To Jeff Schwilk the Drama Queen wrote on Mar 21, 2008 9:50 PM:"On Feb. 23, the Mexican Consulate in San Diego rented the cafeteria at Palomar College for nine hours to give an estimated 600 Mexican [license plates, passports and] matricular consular cards (Mexican picture ID" Do you people really believe this lie. Come on I had go to DMV to renew the registration on my car. It is not true that license plates were being provided that day. Also I don't know about you but I had to send in a registration form, my fee and a picture to get my passport. Do you people really believe this lie. Yes, a picture identification was provided for people who desired and needed one. With proper identification and proof those identifications were provided. Please don't be dooped by Schwilk and his fabrications, exaggerations, and out and out lies.

DD Wiz wrote on Mar 21, 2008 9:56 PM:The published letter from Irvin H. Forbing cites "climate expert" Fred Singer to refute human contributions to global climate change (in conjunction with natural factors). This shows his utter desperation. Singer is well known as a member of the Editorial Advisory Board of the ultra-conservative Cato Institute, and has received almost a half million dollars in direct funding from tobacco and oil industries, including the Tobacco Institute, Exxon, Texaco, Arco, Shell and the American Gas Association.
While he has written extensively, it has not been in objective, independent PEER-REVIEWED scientific or academic journals. Singer is a mouthpiece for the pushers of our addiction to non-renewable FINITE FILTHY FOSSIL FUELS purchased from dependence on terrorists and dictators.
While he has received some excellent scientific education, he is a sell-out.
He has no credibility whatsoever.
This is the kind of source the footsoldiers in the CONSERVATIVE WAR AGAINST SCIENCE have to resort to.

To Mark Gusano wrote on Mar 21, 2008 10:00 PM:im·mi·grant/ˈɪmɪgrənt/ –noun 1. a person who migrates to another country, usually for permanent residence. "illegal immigrant" is an oxymoron since it implies an intent that has not been established and a status that is not deserved." You are correct illegal immigrant is an oxymoron because NO HUMAN BEING IS ILLEGAL. You say "a status that is not deserved." Since when are you and your
"like-minded folks" the ones who decides whom is deserving of immigrating to this country? Once again don't get caught up in the incorrect terminalogy just remember that NO HUMAN BEING IS ILLEGAL.

Nick wrote on Mar 21, 2008 10:40 PM:Am I the only one who has noticed HOW COMPLETELY SCREWED UP the letters section has been for over a week? GET A FREAKIN CLUE. This rag is sucking worse than ever.

Floyd wrote on Mar 22, 2008 1:46 AM:If they broke the law to enter the country, that makes them an illegal alien according to every dictionary I've read. "Trespasser" and "criminal" is also correct terminology, as is the shortened term "illegal" (when used as a noun).

To Nick wrote on Mar 22, 2008 2:57 AM:Yeah, you're the only one.

I'll take your advice, and "GET A FREAKIN CLUE," but only if you promise to "GET A FREAKIN LIFE".

This paper gets better every day!

Yo, Nick wrote on Mar 22, 2008 4:04 AM:It's economics. The janitor is now in charge of the letters section. Do not be surprised at an announcement that NCT is folding/restructuring. You need to be able to read between the lines. Those of us who still have a pulse need to create our own venue for communication. It is a sign of the times - we need to adapt to the changes.

Alf wrote on Mar 22, 2008 4:28 AM:In the "old" format, we all got to see and read the letters and comments from "both sides" (North County Times AND The Californian). In the "old" format, there were known times that the moderators were either not there or on break or whatever and we could adjust the timing of our comments accordingly. In this "new" format, the above-mentioned advantages do not exist. To borrow a phrase from "Nick" (thanks "Nick")- "This rag is sucking worse than ever." Regards, Alf.

The Villiage Idiot wrote on Mar 22, 2008 4:51 AM:Whenever some computer geek tinkers with a website to make it "better for our readers" everybody usually gets ticked off. But hey, it's free, mindless entertainment.
What's somewhat amazing is that some people have nothing better to do than to sit and post all day, everyday.
What's amazing is that some of the twenty or so regular contributors think they might actually convince someone else with their "intellectual" arguments.
What's really amazing is that the NCT actually pays somebody to sit here all day to read and edit out the garbage that doesn’t meet his or her very subjective criteria.

Focal Point wrote on Mar 22, 2008 8:02 AM:NICK: I am frustrated as you are. I suppose that this is the BETA version.

El Guero wrote on Mar 22, 2008 8:11 AM:To the Mexican who asks: "Since when are you and your "like-minded folks" the ones who decides whom is deserving of immigrating to this country?" That's easy: Since the late eighteenth century when the founders declared this to be an independent and sovereign nation. Of course, our sovereignty has been all but erased by the politicians who have forfeited control over immigration to the immigrants themselves, who now have the ultimate authority to decide who comes here, in what numbers, and for how long.

As for the words used to describe the newcomers, it doesn't matter. Illegal alien or undocumented immigrant, they're the same thing. We all know who we're talking about. And if they came without our permission, they're all undeserving, and so say all of us.

Outraged over matricular cards wrote on Mar 22, 2008 8:39 AM:I have seen these events take place all over Souther Calif. How is it that Mexico is able to use tax payer owned facilities to aid and abet, illegal aliens. A Mexican Matricular card means nothing in the US and is not a valid ID, so what's the point. If illegal Aliens need ID then they can go to one of the already way to many mexican Consulates in the US. Stop using our schools and public facilities for Illegal use. I saw on the internet a Mexican consulate official tell some folks that San Diego is and always will be Mexico, what is that all about????

Ron wrote on Mar 22, 2008 8:45 AM:Thanks wizzer for once again.. confirming what I have been saying about castigating discenting scientists. Wiz @9:56 PM, Virtually attacks climate expert Fred Singer for what reason? His science? His theory? His observations?
No! He attacks the man because of who funds his research. Again, they can not contest the science these discenting scientists put forth, so they must attack them from a different angle.
Is this not the same thing that is being said of Barack Obama & the reverend Wright? Is this not guilt by association? Aren't we told by the lib's to consider the man, and not who he chooses to hang out with?
He eventually acknowledges Dr. Singer
has an excellent scientific education, but then says he's a sell-out.
Why? Simply because he does not concur with scientific consensus. I have tried to tell you this debate has gone political, and the sides of the batle have been draw. Specifically, but those on the global warming side. If your not a "believer", you are attacked, dismissed, and exiled.
This is why you do not see their papers in elite peer-reviewed scientific journals. Oh, yes.. they do publish, but the journals are considered "rags" by the elite, and by wizzer.
This is why I have attempted to continually define how this peer review process actually works. Where reviewers will jealously guard their own theories, and exclude those discenting views who challenge them.
He has no credibility whatsoever.
This is the kind WAR AGAINST SCIENCE have to resort to. They smply refuse to answer anyone who might question their authority, or grant money.

No Human Ilegal? wrote on Mar 22, 2008 8:46 AM:You are exactly correct. Illegal Mexican's are not illegal...........When they are in Mexico! Stop defending these law breakers. Check your Statistics. Read and see how much money illegal aliens and their kids cost me every year. Who is going to reimburse me my 500 dollar deductible times two, when my car was hit by an illegal alien? Who is going to bring my friends dead daughter back to life that was killed by a drunk illegal alien. Who is going to repair the emotional trauma of a nine year old boy that was raped and molested by an illegal alien. Stop defending these law breakers. Wait till your life has been turned up side down and destroyed in one day by an illegal alien criminal from mexico.

mexican Id cards wrote on Mar 22, 2008 8:48 AM:If Legal and Illegal Mexicans need an Mexican ID card then they can go to TJ and get one!

to DD Wiz@9:56pm wrote on Mar 22, 2008 9:04 AM: You are correct as usual, except one small particular. The CATO Institute is libertarian, not "ultra-conservative", as you say. The difference is that ultra-conservatives are always wrong, whereas libertarians are mainly wrong in worshiping so-called free trade, which you and I know isn't really free. In this case they've sold themselves (it takes a lot of $$ to run CATO) to business interests which, to their twisted way of thinking, represent the ideal of the market economy - their graven image of the divine. Libertarians are correct on many matters not involving their sacred (cash) cow.

to To Jeff Schwilk the Drama Queen wrote on Mar 22, 2008 9:09 AM: You are absolutely correct, except Jeff Schwilk "dupes" people, he doesn't "doop" them (not that I know of, anyway).

to Outraged @8:39am wrote on Mar 22, 2008 9:20 AM: What part of "rent" don't you understand?

Pluto wrote on Mar 22, 2008 9:27 AM: Irving is wrong about humans not contributing to climate change, but let's get beyond that dead-end debate. The real question is what (if anything) are humans going to do about this threat to our survival? If a huge asteroid were headed toward Earth, I suspect we'd try to do something about it. I hope people like Irving wouldn't stand in our way, saying "we didn't create this crisis!".

Let's be consistent wrote on Mar 22, 2008 9:46 AM:People who go above the speed limit are illegal drivers. Folks who cross a street in the middle of a block are illegal pedestrians. And so on.

Go MM wrote on Mar 22, 2008 9:48 AM: Support Jeff Schwilk and the MM, they are the only ones that care about illegal immigration, while everyone else sleeps. If it wasn't for the MM all over the nation, we would have 21 million illegal aliens given Amnesty. I support the MM.

To: To Outraged wrote on Mar 22, 2008 9:54 AM: So if I rented a building at Palomar College to sell stolen property and drugs, would that be ok as long as you say, " I rented it ." I think I have made my point, haven't I !?

To: to outraged wrote on Mar 22, 2008 9:55 AM:What part of " Illegal ", don't you understand?

Blame Game wrote on Mar 22, 2008 9:57 AM:To the desperate Republicans who are slandering Obama because of the actions of one reverend Wright, i have six words: George Bush...Ted Haggard...'nuff said.

GFN wrote on Mar 22, 2008 10:07 AM:Ralph Nugen, you won't vote Democratic because JFK dallied in office 45 years ago???? That is the kind of "false value" Republicans we have today, and that is why they will be swept away.

GFN wrote on Mar 22, 2008 10:19 AM:Sdraoul, you're hiding, but your "dooped" ousted you. Also, your disregard for American laws...those who enter our country "illegally" ARE illegal aliens... continues to brand you as a subversive element to our system of a law based country. You are being "dooped" into thinking that American laws do not have to be followed because our president doesn't always follow them. Get a better role model!

GFN wrote on Mar 22, 2008 10:45 AM:Leon Levy, Solana Beach, I totally agree: NO ILLEGAL WIRETAPPING. People cannot be trusted. Look at the article on today's NCTime's front page where the passport files of the all three presidential candidates have been illegally reviewed, possibly at the request of the GWB administration. Why not, it does illegal wiretapping under the direction of the president? This is the type of activity that happens--ALWAYS--and that is why there are laws against it; that's why companies which sell stock to the public have to be audited...people cannot be trusted. It is to protect our freedom from...us. History has proven, time and time again, that no justification will alter the final result. No warrant less wiretapping, regardless of your supposedly rightous reasons.

English 101 wrote on Mar 22, 2008 10:46 AM:It is particularly troubled with the growing trend of the news media and other anti-immigrant groups to use the word “illegals” as a noun. Using the word in this way is grammatically incorrect!!! And I agree with that NO Human Being is illegal. Perhaps the activity is illegal but the person is not.

John the Baptist wrote on Mar 22, 2008 10:48 AM:Re: If it quacks, it's a duck. If Cusumano had visited Trinity Church's website, he would have learned Obama's mentor's name is Wright, not White, and that the site is tasteful and well designed.

Hey, DDWiz wrote on Mar 22, 2008 10:52 AM:What about the message? You attacked the messenger real good @ 9:56 PM – now would it be possible for you to drop the partisan gamesmanship long enough to address Forbing/Singer’s message?

To: to To Jeff Schwilk the Drama Queen wrote on Mar 22, 2008 10:55 AM:at least you go the point that jeff does lie. To Jeff Schwilk the Drama Queen other words that can be used fooled, tricked, bamboozled, conned, deceived, deluded, duped, flimflammed*, foxed, hornswoggled*, jerked around, misled, outfoxed, snowed, sucked in. Any and all these words describe jeff and his tactics to anger and divide the Ameican people and our communities.

To El Guero wrote on Mar 22, 2008 11:04 AM:"To the Mexican who asks: "Since when are you and your "like-minded folks" the ones who decides whom is deserving of immigrating to this country?" What makes you think I am Mexican? There it is the racists mindset kicking in!! Who gave those first immigrants permission to come here? "if they came without our permission, they're all undeserving" Once again what give you the right to say who can come here and who can not? "so say all of us" YOU DON'T SPEAK FOR ME.

Stuff Happens to No Human Ilegal? wrote on Mar 22, 2008 11:19 AM:In your comment you say to check the statistics. I have checked the statistics I just did not use your biased source. Immigrants are what made this country great. Any money we spend on educating children is worth it so we can prepare our young people to lead this country tomorrow. "Who is going to reimburse me my 500 dollar deductible times two, when my car was hit by an illegal alien?" You should purchase uninsured motorist property damage coverage I am glad I had it when a young caucasian kid hit my car and he had no license and no insurance. Yes that coverage came in very handy. "Who is going to bring my friends dead daughter back to life that was killed by a drunk illegal alien." My young beautiful daughter died of cancer in December who is going to bring her back to life? Who do I blame for this? Who is going to repair my emotional trauma? "Stop defending these law breakers" I will never stop defending human beings from inhumane treatment. "Wait till your life has been turned up side down and destroyed in one day by an illegal alien criminal from mexico." You see that is the problem your hatred for Mexicans has affected your life and now that hatred has turned into racism. Do you really believe that all illegal immigrants are from Mexico? Well they are not. Those men who attacked the U.S. during 911 had permission to be here. They had Visas to be here. I think you are angry at the wrong people. My life has been turned upside down and destroyed but not by a person who is here for a better life.

El Guero wrote on Mar 22, 2008 11:28 AM:To English 101: "illegals" is just convenient shorthand for "illegal immigrants." Would it be less offensive if we called them "undeserving immigrants" instead?

To El Guero wrote on Mar 22, 2008 11:35 AM:Hey I have an idea why not we just call them human beings!!!! Once again who makes you the one who can label anyone any title or label?

GFN wrote on Mar 22, 2008 12:03 PM:El Guero, the point English 101 is proving is the rhetoric of sdraoul; "No human is illegal!"...see his post at 10:00 pm. I will grant sdraoul that he is correct in what he says, as English 101 points out. The truth is those who enter the US without legal permission are here illegally and are illegal aliens...aliens is the proper word, not humans. Their ACTIONS are ILLEGAL!!!

This is getting interesting wrote on Mar 22, 2008 12:33 PM:So if you are an alien you are not a human? What are you, a duck? If you look in the dictionary, I think you'll find that most meanings of "alien" are human. And their actions are illegal? Which actions are those? Crossing the border to stay here without "papers" is illegal. Is working here illegal? I don't think so...HIRING them is illegal but working isn't. When they drive or eat here are those actions illegal? I don't think so. If they use a fake ID to acquire something, that would certainly be illegal. So if they are doing your yard, they are PEOPLE who are in this country illegally, working legally. You illegally hired them. Have I got this right?

Brian A. wrote on Mar 22, 2008 12:35 PM:Thanks Irving. I love getting scientific advice from someone who beleives the earth is 6,000 years old. LOL

El Guero wrote on Mar 22, 2008 12:40 PM:Yes, GFN, I agree. 'No humans are illegal' is like saying that no dog is dirty. It's the language of someone who's lost an argument...like sdraoul!

DD Wiz wrote on Mar 22, 2008 12:42 PM:The posts from "Ron" (8:45am) and "Hey,DDWiz" (10:52am) wrongly accuse me of an ad hominem attack.
This is not accurate.
I correctly noted that for Irvin H. Forbing to cite as an authority someone who is going against the scientific consensus, when he has a financial vested interest in promoting the anti-science propaganda, lacks credibility and, lacking any other basis, Forbing's letter is also completely without credibility.
But this should not surprise us from someone with a long history of attacks on the biological sciences with his many letters trying to distort real science to undermine the extensive factual evidence for evolution.

Alf wrote on Mar 22, 2008 12:56 PM:Well, "To: to To Jeff Schwilk the Drama Queen" at 10:55AM, you are quite correct. Rhetoric, especially the divisive "If you are not for us, you are against us and therefore, un-American" mule fritters is being recognized by more and more people for the horse manure that it truly is. Whether one writes "illegal aliens", "illegal immigrants" or, simply, "illegals", the point is the same and the message is conveyed and no one who is even remotely cognizant of the illegal immigration problem can deny that they do not understand what is meant. Regards, Alf.

GFN wrote on Mar 22, 2008 1:14 PM:To "This is getting interesting"; semantics...an illegal alien is a human who has entered this country illegally. I am not attempting to deceive. Your post explains it clearly:"Crossing the border to stay here without "papers" is illegal." I agree.

GFN wrote on Mar 22, 2008 1:17 PM:Nice to have you bsck, Alf; a voice of reason.

Alf wrote on Mar 22, 2008 1:51 PM:I must correct the last part of the last sentence of my 12:56PM post. It should say "no one who is even remotely cognizant of the illegal immigration problem can deny that they understand what is meant." My bad. Also, Thanks "GFN" at 1:17PM. Regards, Alf.

Reminder wrote on Mar 22, 2008 2:10 PM:Here's a good reminder why it's hard to know if we ever are "winning" the "war" in Iraq. From the NY Times, QUOTE: Many of the security gains have been attributed to the decision by Sunnis, many of whom were guerrilla fighters, to become American-backed neighborhood militia guards, paid about $300 a month by the military. More than 90,000 militiamen, most of them Sunnis, are now on the American payroll. But it is not clear how many had previously fought American forces. But as the program has expanded, some militia groups have been infiltrated by Sunni militants still at war with American forces. And in some cases American troops have had trouble distinguishing the former insurgents working for the Americans from active fighters who are not. ENDQUOTE In other words, we are paying those who used to kill our troops not to kill our troops. Some of these, however, are still killing our troops (with weapons we gave them) even as we are paying them. And this is Bush/McCain's idea of the surge working. Good grief.

To Stuff Happens to? wrote on Mar 22, 2008 2:24 PM:The immigrants that MADE this country, made it by 1) learning the language, 2) working hard, 3) following the laws...all of it with NO public assistance. The Pilgrims, and subsequent immigrants, did not hop off the boat, automatically get welfare, food-stamps, free medical--and the current population did NOT change THEIR language to "accommodate" the newcomers. Immigrants prior to government social assistance programs (1930's+) had to toil for their survival. Lastly, if we'd had FULL IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT, the 9/11 terrorists you refer to would not have been allowed on the plane due to their "warning signs" (NO luggage, one-way cash ticket??? HELL-OOOO!!)Follow the law, or do NOT come here!

hardtack wrote on Mar 22, 2008 3:41 PM:Thanks for your 12:42 PM. I stand corrected. I had no idea that your post @ 9:56 PM was actually a brilliant response to the 4 points made in Forbing’s letter:

(1) that global climate change has been a natural occurring phenomenon long before modern industrial activity;

(2) that Antarctica has been experiencing increased snow and ice buildup;

(3) that sea temperature increases result in more water vapor in the air, which is contributes vastly more to global warming than CO2;

and (4) that governmental attempts to control global warming will have severe economic implications.

In addition I can also see how your repudiation of Dr. Forbing’s religious beliefs, and Dr. Singer’s employers, thoroughly demolishes the Science Magazine article, “Land Clearing and the Biofuel Carbon Debt” by Joseph Fargione, et al.

In your mind, maybe.

Guilt by association wrote on Mar 22, 2008 3:46 PM:Why weren't the right wing advocates of the theory of guilt by association proclaiming that George Bush's weekly ministering by the Reverend Ted Haggard made G.W. a drug addict and gay?

Money Talks wrote on Mar 22, 2008 3:50 PM:right on Reminder...it's not the surge that's working, it's the cash.

Did I miss something? wrote on Mar 22, 2008 4:18 PM:Are there laws against paying cash for a plane ticket? Are there laws that say you must have luggage? Are there laws that require you to fly round trip? Huh? As for immigration, there is a myth that "back in the day" the immigrants behaved differently. I grew up among many immigrants ("legal" ones, from Europe, Asia, and Latin America). Did they learn the language? Some did, most didn't, fully. All their kids did, although for many, the original language was the only one spoken in the home. As most current ones do, those I remember worked very hard. If you Google some articles about immigration in the early 20th C, you'll find that whole neighborhoods were almost uniformly made up of immigrants from one place. The shops' signs and speech were in the native tongue. There were neighborhood newspapers also not in English. In a generation or so, these faded. At that time, people who called themselves "real Americans" said exactly the same sentences about them, about their habits of life, their language, their taking jobs from "real Americans", ruining the economy and morality of the area, you name it. True, they were legal, although the laws have changed quite a bit since then. Funny how actual history contradicts the myths we hear now, the myths that are in the service of specific political agendas. Sorry.

Nick wrote on Mar 22, 2008 5:34 PM:TO To Nick: I have a great life, thanks. I can see the ocean from the backyard while I BBQ and have cocktails with the neigbors, and the kids all play. No CCR's or HOA's and I can afford the mortgage, couldn't ask for more.
You think this rag is getting better everyday? Dude, you really need to ease up on your med's, they're really starting to cloud your limited thinking.
Cheers, Nick.

DD Wiz wrote on Mar 22, 2008 5:55 PM:The post from "hardtack" (3:41pm) reiterates the "points" from Forbing's published letter, without acknowledging the fact that he has not established any points that undermine the scientific consensus.
I have repeatedly noted, and "hardtack" stubbornly refuses to acknowledge (because that would undermine his position) that:
1 & 2 - human contribution to climate change is in addition to natural factors and far outside the upper control limits of all previous cyclical patterns.
3 - increased Antarctic snow and ice build up has been addressed before. It confirms higher temperatures, because when it gets too cold, as is usual to Antarctica, snow production is greatly curtailed. But current warming trends have allowed for increased snow -- as has been mentioned several times in this forum.
4 - The failure of government action to curtail climate change is what will have catastrophic economic consequences that will dwarf the tragic legacy of Katrina, that other infamous failure to heed long-standing warnings.
Forbing's religious beliefs have nothing to do with the science involved, except when he intrudes non-science (religion) into science, such as "debunking" evolution science while completely incapable of providing the "scientific" basis for his alternative claim.
Similarly, the Science article on land clearing raises some interesting concerns in how climate change should be addressed (I agree that corn-based fuel alternatives are an undersirable solution other than for the unrelated but important purpose of energy independence, and even then there are better alternatives), but does not undermine the basic scientific consensus on the fact of the human contribution to climate change. And, yes, the funding source for Singer is relevant, because it provides the motive for WHY he is so firmly resistant to the consensus of legitimate science.

Mistakes were made wrote on Mar 22, 2008 6:00 PM:Remember during the first term of W, how Rummy insisted, over the votes of the Pentagon, how a small force would do the trick in Iraq? Let's see: at present we have, what, 140,000 troops there? And at least that many "contractors". That makes just about 300,000. Oh, and the 90,000 Sunnis. So we're at about 400,000. More or less just what the generals said in 2003. I wonder where we'd be now if we'd started with 400,000. Mistakes were made.

Do you realize? wrote on Mar 22, 2008 6:01 PM:DDWiz has been PEER-REVIEWED, guess what the results were?

GFN wrote on Mar 22, 2008 6:23 PM:Reminder, 2:10, absolutely brilliant. I cannot believe that our nation has not figured out that we are in a cesspool. When you are in a cesspool, regardless of whose fault it was that got you there, YOU GET OUT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. You make concessions, help some, and let those who live there, live there; how they choose to live.

esteban wrote on Mar 22, 2008 7:17 PM:No one really gave illegal immigration much thought until they made a big deal out of the 2006 marches. There the anti US/pro illegals told all the illegals that the US owed them something. That's when everyone got mad...and rightly so. Remember, if you are for open borders/amnesty, then you are against America.

to esteban wrote on Mar 22, 2008 7:35 PM:Oh come on dude you are not going to try to say the they brought this on themselves, and that no one really gave illegal immigrations much thought. You have got to be kidding what about the racist immigration bill called HR4437? That is when everyone got mad, and rightly so. I am for our Constitution being upheld!!!!! I love America and what it stands for anyone who is against treating people as equals under the law as expressed in the Constitution is against America. If you think carrying an American flag shows somehow that you are Patriotic you are wrong. What makes America great are great Americans. To those of you want to criminalize, demoralize, and dehumanize our new immigrants you are against America. I know it is easier to hate, and to justify your racism if you think of people as not being human but come on is that really the American way? No it is not!!!!

Not associaton: sense! wrote on Mar 22, 2008 8:14 PM:Ron's efforts to equate the dismissal of oil-tool Singer to "guilt by association" are, of course, bogus. Singer is not wrong BECAUSE he is paid off by big oil. No, hard as it is to grasp (it seems), the issue is always the same: has the claim been passed through the best tests for truth that we have, yes, peer review? (Notice, Ron, I said "the best", not the "perfect"). There are, I would hope, peer reviewed research articles by the many that were paid for by big oil. If so, no problemo. Association has nothing to do with it, comprende? Singer seems to be the sort of person who will prostitute his name and education for a buck. No matter: most of us do this without blinking. BUT, it doesn't make what he says true. That, I'm afraid, we leave to the "elite" peer reviewed journals. With whatever flaws they have, they are all we have to go by, and Singer ain't (note the spelling of "ain't" please) there. Sorry. Another straw issue for the Ray Milland of our blogspace, Ron.

El Guero wrote on Mar 22, 2008 8:17 PM:To 'to esteban' (7:35): Your incredulity at esteban's claim that the 2006 marches woke people up to our illegal immigration problem shows you're not paying attention. Those of us who have been voicing our concerns for many years were extremely frustrated by public apathy over the issue until media coverage of those marches, with illegal immigrants waving Mexican flags (until their Spanish-language media handlers convinced them to switch to American flags) brought the illegal immigration problem right into people's living rooms on the nightly news. And it was the "rumble of the people" (to use a Ralph Nader phrase) that killed the McCain-Kennedy immigration "reform" bill in the U.S. Senate last year. And then Orrin Hatch's DREAM Act after that. Don't kid yourself. It was exactly the way you say it wasn't: it was the immigrants (or the "illegals" if you like) who brought the scrutiny and anger over illegal immigration on themselves.

As for carrying the American flag to advertise one's patriotism, I don't think the marchers were carrying them to show their respect for our country, do you?

Nick wrote on Mar 22, 2008 8:20 PM:Hey "Whizzer", I seriously disagree with you on the whole Antarctica deal and you know that, so I will refrain from starting our old tete a' tete on the matter. I would like to ask you to give a piece I found a good read and tell me what you think. It's a piece titled "Climate Change: a guide for the perplexed", and is a pretty good read. It's a roundup of the 26 most common climate myths and misconceptions put out by New Scientist. I actually think you will find a lot of good info there. It is not a debunking piece, but more of a putting things in context bit. I seriously want you to give it a read and tell me what you think.
Cheers, Nick.

Apollo wrote on Mar 22, 2008 8:22 PM:Re: Do you realize? (6:01 p.m.)
Love your sense of humor. Ha, ha, ha. So funny! Hilarious! You should be a professional comedian! No, really, 'cuz you sure ain't makin' it in serious dialogue.
Did you actually have a point, or are personal insults the only arrow in your quiver?
Thanks for reinforcing that, yes, when DDWiz gets peer-reviewed, he is approved, published, and frequently cited.

Nick wrote on Mar 22, 2008 8:24 PM:I totally agree "GFN", "Alf" was missed by many, and is honestly one of the reasons I have hung around these blogs for so long. If your holding a cold one like I am(or a beverage of your choice), hoist it.
Cheers to "Alf"!

DD Wiz wrote on Mar 22, 2008 8:35 PM:The post from "Nick" (8:20pm) offers some recommended reading.
Sorry, "Nick," I appreciate the concern, but this piece is a well-known canard.
It recycles many of the same, old tired arguments against the scientific consensus.
Just look at some of the subtitles:
"Can we trust the science?" A "science" piece that debunks "science" is not credible.
Your source is a popular publication, not a peer-reviewed academic/scientific journal.
If it is going to challenge the established consensus, it needs to rise to the same level.
It talks about the global cooling predictions of the 1970's. This was 30 years ago -- do you still use the same computer or technology as 30 years ago? -- and the first reactions to the data showing colder low temps and hotter hot temps was uncertain at first, due to the exaggeration of extremes of temperature fluctuations. "Nick," as you know, this has all been covered here before.
You dismiss "the Antarctica thing" but don't provide a response to the important point that, at super cold temperature, snow production is lower, and increase in snow in Antarctica is symptomatic of global warming.
Before you can expect me to respond in depth to popular media that goes against the scientific consensus, I think it is fair for you to explain why the scientific consensus needs to be debunked.
Do you also want to take on the therory of gravity? Relativity? Plate tectonics? Geocentric solar system? Round earth?
I kid you not, I and several others here received mailers last year from the "Geocentricity" Foundation and, yes, the Flat Earth Society is alive and well.
If you want me to consider popular media challenges to established science, the burden of proof is on you to show me why.

DD Wiz wrote on Mar 22, 2008 8:39 PM:The post from "Nick" (8:24pm) concludes with, "Cheers to 'Alf'!"
We finally find some common ground.
Yes, Cheers to "Alf"!

Now that you mention it wrote on Mar 22, 2008 8:54 PM:Gravity: talk about a "theory"! I know that Newton's idea of this made no sense at all: how does one body magically affect another body that's so far away? But I think Einstein's general theory of relativity was helpful on that one. Can anyone explain this part? Because, really, I cannot buy the Newtonian idea that one thing, with nothing but "space" in between, can "pull" another thing. How in the world could that happen? Magic? God? Puh-lease!

Wrong Again El Guero wrote on Mar 22, 2008 9:12 PM:HR4437 was the reason the protests began in the first place!!!!! As far as the Mexican flags go if someone was telling me that I have to forget my heritage, culture or nationality then yes I would take to the streets with the flag of that nationality. No one I mean no one will ever tell me that I must forget my heritage in order to be American. We are the melting pot right? So really the racist bills being presented by Congress and other racist representatives caused the uproar and the outrage. They responded in kind to oppression!!! If that were happening to my relatives believe me I would march on the street waving the flag I was being forced to forget.

U.S. Flag wrote on Mar 22, 2008 9:25 PM:If you want to wave your flag of origin then go wave it in that country and take your hate towards the U.S. with you.

El Guero wrote on Mar 22, 2008 9:34 PM:Good for you, 'Wrong Again El Guero.' That's exactly the kind of machismo we like to see because it proves you're not an American after all. And, yes, the marchers were protesting HR4437, the House bill. The Senate bill came later, and when the sleeping American electorate witnessed the marches for themselves, they overloaded the Senate switchboards with angry phone calls and defeated the Senate amnesty. I'll always remember it because t's the only time in living memory when the people outmuscled the special interests. Thanks for showing us your true colors!

Nick wrote on Mar 23, 2008 12:58 AM:Now �Whizzer�, you and I have been over the whole Antarctica thing before. You claim that snowfall in the region is from evaporation caused by Global Warming, to which I disagree. There is plenty of data out there that proves the snowfall is a direct result of evaporation from the warmer oceans being carried over the colder Continent, resulting in more snowfall. I have posted the data for you in the past, which you dismissed. I will post 2 separate pieces for you, just so you may see that there is plenty of it to be found. This is just another one of the twisted truths to the hype called �Global Warming� that all the alarmist�s are pushing. You think you are right, I think you are wrong. I am willing to bet the truth probably lies somewhere in the middle:
(Part 1) The atmosphere over the Southern Ocean and in the coastal zone around Antarctica is characterized by active synoptic and meso-scale dynamics. This is due to the large thermal differences between the continental ice sheet, sea ice, and the ocean. In summer, the open ocean reaches the coastline or floating ice shelves in most regions around Antarctica, while in winter coastal polynyas are common and, also further from the coast, the sea ice cover is fractured with large heat fluxes from open leads. Advection of warm and moist marine air masses over the continental ice sheet has a strong influence on the regional temperatures as well as the surface heat and mass balance.
Snowfall is the source term for the mass balance of the Antarctic ice sheet. The evaporation over the Antarctic continent is very small, but snowfall over the continent is possible due to atmospheric transport of water from lower latitudes. This transport is quantitatively poorly known with a lot of scatter between results of different studies. It is also very difficult to make quantitative estimates of the net precipitation over the Antarctic. This is partly due to the effect of drifting snow. Hence, one of the most relevant possibilities to estimate the net precipitation over the Antarctic is to estimate the moisture flux convergence in the atmosphere.
[Finnish Institute of Marine Research-Antarctica
Prof. Hannu Savij�rvi, project leader, University of Helsinki (UH), Department of Physical Sciences, Division of Atmospheric Sciences.
Timo Vihma, Finnish Meteorological Institute.
Roberta Pirazzini, University of Helsinki and Finnish Institute for Marine Research
Teresa Tenhunen, University of Helsinki
Hanna Tiet�v�inen, University of Helsinki]

Nick wrote on Mar 23, 2008 1:01 AM:(Part 2 for "The Whiz)
(2) The main mechanisms leading to precipitation in the coastal regions and on the East Antarctic plateau are described by, for example, Bromwich (1988), King and Turner (1997), and Cullather et al. (1998). Precipitation in the coastal areas of Antarctica is often orographically induced. The cyclones associated with the snowfall in the coastal regions seldom penetrate far inland and precipitation over the higher parts of the Antarctic plateau, where Dome F, Vostok, and Dome C are located, may also be associated with radiative cooling of the air, instead of orographic lifting (Bromwich 1988). The precipitation amounts on the plateau are usually small.
Owing to the orographic nature of most Antarctic precipitation, errors in the model orography can have great influence on the amount and location of model snowfall. This complicates the comparison between measured and modeled accumulation, and will have the largest effect on the amount of precipitation at the stations reasonably close to the coast, DML05 and Byrd. Genthon and Braun (1995) show that the ERA-15 orography is up to 1000 m too high in western DML resulting in too little precipitation on the Antarctic plateau in this area (Turner et al. 1999), and up to 1000 m too low in eastern DML where Dome F is located. Table 1 shows that at all stations, except Byrd, the model orography is too low, from 79 m at Vostok to 527 m at Dome F. Other factors complicating the comparison between measured accumulation and modeled precipitation, is the model resolution and the fact that accumulation is the result of precipitation, snowdrift erosion and deposition, sublimation, and condensation. The latter processes are disregarded in the analysis, although they are probably locally not negligible (Bromwich 1988; van den Broeke 1997; Cullather et al. 1998).

[American Meteorological Society Published Volume 15, Issue 14, 2002]
By C. H. Reijmer and M. R. van den Broeke
Institute for Marine and Atmospheric Research, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands]

Common sense to 'Wrong Again' wrote on Mar 23, 2008 4:06 AM:Why the paranoia! Most of us have multi-national heritages. My father's side came here in the Mayflower era and my mother was a WWII war bride. What's your deal? No one asked me to forget anything. I love history and geneaology but I am a non-apologetic American. You need to examine your issues.