Turn of the (19th) century?
Red Anarchists.
Heck, back in the mid 80’s when I supported an application in our regional offices, I’d regularly have the field reps assuming that I could see everything they typed into their PCs (non-networked or at best attached to a S/36), as they typed it.
Yup, I’m a magical computer fairy. I can read your computer screen from 2,000 miles away at will, and even read your mind when I need to. Shame on you for those thoughts!
Well, I can’t read it, don’t have permission as a guest, but no worries.
Ok, what about this? Or will every single refutation be labeled ‘anti-scientific’, when quoting non-conforming scientists? What would a meteorologist know about science anway? 
Jung wrote about this, referring to UFOs as technological angels because the accounts were so similar to the angels and other religious visions people used to have yet changed as the world switched from a religious to industrial focus.
Jews were a major target as well. They also were largely founded on rooting out “secret Jews” and “secret Muslims”, who were pretending to be Christian. Remember, quite a few “Christians” at the time were converted at swordpoint; something that applies only to Christians applies to a lot more people when you force them to join.
You might find your cites on scientific issues get more respect if you link to something like The Journal of Actual Scientists rather than NewsBusters: “Exposing & Combating Liberal Media Bias”.
No need - several respected scientists are quoted in both articles.
I guess the line between lizard-people and global warming is a thin one ideed.
Like it’ll make a difference -
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57605
http://epw.senate.gov/speechitem.cfm?party=rep&id=263759
http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/newton/askasci/1993/environ/ENV032.HTM
You linked an INHOFE speech as a cite?! Seriously?
This is hijacking the thread, and really in the wrong forum.
Here ya go! That’s pretty much the definitive anthropogenic climate change thread on this board. Brazil84 had his global-warming-denier ass handed to him. Please read the entire thread to find out what’s already been thrown at the wall and didn’t stick because it just. isn’t. so.
…and, just like real life (the scientific community), there are as many intelligent arguments against it as for it. This is absolutely germane, not a hijack, as we’re talking crackpot conspiracy theories. As I said, there’s a very thin line between believing that mankind’s puny efforts can affect global anything, and believing in the Lizard People. When we see temperatures continuously climbing uniformly all over the world, and consistently, instead of the repeated up & down cycles that have already been measured, and sea levels rising a couple of feet, that would be proof. The ‘global warming’ siren has been sounding since the late 80’s, and already data is showing a cooldown - Welcome worldclimatereport.com - BlueHost.com
The definition of religion is faith without proof. The Church of the Warming has devoted acolytes, who will shut their ears to any & all scientific data. So, if it offends to call this a ‘conspiracy theory’, fine to christen it (pun intended) ‘religious dogma’ instead. 
No offense meant in any post -
to change the subject - how about Gypsies buying used children? My father threatened to sell me to them until I was 5, and started doubting. Or, the curse of the Pharohs?
50 replies and no one has mentioned the Knights Templar, yet?
I’m worried - perhaps this silence is a lingering Templar plo-
Excuse me, someone’s at the door.
Sorry to tell you this but you’re simply wrong. I’m not an expert in claimate change. It’s very unlikely you’re not an expert in climate change. John Coleman is not an expert in climate change - he’s a TV weatherman who got a degree in journalism back in 1957.
But there are hundreds of people in this world who are experts in climate change and they all agree that global warming is real and it is occurring and human beings are a major cause. Anyone who chooses to dismiss what all the experts say and follow somebody who doesn’t know the subject is willfully embracing ignorance. It requires you to believe that all of the experts and the media have agreed to lie to everyone else for no apparent motive - and the name for that kind of belief is crackpot conspiracy theory.
Thuggee
Dacoits
Mahdists
The Yellow Peril
Bolsheviks
Anarchists
Nihilists
Luddites
Trade unions
[insert ethnic group here] are trying to take our jobs and seduce our women.
[insert musical genre here] is going to corrupt our sons and seduce our daughters.
Yes, but they weren’t hunted down because they were Jews, but because they were christians who were suspected to hold on Jewish beliefs or customs. Someone who could prove he was a Jew (i.e. never baptised) was off the hook as far as the inquisition was concerned. Now, Jews had been banned from the kingdom of Spain, so I assume they could be prosecuted by the civil authorities, but not by the inquisition.
And it’s difficult to know how many of the inquisition’s victims where actually secretly practising Judaism rather than simply being accused of the same. It’s not obvious at all that most of them were really Jews in the religious sense since these these “conversos” were merely descendants of Jews in the second, third, fourth, etc… generation in a country where Judaism had been completely banned.
I suspect that a significant numbers of these “Jews” were as Jews as the witches burned at the stake were devil worshippers (and to prevent a nitpick, yes I know that the Spanish inquisition wasn’t very interested in witch-hunt). In a country like Italy with actual Jewish communities, it seems that accusations against converted Jews (or their descendants) were quite often grounded in facts. But regarding Spain, I’m not so sure. That said, it’s just a guess on my part.
I come from the Lancashire area of north-west England, an area where, in the 17th century, witchcraft was widely discussed by ‘nutjobs’ and everyone else. The conspiracy theorists and scare-mongers of the day would spread all sorts of rumours about what witches could do/had done, and the danger they posed. Law-makers worked themselves into a frenzy trying to draft suitable laws to combat the problem, and of course many witches were identified, apprehended, tried and executed (almost always without any legal right to a defence). It was tragic in every sense, and there’s no doubt that a large number of women - some of them very young - were executed when they had done nothing wrong.
You don’t hear much about witchcraft these days, but the same social phenomena of hysterical fear-mongering, finger-pointing and hate - often bypassing both common sense and due process of law - is still with us. I guess this is why ‘Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds’ is still such a popular title… it never goes out of date.
It was the first thing I thought of mentioning, luckily I read the thread through to the end this time 
And thus the dogma gets nourished. It’s not a done deal, not universally agreed upon, and not in any way, shape, or form ‘settled’ or ‘accepted’ that we cause global warming. The media picking one side of an argument is hardly astonishing or groundbreaking. You want to drive a Prius & have 40-watt bulbs in your house, fine. I’ll drive my non-hybrid Honda Accord & stick to 75-watt bulbs, fully in the knowledge that I’m **not ** heating up our planet, any more than the 98.6 degrees on my body surface. Saying that thinking ‘the media have agreed to lie to everyone else for no apparent motive is…crackpot’ is hysterically naive and speaks to gullibility. They love sensationalism, doomsday scenarios, and pseudo-science. To not see the media agenda in promoting the global warming mantra is a breathtaking display of whistling past the graveyard. Doubtless you’ve heard that the world will end in 2012, because that’s when the Mayan calendar runs out? As we get closer, the media will push ‘experts’ on us, who will ‘prove’ the eventual ending, using the same projective math the global warmers used to show the South Pole melting (when in fact it’s getting colder), as well as conveniently ignoring the cyclical nature of weather patterns. You want to blame something for global warming? Cecil himself has the answer: blame the cows! Do cow and termite flatulence threaten the earth’s atmosphere? - The Straight Dope
At the risk of arguing with a wall, I’d like to suggest - if you’re going to blame the cows for global warming, you just shot your arguments against anthropogenic global warming in the foot: The only reason that cows are currently around in such numbers is because of human agriculture. So you can’t use that as evidence against AGW.
Yeah, ‘the Wall’ crumbles in the face of such staggering logic. Ok, I did it. I eat meat & my belt is leather - the cows are bred for my consumption - ergo, *I * cause global warming.
Sorry, everyone - I’ll immediately convert to Veganism and get those curly litebulbs installed forthwith. :smack: