GTWT

A new study was published on the rapid loss of Polar sea ice. See - http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/11/29/15518574-antarctica-greenland-ice-definitely-melting-into-sea-and-speeding-up-experts-warn?lite&ocid=msnhp&pos=2

We didn't cause the last ice age. We are causing climate change. It only seems intelligent to do what we can to prevent as much of the harm as we can.

Emmitt, I agree with nearly everything you've said on this thread except. "They should just trust my judgement. They've neve been a police officer...I have." Surely you're not saying only police officers should judge the behavior of other police officers? Your job is too important and too subject to abuse to not have civilian over-sight. By the way, thank you for your service. You do a tough, necessary job & I'm sure you do it well.

Churches do good. Churches do bad. Church is a very human thing. I will agree that if a church acts like a business it should be taxed as a business. I also think that if a church acts as a political organization it should lose its tax exempt status.

I love NT fans. The university puts $80M into a new stadium, no telling how much into an athletic complex, hires actual Division I coaching staffs, & moves up from a basement-level conference to a respectable mid-level cUSA and still we indulge ourselves with whining and weeping. Our university is progressing just fine. Our athletics will be just fine. Neither is asleep, neither is moribund, we just have a few fans who are incapable of seeing a glass as half-full. Nor can they see the pitcher poised to fill that glass to over-flowing.

Without ambition & pride we would still be in the Belt. Remember conference affiliation is about more than athletics. Who would you rather be associated with - Monroe & Troy or Rice & Tulsa?

Certainly over-population is the greatest problem we face. Too many people is the root cause of most of the important issues confronting our species. Our chance of consciously doing something about it - of making a decision to curb human population growth - is, unfortunately, near zero. It would be like bacteria on a petri dish deciding during the exponential growth phase that they need to stop dividing before disaster strikes. Man is no more capable than E. coli of choosing long-term good over short-term profit. Having said that, I have this irrational optimism that we can do something to make some of the crises we face survivable. We can choose to release less fossil C into the atmosphere. If we do maybe that will buy us some of the time we need to address the ultimate cause of our problem - over-population. John Christy & Roy Spencer first said climate change wasn't happening, then they said that it was happening but that man wasn't the cause, now they say that climate change is happening, man is a major cause, but it's slower than the models predicted. What will these 'scientists' say tomorrow?

The equation is valid. Given the coming disaster, I think sounding an alarm is appropriate. Half of America's political spectrum insists the science is wrong, the other half is willing to ignore reality for political gain. Both sides are choosing short-term gain over long-term good. Articles such as this, that add a near-term incentive for addressing climate change, can only do good.

This isn't just about Pakistan. The point is there are consequences - global consequences - for sticking our heads in the sand. Science denial makes it very hard to do anything intelligently.

Climate change isn't just about government poking its nose in your business. It has real life consequences - including implications for national security. Here's an interesting article on that topic http://chronicle.com/article/US-Urged-to-Step-Up-Research/135724/?cid=pm&utm_source=pm&utm_medium=en

Why is that sad? I thought he touted UNT splendidly in this interview. Kudos Brett Vido.

JUCO is a short-term fix to placate short-sighted fans. I support Coach Mac's approach of recruiting HS players who will be here 4-5 years. That's the way to build a program. UNT's problems have been around a long time & they won't be solved with band-aids. Be patient and watch the coaching staff buiild a team the way it should be built.

Dat true. The only positive thing about having political discussions on GMG is that it diverts some of us from discussions of whether Coach Mac should be lynched or whether DT is the 10th best or 100th best MG qb of the last 10 years. By the way, I really appreciate the posts of Scrappy. I've awarded him more +1s than anyone I've ever been in total disagree with. I like your attitude son.

No, UNT90, it's a religious question. It's a case where one group of people wants to impose their religious beliefs on everyone else.

UNT90, You want me to say that life beings at conception, or birth, or at age-18 yrs. None of that is sensical. Each is preceded by a living form of human. The egg cell prior to fertilization was living and human just as much as it was following ferlization. A more rational question, I thnk, is when does the living cell or cells become sacred. Meaning, when does it matter to your religion. Your answer to that question will be one I won't be able to argue with.

About 3.6 billion years ago in a chemically rich pool of water. Once began, life was continuous. I didn't begin on a cold March night in Wichita Falls. My DNA, which is what I am, has wormed it's way via mitosis & meiosis through time. The individual is transient, what endures is DNA. That's what matters. Damn! That's almost poetic.

Hi UNTgirl, Our life cycle, like most animals, includes a diploid stage (that's you & me), and a haploid stage (egg cells & spermj cells). Both stages are human.

The only reason to make a pregnant woman see a sonogram is to punish her for something you disapprove of. That's wrong. As for when a fetus becomes human, I think the exercise is silly. An oocyte or a sperm cell is human but I don't think you want to grant those cells legal rights. If you did half the posters on GMG would be committing mass murder every evening.

I find your statement, "there is a difference between a freshly fertilized egg and a 3 month old fetus in my book" profoundly true. The 3 month-old fetus is 90 days further along the path to becoming a human than the fertilized egg. Neither is there.

Hickory just doesn't buy it. His informed opinion is based on years of education in the physical & earth sciences. He's devoted his long, productive scientific career to the study of climate change. Yeah, I'm convinced.

Hi Rick, You do know that Newsweek isn't a scientific journal, right? You do know that today, 37 years after that article, we have better models than were available in 1975? You do know that even then, most climate scientists were skeptical about the interpretation that suggested 'global cooling'? You do know that today the vast majority of climate scientists accept that the earth's climate is, on average, warming & that man is largely responsible?

Wow. Marx said religion was the opiate of the masses. It may be more accurate to say that politics is the real opiate of the masses. After voting we're left with the misinformed idea that we have an effect on how we're governed. Someone (B. F. Skinner?) pointed out that the chance your vote will effect a state-wide or federal election are way less than the chance you'll be killed by being hit by a bus on the way to the polls.

Just one? The link - http://www.ontheissues.org/International/Ted_Cruz_Energy_+_Oil.htm People who argue that climate change isn't real, or that man isn't a contributor, or that the cost of ameliorating climate change is too high nearly always are motivated not by science, but by economics, ideology, or politics. Science denial is a conservative trait. You want more? As for my age, I'm 61. I still can recognize that most of the folks at the Tea Party get-together I attended were 'old folks'. That's an observation, something you suggested I do, not an indictment. Oh! Scrappy - I'm looking forward to that beer.

You're right, Scrappy. We're on opposite sides of the political extreme. Like you, I want a balanced budget BUT I want a tax system where the rich pay their fair share. I want a government that is empowered to do the things I want government to do. I want immigration reform - not xenophobia. I want science to inform our policy & I'm not comfortable with science-denial. I don't think having an 'official language' is anything other than a manisfestation of xenophobia. I certainly don't want a Christian version of Sharia law. I don't want to drill on our most precious public land so that Exxon can make a bigger profit & so that you can pay a nickle less for gas for your guzzler. If that makes me an extreme librul, so be it. I do agree with you about the Mean Green.

Thanks for the advice, UNT90. Actually, I do try to think for myself. I also try to gather my own information. I've talked to lots of folk who consider themselves Tea Partiers. They are a remarkably homogeneous group. Not only do they favor a balanced budget - everyone I've talked to wants to balance that budget by smaller government - drastically smaller government - increased taxes cannot be part of the discussion. Every Tea Partier I talked too wants to reduce government regulation - again drastically. Every Tea Partier I've talked to wants to shut down the border. Every Tea Partier I've talked to distrusts the science of climate change. Most favor English as the official language. Most want creationism taught in public schools. Most want public display of religious (read Christian) symbols. Most want to drill baby drill everywhere. So no - the Tea Party isn't just a group of well-meaning old folks who only share an understandable desire to reduce the deficit. These are die-hard extreme conservatives. Their reputation isn't a fabrication of the librul media. They really are on the extreme right of the Republican Party. Nothing wrong with that - unless you try to sell them as something they're not - moderate.