Anuojat

Thats fine and i can undertant that. Howeve its important not that the book "Why you should love fossil fuels" cites metoffice data which corrolates with nasa and NOAA's data and which are sources whom critis and advocates of climate change and global warming cite. If you dont have the boo0k then maybe my comment is moot on you though.

I see. And hey i finally found the direct source for the met OFFICE. Really interesting stuff everyone. Take a look: http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadcrut4/HadCRUT4_accepted.pdf And this directly corrolates with GISS aswell, which at first seems like only 1 c of warming but it is actually much more since every single time the numbers are on the positive its the mark of warming for that year as far as i understand. http://climate.nasa.gov/system/internal_resources/details/original/647_Global_Temperature_Data_File.txt http://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/ Ill throw in the NOAA link in aswell: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/data-access/marineocean-data/extended-reconstructed-sea-surface-temperature-ersst-v4 Now again this is merely about temperatures. Not how muhc humans have effect ect. Just posting important and useful facts foreveryones mind to know

A debate is not a source, scinetific paper or study would be. And ill try to see if books sources are cited without byuing it...

Speaking in public and makign videos and making podcasts (maybe) and being open about it publically. So if i understand you corrently, "easily" or corrolated here with possability of death. I would not call that easily nor would i calll it "giving up" except if by giving up you mean giving up being open about such beliefs to those who arent your trusted friends ect.

Does he cite any sources himself? I think it would be important to look at those more than the book...

And how exactly is not speaking the truth when one has change of being killed "giving up my values"? Reason, honesty, courage and Happiness are mine values. And if i am killed i cannot spread ofr have any of these. I will not allow philosofy to become my bully. And furthermore, "culture" has not been defined here do you mean by culture simply values? And to top this all of i find that until i discover that the changes of getting killed by muslims (when speaking the truth) is lower than any other activity i already perform then ill be spreading reason, honesty, courage and happiness in way which are optimal AKA dont get me killed.

Huh? Waah? :S I dont thin fear of someone trying to potentially murder you means its "superior" in any way.

Because i do not want to risk death by people whom would be dedicated to my death/silence if i was dedicated to speaking the truth and making critism. Huh? What do you mean? Muslims dont follow a "trend" last i checked. Or am i misunderstanding?

Yes. Because tanks are vulnerable still. And dedicated people will find a way and will not stop.

Free speech aint no protection againt knives and bullets. When it comes to statists i am willing to speak, when it comes to muslims i dont think so and i do not think it would foward the cause of reason, freedom and ostracism towards muslims IF its violently dangerous to do so.

What do you mean by this? Is this like a "compared to what" situation youre pointing to? Also i was talking upsetting muslims that may kill me. And i am pretty sure free society aint coming aorund anytime soon. Now if it turns out that speaking out wasnt statistically going to lead you being killed or attacked physically then id be more than happy to speak out more

Well that was quick and pointyant advice Although unfortunately cant do that here unless i get permit AND the gun only in my house AND unloeaded. So... yeah...

God dammit, i wished it was less dangerous to speak your mind and be honest. With statists, i will get at worst shouted down and barred or demotivated to seek certain careers. With muslims, theres randomness. Some will get angry other will think about it a bit, and the rest will want my damn head! If i instead speak the truth about the welfare state, immigration and state intervention i believe the more cunning muslims want me dead too and thus why i dont speak... yet. Doesn anyone have any idea hoe to speak honestly without fear of death?

God dammit, i wished it was less dangerous to speak your mind and be honest. With statists, i will get at worst shouted down and barred or demotivated to seek certain careers. With muslims, theres randomness. Some will get angry other will think about it a bit, and the rest will want my damn head! If i instead speak the truth about the welfare state, immigration and state intervention i believe the more cunning muslims want me dead too and thus why i dont speak... yet. Doesn anyone have any idea hoe to speak honestly without fear of death?

God dammit, i wished it was less dangerous to speak your mind and be honest. With statists, i will get at worst shouted down and barred or demotivated to seek certain careers. With muslims, theres randomness. Some will get angry other will think about it a bit, and the rest will want my damn head! If i instead speak the truth about the welfare state, immigration and state intervention i believe the more cunning muslims want me dead too and thus why i dont speak... yet. Doesn anyone have any idea hoe to speak honestly without fear of death?

Ive been hesitant to post on the forums about this but, being someone whom still holds the position that ive been convinced the global warming and climate change are at the very least occuring partially because of human activity and that such activity is influencing global temperatures and glacier/icemass melting ect. So now when i look the the original post: "1. Global CO2 levels fluctuate between .036 -.038% of total planetary atmospheric gasses." Source for this? "2. Advocates of AGW hypothesis support lowering plantery levels of CO2." As far as i understand it no and certainly not myself. Simply decreasing the human activities that increase Co2 or switching to something that does less of it. "3. CO2 is essential for plant metabolism." Yes. "4. If planetary CO2 levels fall nearer to 0%, then the metabolism of naturally occurring flora will be challenged." Yes but they will adabt to that. However the halting of the increase of Co2 in the climate cyclation of earth seems to be the goal for most people whom AWG causes concern so i dont see "0%" as likely outcome. "5. Therefore, advocates of AGW hypothesis support challenging plant metabolism on a planetary scale." Being againts further increases in Co2 in the cyclation (caused by humans) would not challange plant metabolism. Only if some talk about, and i sure they are out there, decreasing Co2 as a whole instead of jsut the human output. "(Obviously, there are other natural sources of CO2, and it would be unlikely for planetary CO2 levels to ever fall to 0% -- but it's a way of pointing out to the "anti-carbon zealots" that as CO2 lessens from it's already trace amounts, plant life on a planetary scale will suffer.)" This is where it gets tricky because small increases in the Co2 cycling has major effects on both the negative and positive feedback loops on earth climate. So saying that there are only trace amounths of Co2 in the athmosphere at any given time misses the fact that changes to it even subtle have major effects. And again problem is increases in Co2 beyond (and faster) what otherwise would happen is the problem not that theres just too much of it by itself. Now on the other hand if someone is advocating lowering Co2 instread of lowering the output then they would be to say the least, not understanding how climate works or how athmospheric gasses work. ----------------------------------------------------- As for other posters here, i would genuinely be interested in some science and peer rewied papers on climate change that show and cast serious dout on AWG effects or its size. Because as i said, i believe based on evidence that we are effecting the planets temperature and Co2 and positive feedback loops in sighnificant IF NOT catastrophic ways.

Err what? Anthony is the poster above me and he is life coach-like person as i understand it

That youll just have to ask Mike and Stef. As for the FDR community as a whole... well keep on posting and tlaking about it and see how many people respond and with waht kind of feedback

Really Great work. Now how could people help to spread this... hmmm Also i am sure youve already contacted Stef and Mike?

Hey everyone i would like to give personal shoutout to Anthony Sammers message here. Ive had only few sessions with him and regarding his earlier post about being very abstract and tlaking about thigns but not putting them to action, he was plenty of help and i highly recommend him to everyone in the community that might need some help. (On the topic he mentioned or anything else.) Once Again thanks Anthony, and to anyone who might be interested or in need i think he was great. PS. I am hoping this ISINT a wrong place to put sai shoutout though.

"Theft is the taking of assets of from people without their consent and giving nothing in return." After reading those lasts words of his defination of theft i had to stop just to say: Stop referring to your parents again! Seriously, he does this continually with "rights and responceabilities" and "you consent by staying" and "It is not theft if you receive something in return." And most strikingly: "In reality, we receive from the government protection and a commitment to justice. We also receive education, healthcare, transportation, safe food, employment protection and enforcement of contracts." I know theres no direct evidence, but based on everything ive learned and we have talked about in podcasts and on forums and with other FDR member and theraphists read books on psycology and how we know the defence of state begins in childhood trough parents and teachers, i will bet to eat my hat that this is EXACTLY what the person is emotionally and subchounchessly referring to.

Everything youve said hits home for me since "peacefully seperating" from my parents and few other people in my life 10 months ago. And everything ive gone over too about emotions and the end results of either rage or freeze. And i am happy to say that it has been very fundamental yet slow change as youve postulated here. Very good sir.

My personal freedom senses are tingling!

That is a truly chilling and terribly discovery indeed. :S This sorta thing sounds exactly like the idea that our mind repress very strong the most henious of acts committed by our parents or by those around us. OR traumas that would be too much to bear. I too have lot of "unspoken" memories that are barely there in sound of vision but still felt just as strongly as yours i soppose.

Way for her to dodge and ignore your feelings and concerns. :S Nevermind the "arguement" why isint she apalled and apologizing for terrorizing her child?