No kidding. Then they won't immigrate because they know they won't get jobs. Right now, they risk life and limb to come here because they KNOW they can get a job.

Oh, for Christ sake, Che. Hillary's the front runner now for one reason. Brand name recognition. She's not inevitable.

Since illegal immigrants are so essential to the economy, why didn't the nation come to a stand still during these demonstrations? I still got served at restaurants, bought lettuce, had my yard cut. I don't know.

Hillary told Cindy [Sheehan] that we had to continue on in Iraq to honor the sacrifice her son had made.

Glanton how many of those people should vote? I mean watch any Jay Leno show and see what the "man on the street" has to say and you quickly realize that most of that 52% should stay home on election day. The right to vote is essential but in my opinion if you can't tell me who Dick Cheney or John Edwards are then you should stay home.

Slado, those people are not climate scientists. I recognize some names there, like Tim Ball and Sallie Baliunas, who are paid by obscure "institutes" whose funding comes mostly from Exxon. And then there's Freeman Dyson, who thinks he knows everything about everything, from space colonies to climatology. None of these individuals are climate scientists, and I suspect most of the signatories of that letter aren't either. Of course, they are encouraged by the fact that the new Prime Minister is from Alberta, and very sympathetic to the oil and gas industry.

If you accept the current Dem leadership as exemplified by Clinton, Biden, the DLC and see them as an answer to anything significant then you have accepted the status quo. When you can't persuade, you shift the ground of discussion. and when that fails we can just ignore our interlocutor's arguments altogether. Thats nonsense. or is it just like you continuing to ignore the points I make about the current set of Dems. Pot kettle etc I can not see a way of getting the attention of the Dem party besides witholding my measily contributions and informing them why combining with refusing to vote for those "centerist" candidates. Continuing to vote for the likes of Clinton et al just because they are not Bush is a surrender to the status quo. Charlie's idea that it would slow down the decline just prolongs the agony. If the Dems don't support your values dont vote for them. Voting for them because they're not Bush is just as self-defeating. Meanwhile I will send my money and support to any dem candidate that reflects priorites in line with my own. Otherwise if the Dem party implodes so be it, maybe something better will comeout of that ashes.

a Bush PR event on the war on terror went off-script when a man named Harry Taylor took the microphone. Q: You never stop talking about freedom, and I appreciate that. But while I listen to you talk about freedom, I see you assert your right to tap my telephone, to arrest me and hold me without charges, to try to preclude me from breathing clean air and drinking clean water and eating safe food. If I were a woman, you'd like to restrict my opportunity to make a choice and decision about whether I can abort a pregnancy on my own behalf. You are - THE PRESIDENT: I'm not your favorite guy. Go ahead. (Laughter and applause.) Go on, what's your question?

I am invited to give speeches on occasion regarding global warming, and am supposed to give one this summer.

With all the debate recently about Global Warming and Time devoting a whole issue to it I found these links very interesting... 60 Scientists No change I'm not asserting that GW is bogus, just that the media hysteria over it is alarmist. Haven't read much about this issue on this site, just wondering where everybody stood.

The hockey stick debate is about two things. At a technical level it concerns a well-known study that characterized the state of the Earth's climate over the past thousand years and seemed to prove a recent and unprecedented global warming. I will explain how the study got the results it did, examine some key flaws in the methodology and explain why the conclusions are unsupported by the data. At the political level the emerging debate is about whether the enormous international trust that has been placed in the IPCC was betrayed. The hockey stick story reveals that the IPCC allowed a deeply flawed study to dominate the Third Assessment Report, which suggests the possibility of bias in the Report-writing process. In view of the massive global influence of IPCC Reports, there is an urgent need to bias-proof future assessments in order to put climate policy onto a new foundation that will better serve the public interest.

Martin Agerup, president of the Danish Academy for Future Studies and colleagues from Stockholm, Canada, Iceland and Britain say in their report that predictions of "extreme impacts" based on greenhouse emissions employed "faulty science, faulty logic and faulty economics".

In 1960, Drake organizes the first SETI conference, and came up with the now-famous Drake equation: N=N*fp ne fl fi fc fL Where N is the number of stars in the Milky Way galaxy; fp is the fraction with planets; ne is the number of planets per star capable of supporting life; fl is the fraction of planets where life evolves; fi is the fraction where intelligent life evolves; and fc is the fraction that communicates; and fL is the fraction of the planet's life during which the communicating civilizations live. This serious-looking equation gave SETI an serious footing as a legitimate intellectual inquiry. The problem, of course, is that none of the terms can be known, and most cannot even be estimated. The only way to work the equation is to fill in with guesses. And guesses-just so we're clear-are merely expressions of prejudice. Nor can there be "informed guesses." If you need to state how many planets with life choose to communicate, there is simply no way to make an informed guess. It's simply prejudice.

Either way break out the sunscreen because it is Spring! Woo-Hoo...

all interpretations of the evidence are just subjective and lead to irresponsible conjecture on the part of certain interest groups of all stripes.

Glanton how many of those people should vote? I mean watch any Jay Leno show and see what the "man on the street" has to say and you quickly realize that most of that 52% should stay home on election day. The right to vote is essential but in my opinion if you can't tell me who Dick Cheney or John Edwards are then you should stay home.

We -- first of all, there is -- the globe is warming. The fundamental debate: Is it manmade or natural. Put that aside.

Kind of reminds me of the arguments a few years ago when prominent scientists thought the earth was flat. In 1000 years maybe less, one group of scientists are going to be labeled "idiots".

The Earth seems to swing from warm to cold, to warm...., so I don't find it odd that short term tracking of global tempertures has led to collective amnesia of the longer term trends.

Al- i read his 'performance' acknowledging global warming as code for: it's'god's work.

What I love about enviro wackos is their ability to disregard any opinion that does not match their own and keep on trucking no matter what the facts are.

Wonder who is footing the bill? GM?

Learn or burn.

Don't agree with my science? Well you aren't a scientist says Charlie even though the list includes PHD's and fellows at prominent universities all over the world.

So, what are your thoughs on opening up the debates a little more Charlie?

Let's see, the weight of the reputable scientific community versus a novelist, some whores from Exxon and Jerry Falwell's fleet of Suburbans and Jew-Hating rapture promises.

These efforts had the support of the National Academy of Sciences, the American Medical Association, and the National Research Council. It was said that if Jesus were alive, he would have supported this effort. Today, we know that this famous theory that gained so much support was actually pseudoscience. The crisis it claimed was nonexistent. And the actions taken in the name of theory were morally and criminally wrong. Ultimately, they led to the deaths of millions of people. The theory was eugenics, and its history is so dreadful... The theory of eugenics postulated a crisis of the gene pool leading to the deterioration of the human race. The best human beings were not breeding as rapidly as the inferior ones... Francis Galton, a respected British scientist, first speculated about this area, but his ideas were taken far beyond anything he intended. They were adopted by science-minded Americans,... Eventually, this program was expanded into a vast network of concentration camps located near railroad lines, enabling the efficient transport and of killing ten million undesirables. After World War II, nobody was a eugenicist, and nobody had ever been a eugenicist (emphasis added).

Al - The technique of discovering "something" by its effect on what we can observe is well known. If I remember correctly, the existence of Pluto was first confirmed using that method. Is their life out there? Is there intelligent life out there? I believe there is. Note the "believe."

Squeaky - If history has taught us anything, its beware of the charismatic.

Since obviously we don't have instrumental records going back many centuries, those temperatures are reconstructed using proxies, like ice core samples or tree rings.

What is the connection between shall we say right-wing ideology for want of a better term, and climate change? What exactly is their problem? I mean, it's like denying the existence of traffic accidents (another man-made life hazard). I don't get it.

Iran Can Now Make glowing Mickey Mouse Watches

3. Germs might get carsick. Now that's something you don't want to have to clean up.

Some Turkish politicians and journalists are accusing the United States of sheltering terrorists in northern Iraq, i.e. the PKK or Kurdish Worker's Party, a violent group that has fought along guerrilla action against Ankara.... And, don't forget about those Mojahedin-e Khalq fighters at Ashrafiyah Base in Iraq, Iranian terrorists of whom the Pentagon just doesn't seem able to let go.

"Im not going to lead anyone to the Promised Land because if they can be lead in, they can be lead out again."

Johnny - The last sudden climate change was associated with the earth being hit with a large meteor, throwing up a huge cloud of dust/debris causing a severe drop in temperature (Global Cooling) and the extinction of the dinosaurs. Or that is a theory being put forward. May be true. BTW - You do realize that Global Cooling was the terror du jour of many of the same people who are trying to sell us Global Warming. Probably a bit before your time so you'll have to do a bit of research as you will not hear about it on NPR.

I've got no use for Pyrrhic victories

"I have no illusions about the scope of the danger. But electing some less odious Democrats for a while is only putting a bandaid on the thing. It's the climate that is the problem."

And the pro-decency in the media, anti-blasphemy, anti-premarital sex right will probobly scream bloody murder about the show being censored to "appease Muslims".

Alarm rather than genuine scientific curiosity, it appears, is essential to maintaining funding. And only the most senior scientists today can stand up against this alarmist gale, and defy the iron triangle of climate scientists, advocates and policymakers.

It is critical that we raise the alarm about reports that the Bush administration is planning a nuclear attack against Iran. A great country should never contemplate using nuclear weapons. If hundreds of thousands of Americans speak out in opposition to a nuclear attack immediately we can discredit the idea of a nuclear attack before it can take root. Will you spread the word? Please email your friends, family and colleagues about this urgent need for action.