just public funds -- and only for embryonic. research on those cells has resulted in very few positive results.
yet, lots of private funds were pi**** down the hole. great. PRIVATE money should fund it.
********
i love the republicans are idiots because we don't believe in global warming.
the verdict is out and the foundation on which global warming pseudo-science is based is getting shakier and shakier. what I oppose is giving away freedoms to shaky science. i think we're now in week two of the "we only have four months to save the planet" nonsense spouted by United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon. we have until the middle of november!!!!!!! please liberals, build that rocket and leave this planet. i'd love to enjoy fall without you.
*********
just because i disagree with rachel maddow doesn't mean i believe she has a screw loose. yet, those who disagree with limbaugh, or hannity or beck, all state that they indeed, do. my guess is those who say so have not really listened.
********
a report just the other day stated conservatives outmumber liberals in nearly all 50 states.
************
so call me a racist, call me a hate-monger, gun-nut, intolerant churchie, homophobe -- seriously, that's all ya got? we've heard it time and again -- and now, you're all hacked off because we have used the liberal playbook and we're getting organized.
AND -- WE VOTE!

Well DizzyGirl where did you publish your research findings. I am sorry you're a bird bander, still not a scientist. Maybe, lab assistant? By your logic all hunters must be biologists because they too have licenses from the evil socialist government. Please spare me, you don't know the first thing about science. Knowing that Sulphur Dioxide causing cooling and the Milankovitch cycles are responsible for ice ages is basic biology and something an actual scientist would know. Lying to yourself about being a scientist doesn't make you one either.

Yes, already doomed but still fighting pretty much sums it up for me, DiGriz. (Couldn't live with myself otherwise.)

I won't split hairs on percentages, just figured a two-to-one margin would be sufficient margin. Anyone who has 75% of voters' support definitely deserves to stay in office. (Yeah, like either is likely to happen.)

By the way, I couldn't afford the overnight shipping cost and sent your chopped liver via Parcel Post. I'm sure you'll know when it arrives. ;~)

Why stop at 66%? I'd say 75, just to make sure. I like the idea. In any case, no matter how it happens or is implemented, it needs to happen. If it does not, we are all doomed, and the nation that was founded in 1776 will be nothing more than the remnants of the countries our ancestors fled from in the first place. We may already be doomed, but at least we can still fight it.

How is this for a term limit plan? First term in office requires a 50% majority vote, as it does now. However, any subsequent term(s) would require a 66% majority vote. Implement that with Instant Runoff Voting. Best of both.

High fives DiGriz and R123! I think we all want to end up in a similar place. I suggest a slightly different path for getting there:

For a number of reasons, I believe that political parties, per se, are problematic. Good things will start to happen once a majority of Americans are able to emotionally detach their identities from such clubs. (The tone of this column is a perfect example of my point.)

While I agree that term limits would have positive effects, I don't think it is a panacea. I see it as a band-aid that can create its own problems. (Remember when neither of the major presidential candidates seemed as favorable as the one being tossed out of the White House?) I believe Instant Runoff Voting would have a much greater positive effect than term limits, though the two are not mutually exclusive options.

Regardless, many retiring politicians simply become lobbyists and visa-versa. The best solution, in my opinion, is placing MUCH stricter Constitutional limits on government power in the first place. The only way to keep money away from politicians is to first keep politicians away from ours. Without power, there will be no power for them to broker. That environment alone would radically change the profile of the typical political candidate in America.

Apology unnecessary, pepesmom. I agree with your point about the role of individual states. The federalization of our nation has oppressed interstate competition and any innovative approaches to governing this might have fostered. The value of liberty isn't as self evident today as it was to 18th century Americans.

WELL SAID R1234!!! I think a lot of people think like you and I, but it's all just talk unless people are willing to slap term limits on the career politicians and get them out of office, and get some REAL people in there that are more concerned with taking care of the concerns of their community, state, etc., than with having a cushy full-time job that strokes their egos, getting the gov. pension, power, etc. The ONLY way that we can get back to where we started is to reverse the decay of our representative form of government that has occured in the past couple of centuries and return representation to the people. Until that happens - until people are willing to kick the squatters out of ALL public offices via term limits, we will have nothing but more of the same.
-
And everything you said about Ms. Blumner is also correct. It's obvious that she wears ONLY liberal-colored glasses, and is as objective as a turnip.

FOTH: Send the chopped liver - overnight, of course. They don't serve it at the chow halls here, and I miss it greatly. Besides that, I'm tired of the menu. Your mention of liver has made me anxious and hungry. Withdrawls. : )

"Robyn Blumner is a civil liberties and labor law expert who writes about individual freedom, trade, globalization and workers’ rights. She is a columnist for the St. Petersburg Times in St. Petersburg, Fla., and syndicated by Tribune Media Services. E-mail her at blumner@sptimes.com"

This person doesn't believe in freedom. She would rather take away the freedom of anyone who thinks differently from herself. While it is clear that the electorate was tired of GOP rule, it is also clear from the last polls that the electorate is already beginning to tire of DEM rule. In simplistic logic, it is safe to say that neither party reflects the the will of the people, but have, instead, promoted party policy. The two party system no longer works because we have career politicians who are threatened by their own party to take the party stance. Our representatives, on both sides had dropped the ball. It's time to vote the career politicians out of office and clamor for term limits. This reporter is just as inciteful for the left as any inciteful reporter for the right and her column serves no constructive purpose.

Darwin - you know not of which you speak, which is a constant. I do actually watch birds, too. I also hold and have held a Master Bird-Banding Permit from the USGS for years for my own research, and have worked at one of the largest bird-banding research centers for another 30 years (starting at age 10). While bird-watchers are not scientists, I am indeed. That's why I band and study birds. There is much more to to Ornithology research than watching birds - biology, meteorology, geology, entomology, botany, etc. The purpose of my research, for which my banding permit was issued, is to determine the extent of population decline in neotropical migrant species, catharus thrushes in particular. That research also has to take into account the change in the climate, since migration timetables are shifting (backwards), and species are moving further North to reproduce, while others are moving South, like the lovely flocks of Canada Geese everyone has grown to love in Janesville that weren't here in the 70's. But anyway, I am a scientist, and I am aware of the climate change that has occured. I'm also aware that I can goad you into saying stupid things whenever I try, which amuses me. I don't have to call you any names -you do it to yourself, which amuses me even more. Keep it up and don't disappoint me. :)

foth-I'm sorry I messed up and hit the send before I had checked what I had written, but I did not have the time to amend and send anything else at that time. My final statement on this is, for me if there is to be reform I prefer it occur in the individual states. Even then the variables make it almost impossible to legislate a fair bill. Even the difference between cities and towns makes is difficult. Then when you think of the variables between 50 states it becomes ridiculous. I do not want national healthcare in any form enacted by our federal government. I apologize.

Did you actually read it, pepesmom? If so, then I am a bit confused by what you wrote. The overwhelming evidence is that over 100 years of government tinkering in every aspect of medical care is the reason why the system has "failed". I don't think it will survive any more federal government "solutions".

foth-I am not interested in coulds or shoulds, only a WILL as far as the healthcare reform is concerned. We are in need of reform in this area, but not as written in H.R.3200. FDR was in office when SS was enacted and the original bill stated that the money was not to be used for any other purpose, but Congress has borrowed from it with no hope of every paying it back. I will not be in this world when the bill in in fully affective, but my grandchildren and great-grandchildren are already going to be burdened with insurmountable debt which has risen with each decade. I am opposed to putting any of you in a situation that could possibly be worse than the one we are already in.

Those links I provided yesterday to Shawn Tully's proposed alternative healthcare plan are now 404. Here is the third installment of that series, with links to parts 1 and 2: http://money.cnn.com/2009/08/20/news/eco... Food for thought that isn't tainted with partisan bias.

Nice try dizzygirl, however, what I said does not constitute bigotry. Evidently, Universities with their standards of intelligence and knowledge are bigoted against stupidity. You are a victim again.

Bird watching is not a science, but nice try. Global cooling was a possibility in the 70's because we were still releasing Sulphur Dioxide which is an atmospheric coolant. Scientist take these variables such as the Milankovitch cycles into account when making such estimates about future warming.

Common sense is a meaningless term used by stupid people to put down smart people. It isn't a sense and it isn't common, especially amongst bird watchers on bear paths that don't exist.

Alliebaba - What exactly was your comment about, out of curiosity?? Looks rather biblical to me. Please explain.
-
FOTH, sorry, can't speak for that other 7% right now.

You might find these websites interesting in regard to weather. It was the winter and summer after my brothers were born and I remember it well.

http://www.citizenreviewonline.org/July_... (1936 heat wave Midwest)
http://www.crh.noaa.gov/arx/events/heatw...

http://www.answers.com/topic/1936-north-... (1936 cold wave)

"Republicans have very little understanding of the scientific process or the empiricism from which it is derived."
-
One word - Bigot!

Hey, what about the other 7% DiGriz! Chopped liver?? ;~)

It is not wise to draw conclusions about global climate change from observations of weather patterns over a decade or two. Likewise, it is totally meaningless to use year to year changes for this purpose.

May I assume killing all Republicans will bring Utopia?

"Only 12 percent of scientists in a poll released last month by the Pew Research Center say they are Republican or lean toward the GOP, while fully 81 percent of scientists say they are Democrats or lean Democratic."
-
I'm sorry Ms. Blumner. What that says to me, as a scientist (which, I AM BTW - Ornithology is, in fact, a science), is that only 12% of scientists, including myself, posess enough common sense to be free-thinking adults who could survive in the modern world if left to our own devices. The rest would perish.
-
Global warming is not the issue. Global warming is as natural to this planet is as global cooling (how many remember that from the 70's, huh???). The fact is, the planet we are on wobbles. Our orbit around the sun is not constant nor perfect. The temperature of the sun fluctuates, as does the amount and type of radiation it produces, etc., etc., etc. We are heading into another ice age soon, no matter how much crap is in the atmosphere. It's going to happen, just like it did the last few times. What the issue is, is people having jobs as lobbyists, with nice cushy chairs and big desks and security provided by as many people as they can scare to death, or convince that the world is going to die because of something that humans did short of atomic weapons - something as simple as car exhaust or cow flatuation. THAT's the issue - not that it's happening, but WHY - that it's all the fault of human beings alone, and if you don't get on their bandwagon and donate to their cause and give them a job, we are all going to die because of global warming.
-
News flash - We are all going to die. No one who reads this, however, will die from global warming as defined by those people who benefit from the fear they foment.
-
Ms. B asks "Why are they so blind to the looming crisis?" Well, I can give them a reason.... It's called a POLAR ICE CAP, coming "soon" to a continent near you. Oh, and by the way, I don't buy "shade-grown coffee." Coffee is coffee. The SG crowd is still drinking it, which is still contributing to demand, so the rain forests still suffer. Hypocrites and neerdowells....
-
Democrat scientists, who are VERY liberal, do, in fact, lack common sense in my experience. They are very sensitive and empathetic, which is all very nice and good, but lack common sense and/or the ability to use intuitive and logical thought processes to develop rational inferences and arguments based on degrees of evidence (empirical and circumstantial) - Reason. The most intelligent man in the world can still be killed by a bear. A man with common sense stays out of the bear's path. The man who think's he is smarter than everyone else and more morally justified in his actions will eventually get eaten by a bear. Just ask Tim Treadwell, the "bear scientist" who contributed to global warming via the Grizzly's flatulance after digesting him... :)

Hmmm, more ocean ice this year than in 2007; why did the scientists at MSNBC not report this news?
http://www.examiner.com/x-5182-Dallas-We...

Janesville Gazette, P. 7B, Friday August 21, 2009. Story line, "In Hot Water", "World Sets Ocean Temperature Record". How does this reconcile for those of you who get your climate data from the scientist at FOX News?

darwin1, what it is with you and slave owners? I have already shown you who founded the KKK, and you said, that was history. So get off the slave thing your ignorance is permeating the whole blog.

The founders were a group of elitist land owning slave holders. Women had no rights and unless you owned property you had few rights so please spare me the founding fathers speeches. This is an example of the half facts and half details Republicans always present.

Republicans have very little understanding of the scientific process or the empiricism from which it is derived. You should read about the Dover Penn Intelligent Design trial and you will understand why they have such difficulty with science:
http://www.pamd.uscourts.gov/kitzmiller/...

Sorry for the confusion, futurerichguy. My "elitist ruling class" comment was only to reiterate the last paragraph of pepesmom's previous post, about one health plan for the rulers and another plan for "the people". Elitism isn't about being smart. Elitism is about being an oligarch.

Hey everyone, I know bantering back and forth is fun, but this issue is so important. This type of forum where we can trade experiences and insights regarding the issue shouldn't be filled with so much other info that people decide not to read further. There is a lot of food for thought in these blogs and I read many of them, but sometimes I miss an important entry while skimming through the trivia. Thanks

future; I guess we dont have to ever worry about you being in power then. When was the last time a religious leader - in this country anyway- "forced" anything on the masses?

If "elitist ruling class" means that smart people are in power, then I'm all for it. Not sure though what you mean about exempting themselves from the rules they force on the masses. Isn't that a more appropriate statement for the clergy and religious leaders?

Right on RAF and pepesmom! I forget which one of our founding fathers warned against an elitist ruling class that exempts itself from the very rules it forces upon the masses.

Bucky the HSA approach is a good start. Prices should be clearly posted for all services, or at least available in a hand-out. By having no consumer driven competition for prices, only insurance, the escalation will rise at horrendous levels; like now. When was the last time you went to the electronics store and took a TV home, and then 2 months later got a bill to tell you what it cost. The next logical step is having the payments made strictly by the consumer.

The biggest problem with the H.R.3200 is, even though they say you can keep your present plan, there are many restrictions in the bill imposed on the private insurers and if the insurance you have does not fit that criteria you will be forced to look for a policy which does and if none is found you will be thrown into the government pot. The long term outcome of a 'public option' is such an unknown that if it is enacted and the long term outcome is a failure there would be no going back and by that time private insurers could be out of business. If we could clean up the waste, 'roads to nowhere' type legislation and corruption within our government it would be a better start. It is an issue that should be handled by the states, not the federal government.
Another big issue is that Congress has exclude themselves and other federal employees from the bill. How anyone would support a bill written by ones who have the best health plan available, paid for in one way or another by us, is beyond my comprehension. To fairly write a bill that will never affect them is impossible. There is no way to accurately figure the cost and this country cannot afford any more mistakes, particularly at this time.
Either they can join the rest of us or let us join them by putting us on their plan.

Thanks for asking, buckyfan. In another discussion thread, I posted the links below as a good place to start a discussion from a different perspective: America needs shovels, not more crap. Specifically, peel back decades worth of government mandates and prohibitions responsible for creating most of the problems in our healthcare industry. (In two parts. There may now be a third installment but the website's linking isn't very well organized.)

http://money.cnn.com/2009/08/14/news/eco......

http://money.cnn.com/2009/08/18/news/eco......

And it would be a horrible shame if the HSA went away. I used to have a flex savings account, and the HSA is worlds better!

MooShoo-excellent post.

FOTH said: :The phrase, 'not sure what ______ pays', is the primary reason why health care costs climb at twice the rate of inflation."

So, what's your suggested solution? Or, what is the government's plan to handle this? And do you think that plan will work?

Zoom, since you seem to know more about the health reform proposals than me, feel free to jump in. RAF too.

Let's have a real discussion about this.

"It costs me $35 a month ($420 a year) in premiums (not sure what the company pays)."

The phrase, "not sure what ______ pays", is the primary reason why health care costs climb at twice the rate of inflation.

Zoom, the very same reason tort reform was never and probably will never be done...cash is king, until there is term limits.

"If it was so simple, why didn't the Republicans fix this during their six year majority?"
-
My guess is, as everything in politics, it is/was about the money. The same as today.

"Portability of insurance, protection from pre-existing conditions are all things that can be done with a simple law..."

There are a lot more problems with our health care than just those two issues. If it was so simple, why didn't the Republicans fix this during their six year majority?

buckyfan said: "For example, I personally am nervous about having the government take over our health care or provide free health care for all because I fear people will be going to the doctor for every little thing, or unsavory doctors lining their pockets with unnecessary tests, etc."

No bills being discussed propose that health care should be "free for all"! That's a common red herring being spread by anti-reformers. One of the goals is to make insurance more affordable for those that don't have it. That doesn't mean people won't premiums, copays, etc. The vast majority of people without health insurance live in a household where at least one person has a job.

Bucky you are right. Portability of insurance, protection from pre-existing conditions are all things that can be done with a simple law; not over-haul. As far as your HSA, it will be gone when any over-haul is accomplished.

Ms. Blumner wrote the article to stir up the conservative republicans and religious right. If she really wanted to pull your chains, she would have thrown in a few definitions for illustrative value, such as:
*
Paleontology: study of fossilized bones described in scripture to prove fossils are no more than one day older than Adam's rib.
*
Geology: explanation that all geologic features found on earth, which is the center of the universe, are leftovers from the great flood. Sub-theory explains that plate techtonics are the geologic force Moses applied to stone tablets. Pre-Cambrian is 6,000 to 10,000 years old.
*
Physics: energy, motion, substance and form can be explained in the unifying theory of LET THERE BE LIGHT, which proves carbon dating is a socialist conspiracy.
*
Biology: scientific theory that all life on earth, which is the center of the universe, evolves from Genesis 1-2 and explains the diversity and complexity of life forms.
*
Astronomy: supernatural miracles explain everything.
*
Meteorology: advanced conservative study put forth by scholars such as R. Limbaugh to prove global warming occurs only in the frontal cortex of liberals.

Sorry my last post was so long. I normally try not to be so long-winded.

So, let's say we decided to create our own "middle-ground" party. What would its stance be on the issues? Seriously, would the independents who are forced to vote one way or the other be able to agree on anything?

Everyone spends so much time bashing the other side. Instead of us bashing one another, could we actually find common ground?

For example, I personally am nervous about having the government take over our health care or provide free health care for all because I fear people will be going to the doctor for every little thing, or unsavory doctors lining their pockets with unnecessary tests, etc.

But, I do think there should be health insurance that covers catastrophic (expensive) care. We have gotten away from looking at insurance as a safety net for major problems and instead want it to cover every doctor visit, dental appointment, etc.

Insurance like what I currently have might be a nice middle ground. My insurance has a $2,000 deductible for one person, $3,000 for two, etc. I have a health savings account (HSA) in which I have money taken out of my paycheck pretax to cover the entire deductible (and it isn't use-it-or-lose-it).

The plan covers annual physicals/screenings 100 percent, but I pay for everything else up till my deductible is met. After that, the health plan covers everything. It costs me $35 a month ($420 a year) in premiums (not sure what the company pays). If I choose to go to the doctor a lot, or I have a serious illness, the most I pay in a calendar year is $3,420 ($285 per month) which is far less than many people pay a month for "employee plus one" health insurance.

After the first year, I replenish what I have spent out of my HSA. The HSA also lets you set aside pretax money to pay for your medications, and I have a fairly reasonable drug plan included with the insurance program (free necessary drugs like blood pressure meds, $4 for many other drugs and full cost for not-medically-necessary drugs like nasal spray or acne creams).

Certainly, we would still need programs to cover those unable to work or too poor to afford insurance, and we definitely could do as Obama suggests and find ways to eliminate current inefficiencies.

So, would this be a viable option for both sides? If not, why? What would make it better?

Maybe I'm expecting too much from folks on the blog. Maybe you all just enjoy bashing one another. While I enjoy sending out a nice flame once in a while, myself, I think it's time Americans start looking for answers instead of constantly fighting.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0...
+
Where are all the liberals that are usually hollering about "separation of church and state" on this issue?

Bush 2 vetoed a bill that would have freed up financing for embryonic stem cell research. He claimed such research went beyond "moral boundaries."

This is proof that believers falsely claim the moral highground.

This article does not mention the scientists who refute the idea of global warming being caused by us even though I'm sure there has been some impact. There is just as much evidence that the present situation is the normal,cyclical climate changes. Remember reading of the ice age.
Party affiliation has nothing to do with it except to be used by politicians to try and push their agenda by trying to influence the ones susceptible to their scare tactics.
Aruba, I think you better ask the druggist what immodium is used for.

RetiredAirForce, it's bad enough you have the troubles I already know about. Now the "hat" troubles have really got me worried. Go to a tailor.

On "whom" depends on "whom" stands up to be counted, Fool-on-the-Hill. So far, just one has volunteered, but the day is young, old buddy.

Be careful, Fool-on-the-Hill, your last comment has come dangerously close to a "vicious and horrible attack".

But an attack on "whom", Bill? This is clearly an eye-of-beholder situation. :~) Besides, I was just checking to see if you were listening... you being my pal and all.

Excellent, Gaz... err, Hank! Do you do any other impressions?

our "what" troubles...your choice.

Oh Hank, please let me know hat troubles you think I have...this should be fun.

FoolOnTheHill, while it is statistically possible for g-man and I to have been in the same room, the odds are against it. If you can tell me who he is (by email of course) then I can answer your question.
*
However, you can be assured that your pal BillNewbie and I would never be seen in the same room.
*
And if you're trying to mess with RetiredAirForces's head, stop it. He's got enough trouble.

Bill it is only words. The fun part is watching supposed adults act like fools.

The impudence of those who use thinly veiled obscene invectives disguised as Metamucil and Imodium jokes is a site to behold. RetiredAirForce must be quite effective with what he posts for them to try to drive him away as they have. Unfortunately for this supercilious crowd, their method is ineffectual. I admire RetiredAirForce for his persistence in spite of the repeated attempts by a few to goad him into silence.

Be careful, Fool-on-the-Hill, your last comment has come dangerously close to a "vicious and horrible attack".

darwin1 - you've nailed it; "Global Warming is an inexact science so we go by the best preponderance of evidence."

I will correct my statement regarding wildfire contribution of CO2. I should have said that wildfire's have the largest impact on overall CO2 balance in the atmosphere, releasing as much in one California wildfire as the state emits in months. And yes, we can debate that, as different plant species release different concentrations of CO2 as they burn.

When you look at a forest fire you have to consider the entire cycle of events, not just the burn itself. It takes decades for new growth to mature into the carbon sink it once was. As it matures, sunlight reaches the forest floor and speeds the process of decay, releasing CO2.

There's plenty to debate here, and we can research scientific data to counter each other on all aspects of global warming. The bottom line is that it's a reality and we see the effect, but we have no definitive proof as to the cause.

Just wondering... has anyone here ever seen HankJanes and Gazettefan in the same room together? ;~)

RetiredAirForce, your 9:56 post is a perfect blend of form and content.

Hank, there are “nuts” from every political perspective, for instance some make absurd comments with no basis of fact to support them.

FoolOnTheHill, libertarianism, in practice, is a cry for little or no government. Libertarians feel they can ignore the laws they don't like. Whenever you see a run-down property that is a blight on a neighborhood, you can bet the owner of that property is a libertarian.
*
Such people flail the constitution around because the constitution doesn't include the specifics of how things such as building codes are good for a community. Such people only care about THEIR rights.

Generalizations, name calling, and propaganda. Oh, I forgot hypocritical and desperate.

HankJames, anarchy is an absence of government rule, which, for obvious reasons, is inherently unstable. While there are so-called anarchist libertarians, the principle of protected human rights necessitates a constitutional form of government. In fact, most libertarians advocate a stronger, less ambiguous U.S. Constitution. In my opinion, two or three new Amendments should just about do it. :~)

Libertarianism is a half-way house to anarchy.

Everytime RAF expresses his thoughts, he weakens the nation.

I don't see his post here...something carried over from another topic?

RAF, just paraphrasing our friendly Mr. Officerfriendly1. I got a little off the story line and to be more technically accurate to Officerfriendly1, the paraphrase should read: Less scientists = more REPUBLICANS.

MooShoo, please provide something to back up your statement.

The sad thing is is that I knew what paper this was from before finishing the first paragraph. Why can't the St. Petersburgs Times go out of business yet?

" Once you get to a certain level of CO2 in the atmosphere the oceans become acidic and that acid wells up on to land and can kill millions. It happened during the Cambrian period." Millions of what? The plants and animals that didn't exist on land at that time?

More Libertarians = Less SCIENTISTS!

I've believed for some time now that, If we don't get rid of the two party system... SOON (& I'm not sure yet, If its already too late) we are screwed, big time.

I don't believe anything that comes out of the mouth of either side anymore, because both sides are known to be "confirmed" liars. They say what they think we want to hear, to get our votes.. once they're securely placed into their official seats.. we see the true incumbent.

The health-care reform issue is a Great example! We've had heated bills similar come up over the past several years.. i.e. The Patriot Act. Once it hits the news, & Government officials (Local, State, or Federal) learn the majority of constituents don't want the bill to pass.. said officials do what they do best.. Feed us a bunch of distractions like, "well, you know these bills are really complicated, & we're still studying the 400 pages.. I haven't made any decisions on it yet." Then the very next day, I see they voted on the Bill & our Senator (the very one who was studying the 400 pages the day before) voted for the bill (Sen. Kohl I'm referring to). It happens over & over, because its the best way to avoid explaining your reasons for, "following party lines, no matter how bad it hurts our Country. I'm not saying Kohl is the only one.. They all do it.

Very intelligent...yes that was sarcastic, because you are not.

RAF...You need to start drinking Imodium by the barrel. Because your full of it, and yourself!

darwin; your soooo smart - during the Cambrian period? really? wow those little bastard algae polluted the earth even back then with their fossil fuels & cars - wait, I thought you said it was MAN MADE emmissions doing "this" to our earth. Could it be just a natural cooling & warming cycle - "evolution" if you will Mr.Darwin

Bush Dos vetoed a bill that would have loosened financing for embryonic stem cell research. He claimed such research went beyond "moral boundaries."

This is proof that believers falsely claim the moral highground.

Oriley, yes what is your source? I believe that the recent IPCC data on water vapor is that it has a cooling effect during the day and a warming effect at night. See the Nova special called "The Dimming Sun." The reality is that Global Warming is an inexact science so we go by the best preponderance of evidence. And the IPCC has revised its numbers down on several occasions as new data has become available. Conservatives, though, do not ever revise or admit they might be wrong: they are always victims of a liberal conspiracy. Once you get to a certain level of CO2 in the atmosphere the oceans become acidic and that acid wells up on to land and can kill millions. It happened during the Cambrian period.

Some people just want simple answers to things they don't understand. Why is the sky blue? God made it that way. Why did that hurricane happen? God did it. Why are humans on earth? God put us here. If you never want to learn anything that's fine I guess. The same reason conservatives don't want to elect anyone with too much fancy book-learnin, and want to nominate people like Sarah Palin.

"Fact is, the largest contributor is the hot air coming from Bill O'Riley, combined with the methane he emits from poor digestion"
+
This is what you call "facts", and you ask someone else to state their source?
+
I suppose we should all be listening to keith "overbite" olbermann, or chris "no" mathews. Who has the better ratings between O"Reilly, olbermann, and mathews?

ORiley, your assessment that forest fires are the largest contributor to CO2 emissions is false. Fact is, the largest contributor is the hot air coming from Bill O'Riley, combined with the methane he emits from poor digestion. Seriously though, state your source.

So what you are saying is don't trust your scientists any more than you do your politicians.
Good advice.

You actually have 100's of very credible scientists who discount global warming. Many scientists have agendas, just like everyone else. If your getting millions of $$$'s in government grants to study the effects of global warming, it's pretty likely your research is going to say that it's a huge problem. While if you are a scientist employed by a massive coal producer, I doubt your research will say global warming is a huge problem. I would not put much stock in ANY scientist who has big political ties to EITHER party. As the basis behind science (objective reason and analysis) becomes compromised once you inject political beliefs.

Dear Ms. Bobblehead,

I take offense to your article that Republican scientists are united in hiding truths (to further a political agenda) rather than expose them. Perhaps YOU are hiding the facts in an attempt to divert attention from the miserable public policies of the Democratic party? Hmmm?

Let me share some facts with you;

Water vapor accounts for 95% of the Greenhouse Gas effect. Man's contribution of water vapor in the atmosphere = .001%

CO2 accounts for roughly 4% of greenhouse gases. Man's contribution of CO2 = .117%.

The largest source of CO2 in the atmosphere? Forest fires.

Man's overall contribution (anthropogenic) to the greenhouse gas effect (CO2, CH4, N20, CFC's); .28%

Even if man were able to reduce CO2 contributions by 30%, a significant number, the net result MIGHT be a 1/20 of a degree drop in temperature by 2050.

Stick to labor law, Ms Bobblehead. You're no scientist or political analyst.

Did someone on here actually have the guile to say the republicans are the party of cheat on your taxes, or am I just in the Twilight zone here??
Now that's one of the better ones I have heard in a while, considering half of the Obama cabinet (including the secretary of the cabinet, who over seas the IRS; Tim Geithner) were all tax cheats.
To funny

Any good scientist, who deductively reasons on logic, and objectivity , would not identify with either political party. If you can not see by now, just how corrupt both the parties are, you should not even be giving scientific opinion, because you obviously can not analyze anything in an objective manner.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wmc60JmaL...

Democrats vs. The US Constitution

yes republicans are great at ignoring the facts.

Just ignore her. Facts and civility mean nothing to her.

Justsayno...who said GM would not be building cars?

The fact that Republicans are dumb is not news to any of us. They complain about the cost of health care but, never complained about the cost of war or even bothered to ask where the billions were going. They complain about cash for clunkers but, leave out that GM will now build cars directly because of the cash for clunkers program. Republicans don't "believe" in global warming due to their lack of education in science and inability to understand the world around them. The Moral party ? Are you kidding ? Cheat on your wife, cheat on your taxes, and call yourself the moral party, disgusting !

FOTH until term limits are impossed nothing will change...between now and then we are stuck choosing sides from one you have least opposition to.

RAF, I don't believe any independent or third party will have a snowball's chance until a majority of Americans have found the strength to emotionally detach their political loyalties long enough to start listening to their own common sense.

Reasonable people can disagree on the proper role of government. John K. Galbraith and William F. Buckley were on opposite ends of the political spectrum but shared a warm friendship for many years. They had mutual respect and probably didn't call each other an idiot or a moron too often. Libertarians often debate politics with other libertarians. The main difference when libertarians debate is there are no blind loyalties or silly emotional attachments to some "club" getting in the way of any rational discussion of ideas. (Well, that and the tacit agreement that reality will decide who is right or wrong.)

You are absolutley correct MikeF.

CallitasIseeit- I am willing to bet that if we were "to vote out the extremists who are dividing the country only for re-election purposes", there would not be any need for term limits.

Aruba, your depth of knowledge on my politics are about as deep as your depth on the national level. I am a registered independent that leans more libertarian than republican. Until a third party is actually given a chance in this country my votes will favor more republican candidates than democrats. So go back to watching MSNBC, I hear Keith has a special report coming up on Dick Cheney again.

GF what was that about insults? For the record if I live long enough to need Metamucil I'll be sure to let you know.

Well than you do care what the parties believe, especially if they don't believe in science, correct?

I don't really care about what party believes what. Government without science = disaster waiting to happen.

Both the republicans and the democrats have lost touch with the "middle majority" who cannot stand the workings of either the right or the left. JFK would be a republican today by the current democratic standards. Bush 2 seemed a lot more like a tax and spend democrat than a right wing extremist. i don't know what to compare Limbaugh to.

We the people need to vote out the extremists who are dividing the country only for re-election purposes, install term limits and get back to a government that reflects our beliefs and wants.

I could insult the person writing t his article, as it is purley an article meaning to offend others. Mainly those that think freely and use their brains for more than left or right wing sponges, spewing the rhetoric from both sides.

1. Global Warming may or may not be a significant issue, and the impacts on climate change may be more or less of an effect than some scientists have stated or denied. When our governments start riding bicycles to congress and start living on farms (forget about cow flatulence), then maybe I will pay begin to listen to them. In the meantime, I di not believe the evidence provided indicates we will have any sognificant impact on global climate change.

2) Abortion, personally -- it is a womans choice. I also believe the man should have some say, he was there as well. But in the end, the woman makes the decision on the fetus.

3) embryonic stem cells - if science can gain knowledge from the cells and provide a significant solution to a given medical condition, we should use that as a means to finding the solution.

4) Guns - we should be allowed to carry a conceiled handgun ANYWHERE in America.

See -- I could go on. I think for myself and evaluate based upon what I believe to be true. I may change my mind, buts its not based upon what some malcontent article states, its based upon my own invenstigation. So don't try to change my mind. I will find the information on my own. Its people like this that make getting to some equalibrium position impossible.

If that's the case, he must forget it everyday.

And he forgot to drink his Metamucil this morning.

gazettefan...I can answer your question about RAF. He's Republican!

http://gazettextra.com/news/2009/aug/03/...

Today, August 19th, according to WCLO, Corvina's has been issued a 14 day eviction notice.

RAF, how come all you like to do is insult people?

GF, with your history on these pages of talking about the bible; if I wanted to share anything about it, you would be the last person on the list to share it with.

RAF, what are your thoughts on Ecclesiastes?

USAret, don't waste your time. The accusers demeaning others for listening to people on the right are the ones listening to mouth pieces on the left...once this level of discourse is reached, one mouth piece is better than the other, you cannot have a meaningful conversation.

"This is proof that believers falsely claim the moral highground."
-
That is proof you don't think.

futurerichguy: Why do you want to be rich? I mean, the party of the people wants to share your wealth with those who have nothing so why become rich, just wait on the sidelines and you will get your just rewards and not have to work at all. Please, share your wealth with us.
Also, after you finish sharing your wealth, take a few lessons in courtesy. Not everyone in either party is a tool of someone like you imply. You insult both sides with such a remark.

PanamaRed, most of the users you site are Glen Beck Tools. As an engineer and scientist, I can't imagine voting Republican in it's current state.

http://www.350.org/

Bush 2 vetoed a bill that would have loosened financing for embryonic stem cell research. He claimed such research went beyond "moral boundaries."

This is proof that believers falsely claim the moral highground.

Ms. Blumner hit the nail on the proverbial head in this opinion piece. I am not a fan of generalizing but there has been a definite shift in the Republican party toward taking rigid stance on particular issues even in the face of substantiated evidence to the contrary. They seem more concerned with following strict Republican dogma than with improving the lives of American citizens. This trend can also be found in the followers of each party. Each party has their extremists but after listening to Glen Beck and Rush Limbaugh can anyone deny they don't have a screw loose? It's one conspiracy after another and totally deficient of anything that even remotely resembles reality, much less any hint of truth. The Democrats can't touch the Republicans when it comes to fear mongering and artificially inflated anxiety. (can anyone say death panel).
I would have hoped by this time in our country's history we would have a legitimate third political party from which to choose candidates. We need MORE rational, thoughtful and meaningful discourse to help solve complex issues facing this nation, not less. Screaming "socialism" and comparing Mr. Obama to Hitler does nothing to further the health care debate. Just read some of the comments. Doesn't billnewbie's post offer meaningful differing commentary on Ms. Blumners article? Kinsohn is more concerned with the phrasing of the problem (climate change or global warming) than he is with the problem itself. (BTW Kinsohn, there is scientific proof man's activities on this earth have effected changes in our climate). While you can put labels on both political parties, the Republicans flaunt their demogoguery with pride. As Ms. Blumner suggests, Republicans need to adopt and genuinely portray a more inclusive perspective if they are to offer meaningful leadership.

prounion: Please stop assuming you know my views, beliefs based on party affiliation. You have no clue how or what I believe in, who I will or will not vote for. Remember, the other side could assume the same about you following the party spiel, hook, line and sinker.

I guess I don't understand what Ms. Blumner was trying to accomplish when writing this article?

As always Prounion, you didn't read these articles very carefully. Ms. Blumner wrote "56 percent of its members oppose funding of embryonic stem cell research", and the article about the boy who went to China specifically stated that the stem cells they used were not from embryos. If you want relevance you must take the time to be more accurate and not be in such a hurry to demean people you disagree with like the author pathetically tried to do.

You guys didn't draw a comparison between the Republican's opposition to stem cell research and the article where a Janesville kid had to go to China to get treatment?
.
It doesn't concern you the numbers in the republican party that carry on with the illogical beliefe that evolution is not how human life developed on this planet?
.
No wonder republicans turn out in angry masses when told to.

I heard a rumor people actually pay for content such as this which is published in the hard/e-copy of the Janesville Gazette. Is that really true? Suckers!

Bill, it is interesting when the numbers are looked at over whom the “demons” are that donate to politics for influence. During the Bush years the mantra was over big oil, big medicine, and big Parma. When reality shows over the past 20 years big legal (lawyers) donated 3 times as much, as an industry, than the other three and more total than the other three combined. The reason we never heard the cry of big legal, over 75% went to the party crying over the other 3 demons.

And what a wonderfull future the democrats would have us live in.How great it will be to "charge" our plug-in electric/hybrid cars (wich this administration is and will continue to push on us) while prices on electricity skyrocket from cap and trade.

Nice analogy, urinate in the wind. As this is more akin to a poll driven responsiveness, not really something you can lay at the feet of Republicans.

Lawyers, don't you love 'em? Give one a license to practise law and suddenly they become experts on scientists, ethics, religion, climate and the psyche of republicans, among other things. And watch the democrats eat it up being willing to believe any disparaging thing anyone can think of to say about republicans such as the astute and persuasive commentary that Janesvillean added. He must be an expert on wind and its effects on urinary streams as he demonstrates with one of his usual exhibitions of what one says when he's all wet. At least now we know what he's all wet with.

Global Warming is proof the GOP doesn't like science? There is no proof of man-made global warming! In fact, the globe has cooled over the last 10 years, they can't begin to model even the past climate change accurately, the left has had to change the terminology to 'climate change' from 'global warming,' and they have to take votes of selected scientists to prove what they call a scientific fact. That's Democratic science for you, and THAT'S scary.

The Republicans used to have a sane core running things, but they've turned management over to the fringe. The only thing that matters to them on any issue is, "Will this make liberals mad?" There is no further analysis necessary. Heads in the sand doesn't begin to describe it: it's more like urinating into the wind.