O'Toole declares 'the debate is over' on climate change, but his party's grassroots d

[jazz]

Personally I would rather see an adoption to a Gay couple than an abortion

Maybe the boat was rocked enough.

Anyway, I totally concur. A child raised by any good set of parents regardless of gender or orientation is better than the alternative.

There are couples spending hundreds of thousands of dollars in IVF. I would think a match between that group and the abortion side would be much preferable as well.

[Sheepwheat]

Not a peep from the Social Conservatives of Agriville. Made a lot of noise against abortion but became deafening silent regarding legally married Canadian Gay Couples adopting a baby to prevent an abortion.


Where are you Sheep, Fjlip, Ajl, Oliver88, Tom4Tom, still waiting.

Personally I would rather see a Gay Couple adopting than an abortion, what about you Social Conservatives of Agriville

And I stated the fact you are pro death. Not a peep. What difference does it make what I think of gay “marriage”? You’ll simply freak out and have a fit.

[foragefarmer]

And I stated the fact you are pro death. Not a peep. What difference does it make what I think of gay “marriage”? You’ll simply freak out and have a fit.

Not pro death, learn to read, I support adoption 100% over abortion, but it's not my choice it's the women choice.

Now answer the question are you in favour of an adoption to a legally Married Gay Couple in Canada if it prevents an abortion.

Simple question, open to you Sheep and your Like Button Buddies.

[Sheepwheat]

Not pro death, learn to read, I support adoption 100% over abortion, but it's not my choice it's the women choice.

Now answer the question are you in favour of an adoption to a legally Married Gay Couple in Canada if it prevents an abortion.

Simple question, open to you Sheep and your Like Button Buddies.

If it prevents an abortion? Absolutely. Ridiculous as the premise may be. How’s that? Happy now?

[Sheepwheat]

Question for you forage. Leslyn Lewis proposed putting a stop to gender selection abortions in Canada. That was the extent of her abortion policy.

Are you for or against the idea of killing babies because the gender doesn’t line up?

[foragefarmer]

Question for you forage. Leslyn Lewis proposed putting a stop to gender selection abortions in Canada. That was the extent of her abortion policy.

Are you for or against the idea of killing babies because the gender doesn’t line up?

Again learn to read, I'm in favour of adoption 100% over abortion why would I support gender selection?

Again it's the women choice not some sheep farmer in Sask.


"If it prevents an abortion? Absolutely. How’s that? Happy now? Reply With Quote"

I notice you had to edit your original post as it was just to hard for you to swallow. Referencing Gay Marriage as "ridiculous" will help you sleep better I guess.

[tmyrfield]

Interesting you use Micheal Mann as an example of "outright frauds". There has been 7 investigations by both US and Uk governments into the hockey stick graph and not one of them found wrong doing. Micheal Mann himself has been the subject of investigations by Penn State and the National Science Foundation Inspector General and neither found him guilty of wrong doing or fraud. Mann filed libel suits in the US 9 years ago that are still working their way through the courts and to this point the defendants have not provided any evidence that his work was fraudulent, but they are claiming innocent only on free speech grounds. Granted, his case against Tim Ball was thrown out of court in Canada, not because it found his work was proven to be fraudulent but because Mann did not meet a deadline for providing requested information.

So i would be interested in the proof you must have to publicly claim Mann is an "outright fraud"

Oh, and BTW on Jan 22 of this year, Mann asked Washington DC Superior Court for a summary judgement because the defendants have failed to put forward any evidence challenging the validity of his science.

for your edification

https://www.steynonline.com/documents/10974.pdf https://www.steynonline.com/documents/10974.pdf

[Sheepwheat]

Again learn to read, I'm in favour of adoption 100% over abortion why would I support gender selection?

Again it's the women choice not some sheep farmer in Sask.


"If it prevents an abortion? Absolutely. How’s that? Happy now? Reply With Quote"

I notice you had to edit your original post as it was just to hard for you to swallow. Referencing Gay Marriage as "ridiculous" will help you sleep better I guess.

I doesn’t make me feel better. It’s just the truth. I am entitled to my opinion as a sheep farmer in sask.

[Sheepwheat]

I doesn’t make me feel better. It’s just the truth. I am entitled to my opinion as a sheep farmer in sask.

The premise that a bunch of gays are going to save millions of babies from being pulled piece by piece from their mother is a ridiculous premise.

[TOM4CWB]

The premise that a bunch of gays are going to save millions of babies from being pulled piece by piece from their mother is a ridiculous premise.

God alone is the Judge of the motivations of human heart... and further the motivations of those who love their neighbours as themselves.

There are countless couples waiting for babies... the fictitious premise [of too few couples] is specious and vexacious... We are not called to judge [God alone is responsible, at the Great White Throne after we die physically]... https://davidjeremiah.blog/what-is-the-great-white-throne-judgment-in-revelation/

but we are called to forgive and help healing the pain/suffering, and be a compassionate humble spirit.

Cheers

[AlbertaFarmer5]

for your edification

https://www.steynonline.com/documents/10974.pdf https://www.steynonline.com/documents/10974.pdf

I read that when it first came out. It really is amusing. So is Steyn's book entirely about what other scientists ( including, even especially fellow global warming "believers") have to say about Micheal Mann and the damage he has done for the cause and science in general.

One small snippet from Steyn' statement of facts posted above.

Two coauthors of the paper in which the Tiljander proxies appeared criticized
Mann’s use of the upside-down Tiljander proxies. Jean S, Say My Name – February Rerun,
CLIMATE AUDIT, Feb. 6, 2010, https://climateaudit.org/2010/02/06/say-my-name-%e2%80%93-
february-rerun/; Ex. TT at 25-26. One stated that Mann “distorted” the “research result” “in
public.” Id. at 25. The other stated: “Normally, this would be considered as a scientific forgery,
which has serious consequences.” Id. at 26.

This is from the real scientists, regarding Mann misrepresenting their work( in this case, purposefully flipped their data upside down, and even after being confronted, continued to use it that way unapologetically).
This is exactly the type of activity I was referring to in my post above that got brought dml out to defend the indefensible Mann.
And Steyn's document and book are full of similar examples.
Call it noble cause corruption if you think the cause is noble, but that doesn't help the damage this type of fraud has done to the reputation of scientists everywhere.
Look no further than the Covid pandemic to see the tragic results. Mann bears massive responsibility for this current situation, as does anyone who would come to his defense.

[TOM4CWB]

I read that when it first came out. It really is amusing. So is Steyn's book entirely about what other scientists ( including, even especially fellow global warming "believers") have to say about Micheal Mann and the damage he has done for the cause and science in general.

One small snippet from Steyn' statement of facts posted above.



This is from the real scientists, regarding Mann misrepresenting their work( in this case, purposefully flipped their data upside down, and even after being confronted, continued to use it that way unapologetically).
This is exactly the type of activity I was referring to in my post above that got brought dml out to defend the indefensible Mann.
And Steyn's document and book are full of similar examples.
Call it noble cause corruption if you think the cause is noble, but that doesn't help the damage this type of fraud has done to the reputation of scientists everywhere.
Look no further than the Covid pandemic to see the tragic results. Mann bears massive responsibility for this current situation, as does anyone who would come to his defense.

Like the US CDC just went from 6 feet to 3 feet 'social distancing'... when the WHO was 24inches all along...

So Biden and Harris can jam twice as many people [migrants] in the Southern Texas overrun border internment camps along the Mexican border?

These people are shameless hypocrites... who use convenience to justify poverty and 'science' in the name of 'political' justification of 'laughable' social engineering human suffering into their form of perverse 'charity'...

Cheers

[chuckChuck]

The debate over whether human caused climate change is real, is over.

The science of climate change is very much evolving as scientists collect more data and refine their modelling. Climate scientist are responsible for peer review and evaluating the data and conclusions of other climate scientists. Other lay opinions on the credibility of their data and or conclusion are irrelevant to their work.

A5 you like to disparage all climate scientists, but you showed respect for the late David Schindler, a well known Alberta scientist who was producing evidence that climate change will have a very serious impact on fresh water.

Then all we get from you is crickets on David Schindler. You basically went into hiding about Schindler.

Its obvious why you choose not to comment on David Schindler's conclusions on climate change and fresh water because they clearly contradict your uninformed denialist opinions.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Chuck, you are trolling again.

[dmlfarmer]

for your edification

https://www.steynonline.com/documents/10974.pdf https://www.steynonline.com/documents/10974.pdf

You fail to mention that the motion for summary judgement by Steyn, which the defense statement you posted supported, failed and the libel suit against Steyn is continuing. That statement does not prove Mann's work was fraudulent and in fact in deposition the witnesses the defense called which are named in the statement made it clear they did not find Mann committed fraud. Scientists disagree all the time. But simply disagreeing does not mean one side or the other committed fraud.

The hockey stick graph was published 23 years ago. In that time period, after multiple investigations by US and UK governments, Penn State, and the National Science Foundation, no one or no body has proved that Mann committed fraud. He has never been tried and found guilty of fraud. Yet there are those like Steyn (and AF5) who continue to claim he committed fraud and that is the reason Steyn is being sued for libel by Mann.

You can disagree with any person's conclusions all you want. You can argue the science behind a theory. But unless you can prove that a person/scientist knowingly falsified data you can be held libel for accusing them of fraud. That is what the current Mann vs Steyn case is about and nothing in that statement you linked to proves Mann committed fraud. It only shows disagreement with his methods or findings.