Politics - 3 November 2007

The Leipzig Declaration on Global Climate Change is a statement made in 1995, and issued in an updated form 1997, claimed to have been signed by 80 academics and 25 meterologists, and seeking to refute the claim there is a scientific consensus on the global warming issue:
http://sepp.org/policy%20declarations/LDsigs.html

With every passing day, more scientists gather the courage to risk their careers by denouncing the hoax:

4000 Scientists signed 'The Heidelberg Appeal':
http://sepp.org/policy%20declarations/heidelberg_appeal.html

19,000 Scientists declare that global warming is a lie with no scientific basis whatsoever:
http://www.oism.org/pproject/


To say there's a consensus is not just a mistake or an exaggeration, but a deliberate and preposterous lie — though hardly the only untruth Al Gore and his acolytes have promoted :
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckton/goreerrors.html

2007-11-03 08:28:53 · 31 answers · asked by Anonymous

I heard that the reason why Americans are being systematically dumbed down is because our gov doesn't want us to make educated political decisions. They WANT to keep us in the dark.
What do you think?

2007-11-03 08:22:04 · 18 answers · asked by ivy 3

to fall in love with me?

I think he's really charming, cool and cute.

And Laura is not a good match for such a sexy man.

btw can i work as a intern or something because I know i can seduce him.

2007-11-03 08:04:51 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-11-03 08:01:42 · 17 answers · asked by ænima 4

2007-11-03 08:01:19 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous

Putin's statement at a Victory Day parade on Red Square on Wednesday was artfully phrased to be both blunt and vague — but political observers have little doubt he was criticizing the United States for "disrespect for human life, claims to global exclusiveness and dictate, just as it was in the time of the Third Reich."
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003701305_webputin10.html

2007-11-03 07:57:50 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-11-03 07:54:49 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous

i do

2007-11-03 07:43:39 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous

The lesson that the most powerful country in the world should promote peace and stability, instead of war and imperialism.

2007-11-03 07:43:33 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous

Please, I am serious. You republicans out there, enlighten me!
(Except the war, if that's something you aprove of.)

2007-11-03 07:41:24 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous

In the perfect world scenario, I would think the Religious Right would be preaching "Let's pray for Hillary." Not the vitrolic diseemination of all things anti Hillary.

2007-11-03 07:39:38 · 12 answers · asked by whirling W dervish 2

2007-11-03 07:35:28 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous

do you believe it's a learned behavior?

2007-11-03 07:27:04 · 29 answers · asked by Liberal City 6

Details of the projects that Bush cited as his reasons for a veto included:

* $3.6 billion for major wetlands and other coastal restoration, flood control and dredging projects for Louisiana, a state where coastal erosion and storms have resulted in the disappearance of huge areas of land;
* nearly $2 billion for the restoration of the Florida Everglades;
* nearly $2 billion for the Army Corps of Engineers to build seven new locks on the upper Mississippi and Illinois rivers;
* $7 billion for various projects related to hurricane mitigation in Mississippi and Louisiana, including assuring 100-year levee protection in New Orleans;
* hundreds of smaller dredging, wetlands restoration and flood control projects across the country.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21599575/

2007-11-03 07:14:47 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous

Should America's foreign policies be directed and driven by fear alone?

- Reagan/Bush 1 supported Saddam and the contras
- Bush 2 supports Musharraf and invades Iraq

All directed and supported by fear. Your thoughts please.

2007-11-03 06:59:53 · 16 answers · asked by Chi Guy 5

What is this? When all else fails, play the gender-card? Her plans and her take on most issues is what most people dislike about her, not the fact that she is a half-woman.

2007-11-03 06:56:52 · 15 answers · asked by Frank Dileo 3

Imagine:

- no more Taliban (in Afghanistan)
- no more poppy fields to fund 40% of ALL terrorism
- Afghanistan would be a beacon of success by now
- Al-Q would not have Iraq as a recruiting platform
- Iran would not be seeking nukes (Iraq would not stand for it)
- 4000 US soldiers would be alive
- 30,000 US soldiers would not have been wounded
- 500,000 Iraqi's would be alive
- 2 million Iraqis would not be refugees
- Oil would not be at $96 per barrel
- The US treasury would be a projected $2 trillion heavier
- OBL may have been captured
- The US would have far more moral authority

2007-11-03 06:52:05 · 7 answers · asked by Chi Guy 5

He is in clear violation of the Geneva Convention as well as several other treaties and laws. When challenged on the issue of breaking the law, he stated "we don't agree", which is a defense that would never work in a court of law.

2007-11-03 06:41:34 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous

Sure lots of compassionate folks,... lamenting, Boohooing,... but the Sunzabetches time and again pull the rug out from under our children with "ZERO" reaction from the populace...???????

WHY ???????

2007-11-03 06:38:00 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous

Do you think all of those people who Alexander conquered wanted to be conquered?

Did the vast numbers that Alexander killed want to be killed?

Hitler is bad, obviously. Why isn't Alexander viewed negatively too?

Hitler didn't just cause Jews to die. 20 million Russians died. That is a LOT of people. So, even if Hitler did not kill Jews, he would still be disgusting. But, why isn't Alexander also disgusting in people's eyes since he killed people?

2007-11-03 06:37:23 · 12 answers · asked by junglejoe 2

and would the spark be like an argument at the grocery store check out line or university parking lot?

2007-11-03 06:12:43 · 7 answers · asked by Moore55 4

2007-11-03 06:03:38 · 17 answers · asked by Moore55 4

This is my first honest question on yahoo answers. I cannot see the difference between left and right. I see things as either individualism or collectivism. Left and right are both in the category of collectivism and are variants of socialism that agree on just about everything. Can someone help me figure this out?

2007-11-03 06:02:10 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous

Any day now?

2007-11-03 05:52:54 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-11-03 05:52:52 · 23 answers · asked by Anonymous

I predict a landslide victory for Hillary Clinton over the Republican nominee.

I think the Democrats will pickup at least 20 seats in the House, and 5 Seats in the Senate.

2007-11-03 05:52:05 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-11-03 05:49:07 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-11-03 05:46:59 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous

I wonder, because our 'good friend' Musharref has found a way around term limits:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071103/ap_on_re_as/pakistan;_ylt=AsnmofRuJSXKhMvRm09qug6s0NUE

Maybe it will work here, do you think?

2007-11-03 05:46:37 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-11-03 05:45:02 · 11 answers · asked by Spartacus 3