No person

No person has rights unless we all do.

My Friends, I love you.

My child, I love you as much as any parent loves theirs. They want everything for you, I will give it to you, you know.

If you hurt, I will protect you.

Then,

You will love your childs.....


If You Are Allowed To [see war here] and don't live bad places you stupid unfortunate cunts

Oh yeah, love.

My baby.

Lets roast it. Say hello to my mom in Iraq.

She had a child, first it got fried, then she went to get it.

I fucking love war.

Lets drop a real frying pan.

You want to hear a description?

First, turn your oven to 450.

Then I will tell you that is like a freezer.


You want scary?


No, you do not. I will show you ugly. I am a physicist. I will hurt you.

We don't know know anything like nakashima, or dreseden. You do not know what our planet will be like, If You Are Unfortunate Enough Not To Get Instantly Burned To an Instant Crisp Without Hearing Your Child Crackle First.

Fuck Off. If You Are LUCKY. LETS TAKE A LOOK....

HTTP/stuffedinaincineratorandthenyouwaittillyougetyourskinstucktothewall...

Lust

Admiration for each other.

love is

i met her and right away she looked and tiny but no look but each knew so maybe ast home later thinking about fucking stupid power play canadians, actually not to bad, markov good shot? HAHAS, then drowsy today i rember the silly things.

Store, walking to see my frozen pizza, with feta cheezes, where is it. WTF? Do they sell it. yeh i remebers them having it from last time and I thought about it with burnt tomatoes and feta sausages and all the greases and tight crussts, the her wht the fuck did that come from and i went to the store many times.


Never seern herr.


Yse I did.

I married her.

You know it, she loved me so much. I coulld not have hurt anyone more if I I tokk our little bboy and stuck a pipe up his ass into his skull and let him screech.

That is hate, and who gives a fuck if it doesn'tr happen to my little girl.

I will take your child and say hello aand then pass by as you you take her to the swing and push her than you smile in th4 warm sun.

I wish that for everytone.
That is heaven, hey? You and you childs, they is happiest as they can.

That is heaven,


when I know


you


and your tiny baybe have this closeness that they know you to hold them. They feel comfort, you have it you give, you get love back.




What do you want for othters. Your car is driving over 3 months child. You look?

Get the fuck out to put gas into your pathetic vehicle, and stomp on a baby while mommy gets her ccunt split with a machete while she still will not fall to bring the food to her baybeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.

Off the top of my head....

mikmik said...

Some people starve and die when they are childs. We have bones only, and diahrea, we been bit.

Where is mommy, she is cutting raped and cut into her cunt, she only had had the tiny task of getting a fiddy poun sack, carry it to me, for FUCKS SAKE.

Thanks for making me.

I am dying. Mike will say this for me.

Will you?


I am fine, how are you?

This is a canadian thought.. I got inspiration for this thought at Canadian Cynic.

Of course it isn't only canadian, it is a human thought. I cannot wait to melt you with fusiions.

You will die when you look at the bright spot it will hurt you so fucking much, it will it is to late you read this you are in indescribable pain i put gas on you and lie into you eye you cant remember you hurt, you fucking beg me, you fucking beg me with every hope you have.

Fuck off, and beg me to kill you. i cant cunt, i am dead as well it is a thing it is over ever thing you loved is hert beyond what you feel and you wish to die but you will only burn for the next 4 secons is it hot you dont know pain.

Fucking stab you through de eyes, with an awl, red hot, haha, you looked, not dead, fuckheads.

Dada on flight one he dont die, you niether.

No more childs, only melted skins and crying for you to help but you cant see cunt.

It is 6 months old and stuck to the pavement. You die, but you cant kill it to help it.

You do not know pain.

Not even close.

Because We Are.

What makes you

Libertarian is all good.

What good are your rights when a dying man is taking your possessions.

O woman will sell herself to provide food for her kids. That is fine. But her kids will grow up, and fuck you up.

That is libertarian, no that is pain, and that is what Ron Paul brings. To 30% of the population, if not more.
Reply | Parent | posted 06:22 pm on 12/23/2007
Previewing your comment:

comment icon You said
Reply to this comment:
Logged in as mikmik (Not you? Log out)
NEW expand collapse mikmik (See profile | I'm a fan of mikmik)
Do not forget that dying man will kill you if he thinks you have weapons.
Then he will the next victim with possessions with those weapons.


I'm not aware of too many things, I know what I know if you what I mean.
Reply | Parent | posted 06:24 pm on 12/23/2007
Previewing your comment:

comment icon You said
Reply to this comment:
Logged in as mikmik (Not you? Log out)
NEW expand collapse mikmik (See profile | I'm a fan of mikmik)
Know it.

It will happen. It does always, sorry, all ways.

Land mines, mofo. Your fucking guns in Canada.

Hah. :(----
Reply | Parent | posted 06:27 pm on 12/23/2007
Previewing your comment:

comment icon You said
Reply to this comment:
Logged in as mikmik (Not you? Log out)
NEW expand collapse mikmik (See profile | I'm a fan of mikmik)
No person has rights unless all people have equal rights.


Get that the fuck through your skull.
Reply | Parent | posted 06:29 pm on 12/23/2007
Previewing your comment:

comment icon You said
Reply to this comment:
Logged in as mikmik (Not you? Log out)
NEW expand collapse mikmik (See profile | I'm a fan of mikmik)
That is the most important saying in history.

Who said it?



Me

:('
Reply | Parent | posted 06:32 pm on 12/23/2007
Previewing your comment:

comment icon You said
Reply to this comment:
Logged in as mikmik (Not you? Log out)
NEW expand collapse mikmik (See profile | I'm a fan of mikmik)
Every life is precious. Then they all are.



Then they all are.

When is your life precious?

tell me, Ron fucking Paul.

You go tell me.
Reply | Parent | posted 06:47 pm on 12/23/2007
Previewing your comment:

comment icon You said
Reply to this comment:
Logged in as mikmik (Not you? Log out)
expand collapse ErnestineBass (See profile | I'm a fan of ErnestineBass)

Words of eloquence

Evolution is one of the great ideas of western civilization. It unites disparate parts of science related to biology, such as botany, zoology, mycology, nuclear physics, chemistry, geology, paleontology and archeology, into a larger framework that helps scientists understand nature. This knowledge in this framework can then be applied to serious matters such as increasing crop yields and the “green revolution” of Norman Borlaug, in order to feed humanity (a task we still have yet to achieve), or to figuring out the causes and treatments, and perhaps cures for diabetes.

In Texas, we use evolution to fight the cotton boll weevil and imported fire ants, to make the Rio Grande Valley productive with citrus fruit, and to treat and cure cancer and other diseases. We use corroborating sciences, such as geology, to find and extract coal, petroleum and natural gas.

Am I being dogmatic when I say Texas kids need to know that? None of that science rests solely on a proclamation by any religious sect. All of that science is based on observations of nature and experiments in laboratories. Evolution theory is the based on extensive observations in nature and millions of experimental procedures, not one of which has succeeded in finding any of the alleged weaknesses in the theory.

400 Deniers; Only 52 Believers

Little by little the myth dies ... and now it turns out that maybe as few as 52 scientists contributed to the IPCC reports:

Yeah, 177 science bodies were put out by 52 researchers?!?
HAH!!! See this, stunned fuck:
This consensus is represented in the IPCC Third Assessment Report, Working Group 1 (TAR WG1), the most comprehensive compilation and summary of current climate research ever attempted, and arguably the most thoroughly peer reviewed scientific document in history. While this review was sponsored by the UN, the research it compiled and reviewed was not, and the scientists involved were independent and came from all over the world.

The conclusions reached in this document have been explicitly endorsed by ...

* Academia Brasiliera de Ciências (Bazil)
* Royal Society of Canada
* Chinese Academy of Sciences
* Academié des Sciences (France)
* Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina (Germany)
* Indian National Science Academy
* Accademia dei Lincei (Italy)
* Science Council of Japan
* Russian Academy of Sciences
* Royal Society (United Kingdom)
* National Academy of Sciences (United States of America)
* Australian Academy of Sciences
* Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium for Sciences and the Arts
* Caribbean Academy of Sciences
* Indonesian Academy of Sciences
* Royal Irish Academy
* Academy of Sciences Malaysia
* Academy Council of the Royal Society of New Zealand
* Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences

... in either one or both of these documents: PDF, PDF.

In addition to these national academies, the following institutions specializing in climate, atmosphere, ocean, and/or earth sciences have endorsed or published the same conclusions as presented in the TAR report:

* NASA's Goddard Institute of Space Studies (GISS)
* National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
* National Academy of Sciences (NAS)
* State of the Canadian Cryosphere (SOCC)
* Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
* Royal Society of the United Kingdom (RS)
* American Geophysical Union (AGU)
* American Institute of Physics (AIP)
* National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR)
* American Meteorological Society (AMS)
* Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society (CMOS)

If this is not scientific consensus, what in the world would a consensus look like?

(Addendum: One could legitimately argue that such policy statements by necessity hide possibly legitimate internal debate while trying to present unity of position. Science is ultimately determined in peer reviewed journals. Fortunately, there is a bit of research that looked specifically at this very question -- the subject of another guide entry.)

---

From the comments:
I don't believe it's a fact. I have grave misgiving about the IPCC, as do many people far closer to the IPCC than I. So, I don't believe in working toward fixing a non-problem. Try me on factual environmental issues though, and you might be surprised at my response.

How about if I do?
You have grave misgivings. So f***ing what? As to which people are 'closer to the IPCC'??
You always believe the minority? Why don't you go ahead and introduce us to your friends that you seem so familiar with, the 'ones much closer to the IPCC'.

There are the IPCC, they are not close, they are it. I believe them over you, and I can also evaluate raw scientific publishings. I also remember reading in the mid seventies about the build up CO2 in our atmosphere, and that this would happen, and I also remember exact predictions of when and what would happen.

You got any BS 'authorities' that have that record? Because if you don't have alternate climate models that predict this and then show it as an anomaly, or random fluctuation, then STFU.

And I mean taking into account not only CO2 levels and the correlations to the melting of glaciers and north polar ice, but explaining what the next twenty years will be like based on sound extrapolation.

Do it, MoFo.

You can't. I know you can't.

Fucking idiot here

Celestial junk (is right!)

There’s an unwritten rule among “progressives” that one is not allowed to condemn Islam.

Ha, your whole argument is based on an incorrect assumption - or should I say slanderous presupposition.

Pity the small mind mind that argues against straw men.

You are not bright, you are dull.

I will go on the record as stating that all religion is inane and misguided. Furthermore, Islamic radicals are particularily violent, but that is owing more to their backward culture than the philosophy of their religion.

Anyone that lives by dogma and/or assumption and colored thinking, instead of pragmatic evaluation of pertinent reality and available information, is stupid.

I include you in the latter.

You insult me with your trite meanderings. I am NDP. I know how to think, and when you want lessons in cognition, I will gladly give them to you.

There are no rules, there is only evaluation of immediate situation. Of course, one must have a developed morality to understand this.

- - -
comment #11
3. "You don't seem to be able to distinguish the difference and, to be completely blunt, just demonstrated what you don't know, as opposed to what you do."

When huge numbers of that so-elusive person, the "moderate Muslim" demonstrate AGAINST Islamofascism, against Islamic terrorism; AGAINST persecuting non-Muslims in majority Muslim countries; FOR equal human rights for women, for gays, for all peoples of whatever faith...

When all these events come to pass, I'll say, OK there is Christian extremism, like Islamic extremism. I think it a damn safe bet I'll NEVER have to do this.

What do you think about this, Dave? Do you agree my preconditions are fair and reasonable, in keeping with Western liberal democracy and humanitarian values? Or, if you disagree, please tell me why.
Dave in Pa. | 12.22.07 - 2:33 am | #


Dave in Pa, you didn't finish your #2 statement. Learn how to make a valid point, why don't you.

For instance, #3, you expect an irrelevant occurrence to 'come to pass' as you say, before you pass judgment on an unrelated situation.
That makes no sense. None whatsoever.

There are hundreds of examples of Christian motivated acts of extreme violence. It does not matter if anyone else is more violent, or less, the acts of Christian radicals speak for themselves.

See you in Ireland, or Spain. You tell all the people that died there that they don't count.

I fucking dare you, freak


I cannot fucking stand stupid fucking morons that get hysterical and self righteous over false claims of others behaviour. If you are so fucking moronic as to have to make shit up in order to screech and whine and feel superior, you are fucking beneath pathetic.

You got that? What a fucking wimp.

Reply to wingnut space-cadet

With respect, you seem to have missed the point. Gonzalez WAS doing research that furthered ID. His research on galactic hzabitable zones - an area in which he is considered expert - was turning up inconvenient facts about the favourable position of Earth and its moon for life and exploration.
LMAO!!! Galactic habitable zones, indeed!
We may reach the point in my own lifetime when one really must turn to religion ("religion?") in order to get a correct account of basic facts about our planet and to science ("science"?) for propaganda and witch hunts.
We may reach a point in my lifetime when even insipid fools know how to use reason. It won't be in your lifetime, however.
So an incorrect account of Earth's position is science and a correct account is religion?
Where TF do you get that idea? Do you even know what you are talking about, or do you just make whimsical interpretations and claims, and then use them as factual premises to base your even more absurd conclusions on?

For instance, what incorrect account of earth's position??? Your quote from sagan does not have anything to do with Earth's position, least of all in relation to our galaxy. Whether the earth is habitable or not has ZERO, get it ZERO to do with where we are in the galaxy. It has to do with our position in THE SOLAR SYSTEM!!!
- - -

Now you, Denyse. It is such a non-issue. There are multiple reasons he was denied tenure, and it certainly wasn't some kind of a conspiracy.
His grants were 1/10th of average, that including a majority from DI for $50,000!!
His published work was unscientific and not at all up to standard for a legitimate school.

Speaking of which, you must absolutely hate Steven Harper, and GWBush. I mean, they are dozens of times more evasive and dishonest than this University's admin you claim credibilitys is in shreds.
Your accounting of facts. That is credibility in shreds, as if it ever was established in the first place.

Another comment that won't show, I am sure.