Okay, gun fetish folks, tell those 20 dead elementary school children at Sandy Hook School in Newtown, CT. why you think everyone should be packing firearms!

"MB Studio Productions High Capacity Magazine PSA"

h ttp://ww w.youtube.c om/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=7F1nPSNnaBo

“In the aftermath of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting in Newtown, Conn., Gallup finds 58% of Americans in favor of strengthening the laws covering the sale of firearms, up from 43% in 2011.”

* * *

Americans Want Stricter Gun Laws, Still Oppose Bans

by Lydia Saad

(gallup)

“Gallup polling shows Americans are not prepared to relinquish their Second Amendment rights, as majorities reject banning the possession of handguns by civilians, or even outlawing the manufacture or possession of certain "semi-automatic guns known as assault rifles"; but they are clearly more open to further restricting the sale of guns, including with more background checks and bans on high-capacity magazines.”

In U.S., 38% Dissatisfied and Want Stricter Gun Laws

by Lydia Saad

(gallup)

I didn't mean to infer that you disagree with Jesus. In fact, I believe you try hard to agree with Jesus. I wrote that comment before I saw your comment about exercise. I have to admit that I greatly enjoy cycling, and that enjoyment has as much to do with my choice as any social responsibility. Plain old thrift also plays a factor.

Oops

Lighten up harry, no need to paint me as disagreeing with Jesus, just saying its good exercise.

Lighten up harry, no need to paint me as disagreeing with Jesus, just saying its good exercise.

You may think my efforts insignificant, but I believe Jesus Christ would disagree with you. He said, “You have been faithful over a few things; I will make you ruler over many things.”

Its good exercise harry, help you live longer.

That's it, lets find a way to make volcanos erupt, and offset global warming. You solved it myth nice job. Sarcasm off.

“Keep riding your bike carpooling or whatever makes you feel like you are saving the earth from disaster.”

Thank you for reminding us that I take personal responsibility, which I believe is one of the bedrock principles of conservatism.

I sure do remember the ozone depletion debate, and I’m glad you brought that up because it’s relevant to the current misinformation campaign waged by those who reject the findings of 97% of the world’s climate scientists. Let’s review.

In 1974, chemists Sherry Rowland and Mario Molina warned that CFCs could attack the protective ozone layer.

Even though the scientific community widely accepted their conclusions, politicians, bean counters, and industrial spokespeople mounted a large public misinformation campaign. These skeptics loudly proclaimed that economic disaster would occur if we phased out CFCs.

Then, in 1987, discovery of an actual “ozone hole” led to widespread acceptance of scientists’ findings, and CFCs were phased out.

There was no economic disaster.

And I believe we can also address anthropogenic CO2 without economic disaster. Thanks for bringing this up.

Actually a volcano eruption especially a big one would cool the planet. In fact they have before. Just look up the Year without a Summer.

If that comment is meant to insinuate that a volcanic eruption would mitigate a person's attempt at emitting less greenhouse gases by way of adding extra warmth. Then that shows you are ignorant of climate science. Which in turns points further to your position being the result of political expediency.

If thats the case how in the world do you feel free being so constrained by the party you make home to go along with the rest of the flock?

What rights are you having stolen from you ithink/tiredofit?

Believe what you want to. I am not trying to convince you of my position, just explaining my skepticism. Keep riding your bike carpooling or whatever makes you feel like you are saving the earth from disaster. One volcano eruption will wipe out a million years of your efforts.

Remember the hole in the ozone?

ww w.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html

ww w.law.cornell.edu/constitution/second_amendment

“Scientists predicted global cooling and a coming ice age as little as 40 years ago.” That’s a smoke screen. Much data has been collected and analyzed in the last 40 years. In addition, computer advances have greatly improved the art of predicting. In view of this, I’d say current predictions are much more relevant that those of 40 years ago.

“Also they didn't predict the lack of warming in the last 10 to 14 years.” As I pointed out before, the flattening of measured atmospheric temperatures doesn’t mean that the earth hasn’t warmed, because much of the excess heat has gone into the oceans.

In case you don’t remember, I’ll repeat some of the key phrases from the study in Nature that I referenced earlier.

“Our results hence point at the key role of the ocean heat uptake in the recent warming slowdown.”

And this, far from undermining climate science…

“…strengthens our confidence in the robustness of our climate models.”

Scientists predicted global cooling and a coming ice age as little as 40 years ago. Also they didn't predict the lack of warming in the last 10 to 14 years. I see lots of theory and possible links etc. But I am not convinced that there is a cause and effect.